BATU PUTIH

 Hi readers

Not too late to wish you all happy welcoming 2024. May this year we will be blessed with healthy life and peaceful mind .

I choose this topic as it was close to my job in defense industry.

From Prof Dr Ramasamy

Why RCI on Batu Putih?

I am not exactly clear why the government has to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on the sovereignity of the islands of Batu Putih, Middle Rocks and Southern Ledge, off the coast of Johore. 

I thought the sovereignty of the three islands were settled when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in May 2008 decided to recognise Batu Putih belonging to Singapore, Middle Rocks to Malaysia and the Sothern Ledge to the territorial waters of the country in which it was situated. 

Under the government of Najib Razak there was an attempt to appeal the decision of the ICJ in 2017,  I understand an hastily prepared application ostensibly based on fresh evidence. 

But unfortunately, when Dr Mahathir Mohammed became the prime minister in 2018, the appeal was withdrawn on the grounds of lacking merit. Moreover, the cost of the appeal would have been financially burdensome. 

Subsequently, given the Sultan of Johor’s unhappiness over the sovereignty question of Batu Putih and the adjacent islands, a task force was set up to re-examine the sovereignty of these islands. 

However, given the difficulty of retracting information pertaining to the sovereignty, the task force has been abandoned. In place, the Madani government has agreed for a RCI on the islands.

I am not sure about the terms of the reference of the RCI whose members are still to be named by the Yang Dipertuan Agong. Perhaps the formation of the RCI is still at the initial stage to read too much into it. 

The RCI might be better framework to examine the events that led to Malaysia’s loss of sovereignty over Batu Putih. 

The RCI could also explain the nature of the appeal and what were the new sources of information that constituted the basis of the appeal. 

Why did the government of Mahathir withdrew the appeal and what were the reasons given to say that the appeal would not stand a chance in the ICJ. 

I don’t think that the RCI is meant for Malaysia to reassert its sovereignty over the Batu Putih. 

I believe that a diplomatic and bilateral approach should be pursued for the eventual reassertion of sovereignty. 

The decision made by the ICJ in 2008 was the final. Even the appeal in 2017 somewhat late given the decision was made in 2008.

What will be interesting to know whether the RCI will look into the following areas. 

First, why in the first place Malaysia lost its sovereignty over Batu Putih and why Singapore emerged the winner. 

Second, what was the nature of the appeal in 2017 and the grounds for this. 

Third, was Mahathir right in withdrawing the appeal. Shouldn’t he have had left the decision to the ICJ? Was this an example of naivety or arrogance of power, or both?

Fourth, why was the task force formed and abandoned?  Was it formed with the intention to shift the blame on the former attorney general Tommy Thomas and the former prime minister, Mahathir on why Malaysia lost its sovereignty over the island? 

Fifth, the RCI as a mechanism to gather information on Malaysia’s quest for sovereignty is fine, but whether it could overturn the decision of the ICJ might be non-starter. It is not that Malaysia should say goodbye to its claim over the sovereignty of Batu Putih as other channels should be used to pursue the long term goal of sovereignty.

I am all for RCI on Batu Putih if such an effort lays the foundation of an eventual diplomatic settlement of sovereignty in favour of Malaysia.

From Captain Syed Sharom RMN, he said 

My take. Malaysia needs to consider how much of its maritime interest is lost or jeopardised resulting from Singapore’s sovereignty over Pu Batu Putih. To my mind Malaysia has lost almost nothing except (1) a small Singapore territorial water around the lighthouse whose area would be much shrunk as it is sandwiched by and overlaps with Malaysia’ territorial water (MTW) off south Johore as well as that of Middle Ledge, and (2) the “light and buoy” dues from ships passing by the lighthouse is now payable to Singapore Port Authority not to Malaysia. I think Singapore’s original aim of acquiring sovereignty over Pu Batu Puteh was to acquire a huge chunk of EEZ extending eastward over the South China Sea that could have stemmed from its territorial waters around the lighthouse. Alas, that aim is doomed because similar MTW and EEZ emanating from Middle Ledge, barely two cables to the south of the lighthouse which the ICJ had awarded as belonging to Malaysia, would negate such Singapore’s EEZ aspiration. So, what Malaysia needs to do is fortify its assertion of sovereignty over Middle Ledge and lose nothing. Malaysia loses on “light and buoy” dues from the lighthouse but it saves a lot of money for not having to maintain the lighthouse. The planned RCI would be a waste of effort for it might have a hidden agenda of unnecessary witch hunting.

From our friend Lone Wolf 

Pu Batu Putih is strategic to Singapore in extending shipping surveillance and proof of usefulness of Singapore to her allies, most notably the US as an added value to her importance.  Looking at the installation even just from outside could gauge the resources required and maintenance over the years of which, nothing on Middle Rock could compare. Seriously? Want to take back Pu Batu Putih?

And what do you think??

I hope to get some comment from #Singaporean

This letter kill Malaysia chances in PBB

PLKN or National Services - 2 nd Tier Of Malaysia Defense

 we receive this message through WAG and have a heaty discussion on this matter.

The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) is currently conducting a survey on National Service Training Program (PLKN). The purpose is to obtain feedback from the general public on the re-implementation of National Service Training Program (PLKN) in order to meet the objectives of training and Act 628 National Service Training. 

