Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster

[798] Of ASEAN fails East Timor

East Timor is deep in crisis and they’re in need of help. I’m glad to hear that East Timor has requested assistance from Malaysia and even happier to know that Malaysia is responding to the request. My only regret is that Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) has neither been proactive nor responsive to the conflict. What’s more embarassing is to see Australia leading the expedition instead of ASEAN .

Those that have been reading my blog long enough would know that I advocate a stronger ASEAN. Since East Timor is part of Southeast Asia, I strongly feel that East Timor is part of ASEAN, regardless the fact that the country has yet to be granted an observer status, much less a membership. Therefore, I see the conflict as a trouble in ASEAN’s backyard. So, it’s only logical for me to want to see ASEAN to assist East Timor. Unfortunately, ASEAN has not and because of this, I believe ASEAN has failed East Timor.

I do understand that ASEAN is primarily an organization concerned with economic, political and cultural cooperation. It’s not a military alliance and ASEAN has no peacekeeping force of its own. However, I have no desire to see a failed state within Southeast Asia; ASEAN should feel the same way too. If ASEAN does feel the same way, then it should have the means to prevent states from falling into anarchy. That means must include a way to maintain law and order.

Perhaps, it’s time for ASEAN to have a formal body that could take police actions in time of crisis. If ASEAN had such body, it could have taken the lead in assisting East Timor and indirectly telling the world that we are capable of caring for our own welfare. More importantly, ASEAN wouldn’t have failed its small neighbor.

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government

[786] Of white elephant for the Thai monarch

In The Star today:

The Nation reported that all “white” elephants found in Thailand must be presented to the king and become his sole ownership.

“White elephants are regarded as auspicious. The more a monarch acquires during a reign, the more prosperous and happy his kingdom will be,” according to The Nation.

Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

If no, Malaysia does have a “white elephant” in Johor. Since the Thais see white elephants as auspicious, they’d appreciate Malaysia offering our white elephant to them as, er, gift of friendship.

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government This blog

[768] Of bridge of euphemism: another take

As I’ve written before, I’m extremely disappointed with the way the Malaysian government handled the bridge issue. I’m disappointed and angry because the whole fiasco seems to prove that the Malaysian government had failed to explore all contingencies regarding this matter.

The Prime Minister states the legal ramification due to the need to severe and reconnect the water lines and the railway track that go to Singapore as the reason for the bridge cancellation. The problem is, why now? Why offer such reason only now? Did the policymakers fail to give such detail a visit in the earlier stages of planning? It’s a preposterous idea but yet, it’s one of the most possible explanations, if not the only. If that is the case, then God save Malaysia.

If Malaysian government was so worried with legal implications that would arise, why did the Malaysian government give a green light to Gerbang Perdana, the bridge contractor in the first place? Wouldn’t it make more sense to go to the international court, be it the International Court of Justice at The Hague or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, whichever relevant, before going ahead with the project if the government was honestly concerned with legality? Why stating such reason after pressing the start button? Why initiate the project and kill it off soon after and in so, having to compensate a private entity with RM100 million needlessly? Why not cancel it before iniatiate the project? Why the earlier gung-ho attitude and therefore putting a facade that blatantly misled many Malaysians?

Why? Why? Why?

If the government had explored all avenues, this issue would have been resolved much earlier. If the government had done its homework, Malaysia could have saved resources that would be better spent elsewhere. If the Malaysian government had called the project off before construction actually had begun, maybe I wouldn’t be so infuriated. Maybe, a lot less people would have been agitated.

Concerning the media, it’s amazing how popular opinion in the mainstream media changes at a finger snap, blink of an eye. Just weeks ago, the MSM was 100% behind the bridge. Hell! 101% if it is at all sensible. But when the Prime Minister changes his mind, so does the MSM without pause. Where is the sincerity in us all? This is not honesty. This is merely kow-towing to the power-that-be.

