So, in truest form of doublespeak, a crooked bridge has become a scenic bridge. Shakespeare would say, what’s in a name? Despite the doublespeak, I fully support the idea of a bridge, bent or otherwise.
In my opinion, the only reason Singapore is being impossible is because an opening of Tebrau Strait would enable Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) in Johor to seriously challenge Port of Singapore. The growth of PTP has already alarmed the Singaporean government. For the past few years, several of the world’s largest container ship operators like Maersk and Evergreen have migrated from Singapore to PTP. According to Wikipedia, Maersk’s migration alone represented a 10% drop in business at Singaporean ports.
PTP is growing because it’s a cheaper alternative to Singaporean ports. And it’s growing in spite of the Causeway. Imagine if there were no causeway to prevent sea travels. With clear lines connecting PTP with two other Johor ports in the east – namely Johor Port at Pasir Gudang and Tanjung Langsat Port – PTP would become an even larger entrepot. That itself would encourage PTP to grow even further and faster.
I’m sure the Singaporean government know this and I suspect they’re trying to slow PTP’s growth down. Today in Utusan Malaysia, an article suggests that Singaporean reclamation projects at eastern and western reach of Tebrau Straits might be Singapore’s effort to prevent the strait from becoming a viable sea route. That article helped me sealed my suspicion. After all, narrowing the strait is the surest way to keep PTP and other Johor ports’ growth in check.
Singapore insists that construction of a bridge replacing the Causeway must bring benefit to both sides. However, opening up of the strait will hurt Singaporean trade. Given that, Singapore refusal to agree to a bridge is comprehensible, no matter how frustrating it is. So, when Singapore said it’s not benefiting from the construction of the bridge, Singapore is telling the truth. More importantly, a convoluted truth because Singapore is applying a false dilemma fallacy. The result of “no bridge” has already been guaranteed when they supplied the condition. And not to forget, this is done on top of other nonsense reasons such as traffic volume into Singapore, higher toll and how Goh Chok Tong is feeling nostalgic about the Causeway given by Singaporean government.
A false dilemma is the appearance that only two choices exist when in fact, there are other explorable options. For instance, if Singapore refuses to replace its half of the Causeway, Malaysia could demolish its half and then replace it with a crooked bridge, which is what Malaysia is doing.
A crooked bridge is an unfortunate political turn. Nonetheless, I believe it is important for Malaysia to take our economy into own hands instead of the Singaporeans’. We should never make ourselves as somebody else’s hostage. This bridge is us driving forward. This bridge is us giving the Tebrau Strait back its life.
