Of local design and manufacture, the vehicle has yet to win
an order since it’s unveiling in 2006 (photo : Deftech)
In addition lies the fact that Malaysia’s defence industry
is largely competing against itself for a small domestic market, in July 1999
the Malaysian Defence Industry Council was created to serve as a forum for the
defence industry, the Council being headed by the defence minister and
comprised of government officials and the heads of local defence companies.
Under it are six working groups dealing with the six specified defence industry
fields deemed strategic by the Malaysian government; Aerospace, Maritime,
Weaponry, Automotive, Information Communications Technology and Commonuser
Equipment, each being headed by a representative from the companies in the
defence industry. However, given that the companies involved are competitors in
a smallMalaysian domestic defence market, it is not surprising that little has
come out in the form of a common approach to the industry’s development or
joint development/cooperation efforts between the companies. The recent
cooperation between three companies Composite Technologies Research Malaysia
(CTRM), System Consultancy Services and Ikramatic System, to form a consortium
to develop the ALUDRA (Allianced Unmanned Developmental Research Aircraft) UAV
was a result of a government directive to the companies to collaborate rather
than compete against each other in developing a UAV for the Malaysian Armed
Forces.
There has been little interest among Malaysian defence
companies towards mergers or consolidation, the only exception being Deftech’s
MYR6 million ($1.75 million) takeover of MMC Defence in January 2007 and
renaming it Defence Services, MMC Defence was the local industrial partner for
Poland’s Bumar in the supply of 48 PT-91M MBTs to Malaysia and provided
in-country support for the tanks. The move allowed Deftech to ensure additional
work for itsmain factory in Pekan, which was used to assemble 259 FNSS ACV-300
AFVs ordered by Malaysia. Deftech also provides various wheeled vehicles for
the Malaysian army ranging from its Handalan II truck design to various other
truck and wheeled vehicles from it’s foreign partners which include Daimler
Chrysler for G military vehicles, Alvis for Supacat, Mowag for Duro vehicles
and Iveco for heavy duty military trucks. In 2005 Deftech completed a 69
vehicle order for Handalan II trucks for the Royal Brunei Armed Forces. The
company’s indigenously designed 4x4 AV4 light armoured vehicle illustrates the
problem faced by Malaysian defence companies, having debuted the vehicle in
2006 with the expectation that the Malaysian Army would purchase the vehicle,
the company has had to instead face the reality that there is little interest
by the Malaysian government to purchase the AV4.
Manufactured by Deftech, the truck is in widespread use with
the Malaysian Armed Forces and is also used by the Royal Brunei Armed Forces
(photo : Deftech)
For research and development, the Malaysian Defence Ministry has the Science
and Technology Research Institute for Defence (STRIDE) which along with
conducting its own research and development programmes, collaborates and
provides limited funding for local defence companies for R&D and also
provides technical and scientific evaluations for the Malaysian Armed Forces.
However, STRIDE has only a small funding allocation for R&D, for the
2006-2010 timeframe, it was only allocated MYR17.5 million ($5.1million) a
figure that clearly precludes any significant R&D programmes.
Since his appointment in 2009, Defence Minister Dato’ Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi
has been pushing two initiatives in regard to the Malaysian defence industry.
The first one calls for the establishment of an ASEAN (Association of South
East Asian Nations) Defence Industry Council to promote cooperation and trade
between ASEAN member countries in their respective defence products. However
there has been little response from other ASEAN countries as to whether they
would be willing to create and support such an organisation. Coupled with the
fact that many ASEAN countries see little need to purchase defence equipment
from fellow ASEAN members, it appears highly unlikely that the idea of an ASEAN
Defence Industry Council will be realised. The second initiative is the
proposed establishment of a Defence Technology Park in Malaysia which is to
serve a regional hub for the both defence research and production. The proposed
Defence Technology Park covers 492.5 hectares of land located at Sungkai in the
peninsular Malaysian state of Perak. A two year study plan for the proposal to
be carried out by Masterplan Consulting was announced at the Langkawi
International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) 2009 show. At the same show, French
Defence Minister Herv_ Morin stated that France was looking to assist Malaysia
in developing its indigenous defence industry with the potential for
outsourcing work to Malaysia in regard to French defence sales in the region
though he also stated that this was all in the preliminary stage and would
depend on which field of defence industry that the Malaysians were wanting to
develop.