Please click the link below:

English version: shorturl.at/hluBF

Bahasa Malaysia version: shorturl.at/dxHOS

The first thing government must decide, either this is military national service training or youth training for nation-building.  From point of view on youth training for nation-building and Military National Service is totally different. National Service Training for a country like Malaysia is good so that there is NO requirement for over-sized armed forces. However, the concept, planning, and execution must be right and never repeat previous PLKN mistakes. The initial PLKN training was a big failure. It was later incorporated into the NBOS program & was suspended for 1 year in 2015 to allow an in-depth study & recommend a way forward. They came out with PLKN 2.0 to target school dropouts & implemented it in 2016. The focus was on vocational/technical training. It was another failure & the PH govt rightfully terminated it in 2018. 

 We don't need Military National Service, especially for Malaysia. Ensure we are well equipped & good management of MAF assets. No need for a huge MAF. Support a National Youth Training program as a school extra-curriculum programme. No need PLKN, it waste of money. Channel money to school instead... cheaper, cost-effective & more can be trained on multicultural teamwork, junior leadership, inculcate integrity & loyalty to the nation for nation-building objectives.

Mindef needs to rethink & address the failures of PLKN.

Believe it. or not , we spent rm 700 mil annually to enrich some for nothing. 

 what do we hope to achieve from the three months course?

Channel this Rm 700m to schools, more effective to change mindsets to benefit nation building. Even those passed out from university PALAPES as officers are missing. They are supposed to be the reservists too. They have brains and skills after they start working, they can be an asset for our MAF if the training continues for them annually. 

Alternatively, we could do it during school holidays in the existing Military camps. We already have a reserve provision in the AFA72 to utilize. Do not allow the Mindef civilians to engage in this project as they will create benefit for themselves as what they did to the previous PLKN before.

They promote themselves to be bosses in the organization where they can't even walk properly and became the supremo of PLKN and having fun making soldiers and veterans as their balacis.

It should be given to JPP to organize it and  headed by a General. Veterans could be utilised as instructors which helps to create as 2nd job for them. It should be made as part of defense plan for the nation, not a place where trainees learn how to sing dangdut. Military training disguise as national service benefits all

Brain Storming from Veteran ATM Group.

The program should be prolonged to 6 months, and the graduate from PLKN should be given priority for admission to IPTS.

 

US says Littoral Combat Ship USS Coronado, now in Singapore, is combat ready

by: Wes Goodman | .

Bloomberg | .

published: October 17, 2016

USS Coronado arrives to Changi Naval Base, Singapore, on Oct. 16, 2016 to begin a rotational deployment to the Indo-Asia-Pacific region. Joshua Fulton/U.S. Navy

The latest U.S. Littoral Combat Ship to arrive in Southeast Asia is combat ready, according to a senior Navy officer, after a series of mechanical snafus cast doubt on the ability of the vessels to operate effectively in shallow coastal waters.

The USS Coronado is "ready to go do its job," said Rear Admiral Don Gabrielson, Commander of Task Force 73 and Singapore area coordinator, adding operation, maintenance, design and training issues have been addressed. "Every ship has maintenance issues. Any time you take a new class of ship and you have a new model for taking care of the ship and training the crew, there are going to be things that you learn."

"It's crossed many miles of Pacific Ocean to get here all by itself," he said on Sunday on board the ship in Singapore.

The Coronado is the first deployment of an independence-variant Littoral Combat Ship to Southeast Asia and the third overall in the class. It has a larger flight deck than other LCS vessels and greater fuel capacity. It will use Singapore as a maintenance hub and carry out drills with countries in the region.

The ships, designed for the kinds of shallow coastal waters that surround many islands and reefs in Southeast Asia, are a spearhead for the U.S. military rebalance to the region, a key part of the Obama administration's bid to balance China's greater military and economic clout. Still, they have been confronted with equipment breakdowns and harried crews, with the Navy now moving to revamp the $29 billion program.

Issues with LCS maintenance haven't set back the U.S. presence in Southeast Asia, Gabrielson said. "There's a huge amount of demand for the Littoral Combat Ship by every nation out here in terms of exercise and integration."

The ship, built in two versions by Lockheed Martin Corp. and Austal Ltd., has been criticized for its reliability flaws, limited combat power and uncertain ability to survive in combat. The service is using its first ships for more extensive testing, reducing the rotation of crew members and de-emphasizing the swapping of missions and equipment that was supposed to be a hallmark of the vessels.

Two of the first vessels experienced propulsion-system failures, in December with the Milwaukee and in January with the Fort Worth. The Fort Worth was sidelined in port in Singapore for eight months. Two more vessels experienced failures in July and August.

The U.S. is targeting to have four of the vessels in Southeast Asia in coming years, Gabrielson said. The presence of the LCS is not meant to send a specific message to China, he added. "It's not a message to anyone other than what is going on in this part of the world matters to the whole world."

China claims the bulk of the disputed South China Sea, where its military buildup and land reclamation have created tensions with some Southeast Asian nations. It has also sparked friction with the U.S. amid a broader tussle for influence between the two powers in the western Pacific.

The risk of a clash in the South China Sea lies with non-military ships, Singapore Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said earlier this month, as China deploys more heavily armed coast guard vessels in the disputed waters.

Singapore has joined other nations in the region and the U.S. in warning the reliance on fishing boats and coast guards to assert territorial claims in the South China Sea raises the prospect of an incident. It's a key shipping lane that carries as much as $5 trillion in trade a year.

China has used its so-called white hull fleet to chase and shoo ships including fishing boats from other countries away from the reefs it claims.