Yet, I can’t pretend to be shocked. The MSM is a dog on leash with the kris looms above after all. Some of them are even downright suckers.

In his column today in the New Straits Times, Khairy Jamaluddin – the PM’s son-in-law with grand political ambition – while supporting his father-in-law, quotes Sir John Maynard Keynes: “When the facts change, I changed my mind.” I don’t mind pragmatism but in this case, the facts haven’t changed. It’s still fact that we need to cut the pipes, the track and – surprise, surprise – the Causeway! On top of that, Singapore’s position has already been known right from the start. The only way the facts could have had changed is if the government had failed to explore all contingencies.

Finally, our beloved Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is an indecisive man. I hope the common people will be as indecisive as him in 2008 about voting for his party. Let’s see how well he likes indecisiveness.

I feel cheated by my own government and I don’t like that.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s – touching on ReCom.org, I’ve said earlier that it would be back within 24 hours. At first, it was thought that it was a billing issue. However, it is not. Given that I’ve received some search result with the word “recom” on it, I feel it’s important to inform those that wanted to know what’s going on.

Here’s the story. The operator of the server that hosts ReCom.org informs “us” that ReCom is consuming too much resources and it’s starting to affect the server stability. Some of the admins say that something is not right and that ReCom shouldn’t experience the level of traffic according to the host. So now, ReCom.org has several option.

One is to try to reduce traffic. I doubt this will be so. Two, subscribe to greater resources. That’s most likely mean paying USD45 per month and in the long run, USD540 for the year. Somebody has already pledged USD100 for ReCom but I really don’t like option two. But hell…

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

pp/s – housekeeping! From now on, I’ll place arabesque-like icons to separate my main entry and all of those postscripts.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

ppp/s – as of April 16, ReCom is back.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p4/s – Mahathir is a dissenter. Maybe now he feels how Tunku felt back in the 1980s. Regardless, from Bernama:

JOHOR BAHARU, April 15 (Bernama) — Malaysia has the right under its agreement with Singapore to relocate the pipelines supplying water to the island for specified reasons but only after giving about six months notice, said former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

He said the provision for relocation was proven valid because Malaysia had relocated the Singapore pipelines on land during the construction of the new road and railway station for the Integrated Southern Gateway project.

Another article by Bernama, syndicated by Singaporean Straits Times:

JOHOR BARU – IN AN open attack on his successor, former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad yesterday suggested holding a referendum in Johor to see if there was backing in the state for the government decision to cancel the bridge project.

I can’t find the same article at Bernama.

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government

[766] Of crooked bridge cancelled

While I’m relieved that the Malaysian government has stopped the bridge talks with Singapore and directly crossed out the possibility of Malaysia acceding to unacceptable Singaporean demands, I’m extremely disappointed with the Malaysian government’s decision to cancel the bridge altogether . I found it out through TV3. Bernama has more:

KUALA LUMPUR, April 12 (Bernama) — The government has decided to stop the construction of the bridge to replace the Johor Causeway that links Malaysia and Singapore, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced Wednesday.

He said the government had also decided to stop all negotiations pertaining to the bridge. Construction of the bridge, also known as the “scenic bridge” began early this year, to replace half of the Johor Causeway on the Malaysian side.

Though the reason for quitting the negotiation has been given, reason for the bridge cancelation is still a mystery. Hence, tomorrow’s local papers will be of extraordinary interest. The Malaysian government must clear out the air.

Before tomorrow comes, I’d like to say, historical heritage is not a proper reason and I will not accept such incoherent reasoning.

As stated earlier, I’m for a bridge, straight or otherwise. And no, if there’s still anybody that thinks the bridge would be a cul-de-sac, it is not. At the same time, I’m against bowing to Singaporean impossible demands. You could say, I’m being hawkish on this matter.

p/s – ReCom.org is down (again!) but it should be back up in less than a day.

pp/s – as if one disappointment is not enough, Malaysia lost 1 – 0 to Japan in Hockey World Cup Qualifier in Changzhou, China. This makes it hard for Malaysia to qualify for the World Cup.

ppp/s – the Prime Minister answers the mystery:

PUTRAJAYA, April 12 (Bernama) — Malaysia decided to stop the construction of the “scenic bridge” meant to replace the Malaysian half of the Johor Causeway because of its legal implications and complications, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Wednesday.