Another products of Deftech (photo
: Deftech)
In terms of future major local defence industry manufacturing programs, only
two programmes are expected to materialise soon, both of which are naval
shipbuilding programs, the first onewill be the follow-on Batch 2 ships of the
Kedah class Next Generation Patrol Vessels, ofwhich sixwould be built and which
would be larger and armed with antisurface and anti-air missiles in contrast to
the lightly armed first batch whose armament consists only of a 76mm main gun
and two 30mm cannons. The programme was originally thought to be of secondary
consideration in contrast to the proposed local construction of two BAE Systems
Batch 2 Lekiu class frigates, however with the government indefinitely
postponing the frigate programme, the Batch 2 NGPVs have come to the fore,
particularly with Boustead Naval Shipyards, which built the Kedah class,
nearing completion of the final ship of the six ship class. At LIMA 2009,
Malaysian PrimeMinister Dato SeriNajib said that the Batch 2 NGPV was of
priority as Boustead had some over 2000 local subcontractors dependent on its
shipbuilding work. However, he did not indicate as to when the Malaysian
government would actually allocate funding and begin the programme.
The other shipbuilding programme would be the Malaysian Multi-Purpose Support
Ship (MPSS) program. With the RMN’s loss of its LST KD Sri Inderapura in
October 2009 to a ship fire, it is expected that the programme, which was
postponed in 2008 for financial reasons would be started again with a decision
made this year. The requirements call for up to three ships, with the joint
capacity of two ships able to completely transport an entire Malaysian Rapid
Deployment Force Battalion. Individual ship requirements are for a capacity of
500 troops and 100 vehicles, an 18 knots speed with 8,000nm endurance using
diesel engines, landing deck capacity for 2-3 helicopters and storage capacity
for four helicopters and four LCM along with a possible installation of a
missile system for point defence and the ability of the ship to act as a
command platform and floating headquarters for joint and amphibious operations.
The Malaysian industrial requirement would allow the lead ship to be built in
the country of origin of the design but the remaining ships would have to be
built in Malaysia. The purchase of a 66 percent stake in South Korean
shipbuilder TKS Co Limited by Malaysian shipbuilding company NGV Tech, a deal
which was signed at LIMA 2009, has led to speculation that the Korean Dokdo
design would be chosen and that NGV Tech would be the Malaysian company for the
programme though nothing concrete has emerged to indicate that this was the
case.
With the six ship class almost completed, shipbuilder
Boustead Naval Shipyard is hoping to get an order for an improved Batch 2 class
(photo : Malaysian Defence)
Malaysia’s defence industry today contributes to the growing
supply of military assault rifles, small caliber ammunitions, unmanned air
vehicles (UAVs), patrol vessels, information and communications technology
(ICT) based solutions and military gear and apparel.
The country’s industry has also developed capabilities to
undertake activities in the areas of maintenance, repair and overhaul, upgrades
and modernisation in certain areas as well as the capability to manufacture
parts and components for both local and foreign markets.
SME Ordnance Sdn Bhd (SMEO) has licence to make Colt's M4
assault riffle for the procurement of 14,000 rifles in a RM70mil deal. (photo :
coltguns)
However, taken as a whole, the Malaysian defence industry
still has a long way to go before it fully meets the needs of the Malaysian
Armed Forces and becoming a major defence exporter. For instance, other than
licensed production of the Colt M-4, Malaysia does not manufacture any other
weapons or weapon systems, leaving the Malaysian Army wholly dependent on
foreign suppliers for the majority of its weaponry. Similarly, despite building
its six Kedah class Next Generation Patrol Vessels, the NGPVs are lightly armed
and it remains to be seen as to whether Malaysia can successfully build more
sophisticated and heavily armed ships.
The other problem that the Malaysian defence industry faces
is the fact that Malaysia’s defence procurement can be summed up as erratic at
best as governments have no problems in postponing defence programmes or
allowing timeframes to slip.
Designed by a consortium of three Malaysian companies, the
UAV is currently undergoing operational testing and evaluation (photo : CTRM)
The development of the Malaysian defence industry started in
the early 1970s when the country embarked on the establishment of a government
owned ordnance factory. This was then followed by the privatisation of the
depot facilities of the Royal Malaysian Air Force and the Royal Malaysian Navy
in the 1980s and 1990s. The 1990s also saw the Malaysian government placing a
requirement for offset programmes and technology transfer to be included in any
purchase of foreign defence equipment although neither were required to be
military or defence industry related. This was in line with the then Prime
Minister Mahathir Mohammad’s ‘Vision 2020 ‘ goal of making Malaysia a fully
industrialised and technologically advanced nation by 2020 and in line with
this was the development of Malaysian industries, especially the aerospace and
defence industries via transfer of technology and offset programmes.
Adding impetus to the development of the local defence
industry was a change in the strategic thinking as to the role of the Malaysian
Armed Forces. Up until the late 80’s, the armed forces had by and large been
focused on the counter-insurgency role due to the need to suppress the remnants
of the communist insurgency. This changed though as there was a realisation
that the armed forces would have to deal with conventional, external threats
and thus it would have to transform from a largely infantry based army,
supported by a brown water navy and a small air force to a modern armed force
with both the Navy and Air Force becoming service arms with greater roles than
simply supporting army operations as had been the case in the past.
The 259 vehicles all types in use with the Malaysian army
are all assembled locally by DRB-Hicom Defence Technologies/Deftech (photo :
Militaryphotos)
However the transformation had a price as naturally this
meant new and more sophisticated equipment had to be purchased and it became
clear that it was no longer financially feasible to rely largely on foreign
companies, not only for procurement but also for support and maintenance due to
the increasingly complex equipment being operated by the Armed Forces, this was
coupled with the depreciation of the Malaysian Ringgit relative to the US
Dollar along with the rise of the Euro, all of which made foreign transactions
more costly. Thus, turning to local defence companies made fiscal sense.
Moreover from a security standpoint, it was also necessary not to be overly
reliant on foreign sources for procurement and support as Malaysia had no
control over access and availability and it was seen as necessary to have a
domestic capability to support and maintain any military equipment of foreign
origin and to also reduce reliance on foreign manufacturers, through having an
indigenous defence industry.
FNSS developed the ACV-300 based on the AIFV to meet the
Turkish Land Forces Command's (TLFC's) operational requirement. The Malaysian
version of the AIFV is a result of a collaboration between FNSS and the
Malaysian company Deftech. Malaysia's ACV-300 tanks are nicknamed the Adnan
(photo : kmbyaf)
However while the defence industry has grown somewhat
steadily, it has still yet to be able to fully meet the needs of the Malaysian
Armed Forces. Armed Forces Chief General Tan Sri Azizan Ariffin stated in 2009
that only 30 percent of the Armed Forces’ needs were met by the local defence
industry. Some of the shortcomings in theMalaysian defence industry can be
traced to the government itself, although the Malaysian government had
formulated the Defence Industry Blueprint which lays down the strategy and
policies for development in six fields. There are five areas of common emphasis
for each field, namely the development of human resources and competencies,
technology development, industrial development, self sufficiency and
international marketing. The Blueprint also had it’s shortcomings in that it
did not lay down specific goals or benchmarks to achieve in the development of
the Malaysian defence industry and furthermore, placed much of the burden for
developing the defence industry on industry itself, rather than the government.
The fact is that an indigenous defence industry, particularly for a small
country like Malaysia, is not very profitable and cannot sustain and develop
itself without government support, particularly fiscally. In addition, the
Malaysian government’s emphasis for local defence companies to rely on private
financing ignores the fact that for defence companies to attract investment,
the potential for a return must be shown which leads back to the erratic and
ambiguous nature of the Malaysian government’s plans for defence procurement.
Given the uncertainty as to the Malaysian government’s commitment to support
any particular military programme, this makes it difficult for Malaysian
defence companies to attract investment given the fact that little assurance
exists for any return.