The Prime Minister said the Cabinet deliberated on the project at its weekly meeting today and felt that there would still be legal implications and complications to resolve afterward should Malaysia proceed with the project.

“Problems will arise when we have to cut the causeway, the water pipes and railway track and connected them to the new bridge. The problems will continue,” he told Bernama when asked to explain why Malaysia did not just build the bridge in its own territory without negotiating with Singapore.

So, does this mean we could only have a bridge in 2060 when the water contract ends?

Categories
ASEAN Politics & government

[748] Of a bridge, some airspace and a whole lot of sand

I’m not sure how to react to the announcement that Malaysia and Singapore have agreed in principle to build a straight bridge in order to replace the Causeway. Reason is, Malaysia relented on two points: airspace and sand supply.

In return of Singaporean cooperation for a straight bridge, Singapore wants to use Malaysian airspace to train its air force and a guaranteed sand supply to continue its reclamation projects. Without going too deep into the issue, I’d say this as highly unreasonable; I feel it’s impossible to meet. That impossible demands and the need to fuel economic growth in southern Malaysia are the reasons why I support a construction of a bridge to replace the Causeway, without Singaporean cooperation.

Concerning air space, I simply don’t trust the Singaporean government and their military even less. Hell, I don’t trust my own government. Singapore says it wants to use Malaysian airspace for training purposes. However, it isn’t too hard for Singapore or anybody for that matter to turn this little maneuver into some sort of espionage missions. I don’t know what high value targets are there in Johor but I bet Singapore would know if Malaysia is to allow Singapore to conduct “training” in Malaysian Johor airspace.

More interesting is sand supply. Singapore has been aggressive in reclaiming lands from the sea; the reclamation projects have attracted Malaysian and Indonesian attention. Both have expressed concerned about the projects but Singapore ignored it. Malaysia was especially concerned with Singaporean reclamation at Tuas in the west and at Pulau Tekong in the east; both border Malaysian state of Johor. In 2003, both countries went to the International Court of Justice to resolve the issue once and for all. The ICJ in turn sided with Singapore with reservations.

Regardless of the result, it doesn’t matter because Singapore had to stop its reclamation effort, thanks to Indonesia. Previously, Indonesia provided the raw materials Singapore needed for its reclamation project. Like Malaysia, Indonesia was suspicious of the Singaporean effort. In the end, Indonesia cut off the supply, fearing Singapore redrawing the Singaporean-Indonesian border. The projects are still on hold. Now, Singapore needs to find a new source of sand. And guess who Singapore is turning to now?

If Malaysia agrees to supply Singapore the sand, it would be an odd thing to do. Malaysia is against Singaporean reclamation project. For Malaysia to supply the sand and enable Singapore to continue a project that Malaysia is so vehemently disagree of, is, again, odd. It defies logic.

Perhaps, this is because Malaysia knows that Singapore could get the sand that its need from somewhere else. We know how Singapore managed to buy a company of strategic importance in Thailand. Given that, it wouldn’t be hard for Singapore to get some sand from Thailand. Maybe here’s is just Malaysia doing a “hey, why not make some money out of it?” act.

Unless Singapore could sweeten the pot – like allowing Malaysians that work in Singapore to withdraw money that the Singaporean government has been withholding – I definitely believe a crooked bridge is a better deal. Of course, a straight bridge is good but circumstances make it not too favorable.

With the bent bridge, Malaysia gets a little less of what it wants without giving Singapore anything. If Malaysia accedes to Singaporean demands, Malaysia would get what it wants by giving too much to Singapore.