One More Prickly Malaysian Action Against Singapore ?
-
It seems that Malaysian Foreign Relations in the hand of their very capable Syed Hamid Albar will see another brilliant move from his pate absent scalp.
The reported news on Saturday night came as a surprise with the sudden notice of International Arbitration, that gave Singapore a very short timing of TWO Weeks for a Singapore response to their action - on the issue concerning Singapore land reclamation works at Tuas and Pulau Tekong.
When piecing all the Malaysian actions together, it is quite clear that Malaysia is intending to hog all that they can from Brunei, Indonesia, Thailand, and Singapore.
Could this be the Malaysian Government sour faced reaction in not getting their way to set up an alternative ASEAN Secreteriat being established in K L ?
Reclamation in S'pore: KL takes legal action
Malaysia breaks off talks, refers dispute to arbitration; Republic disappointed at sudden decision but confident of its case
By Lydia Lim
MALAYSIA has launched a legal battle against Singapore by referring its unhappiness over reclamation at Pulau Tekong and Tuas to international arbitration, instead of continuing negotiations.
It has also applied separately to put an immediate stop to the reclamation works.
Expressing disappointment over its neighbour's actions, Singapore yesterday described them as 'premature and unnecessary'.
'It is regrettable that Malaysia has not made a serious attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations,' said a Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesman.
Foreign Minister S. Jayakumar also told reporters later that he found Malaysia's sudden decision to break off talks 'strange and disappointing'.
Speaking on the sidelines of the opening of the Apec secretariat building, he said: 'We very much prefer to have negotiations and an amicable solution but they've now decided to take this route and it is their right.'
Malaysia has also made the immediate stoppage of reclamation works as a precondition to further talks.
Rejecting this, the MFA spokesman said that the suspension of works was a very serious matter and would be justified only if there was 'clear evidence of serious and imminent danger'.
'Singapore has provided Malaysia with technical reports and explained in detail that our studies indicate that no significant adverse effects will result from our reclamation works. Malaysia's demand is therefore not justified,' she said.
Both the MFA statement and Professor Jayakumar's comments came in the wake of a press release on Friday by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. It announced Malaysia's request for 'provisional measures', including to stop the reclamation in the western and eastern parts of Singapore.
These measures are an interim step that states can take to protect their interests before a case goes to arbitration.
According to the press release, Malaysia said the works were causing 'serious and irreversible damage to the marine environment and serious prejudice' to its rights.
Malaysia first raised its objections to the reclamation in January last year.
Following its complaints, Singapore repeatedly asked Kuala Lumpur to back its claims with technical reports. It did not do so until July 4 this year.
Meanwhile, Malaysian politicians and officials alleged through their media that the reclamation encroached on Malaysia's territorial waters, narrowed the shipping lane and damaged their country's interests in various other ways.
Singapore rebutted all the claims.
On July 4, Malaysia sent a diplomatic note giving Singapore notice that it was referring the matter to international arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
It gave the long-delayed technical reports and demanded that Singapore respond within two weeks, or it would apply to stop the works.
Singapore gave its reports despite the short notice.
And at Singapore's suggestion, officials and experts also met here on Aug 13 and 14.
'It was a good start to understanding each other's concerns,' said the MFA spokesman. She added, however, that given the complex and highly technical discussions, it was clear more meetings were needed as both sides had only identified the issues that divided them.
Singapore had suggested a second meeting to be hosted by Malaysia.
But on Sept 5, Malaysia applied to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, signalling it was closing the door to further negotiations.
Yesterday, the MFA spokesman expressed confidence that 'Singapore's position will be vindicated' when the issue goes before international arbitration and adjudication.
As Singapore is small and land is scarce, reclamation was necessary for its survival and prosperity, she said, and its reclamation plans had always been in the public domain.
'In all our reclamation works, Singapore acted in conformity with our rights and obligations under international law.'
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,208598,00.html? -
Actions currently taken by Malaysia:
TWO LEGAL TRACKS
Malaysia is doing two things on the legal front at the same time. First, it is seeking arbitration to decide whether Singapore has a right to reclaim land in Tuas and Tekong. Second, it wants to put an immediate stop to the ongoing reclamation works.
TRACK #1
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, countries have three options to settle disputes. They can go either to the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, or decide on arbitration.
When Malaysia and Singapore signed the Convention, neither specified the route each preferred. By default, their recourse will be via arbitration.
On July 4, Malaysia served notice to Singapore and started arbitration proceedings. The arbitration tribunal, which has yet to be set up, will comprise five members agreed upon by both sides. They have so far chosen one representative each, with the remaining three yet to be decided. The process starts only after the panel is set up.
TRACK #2
Pending the setting up of the arbitration tribunal, Malaysia wants Singapore to stop the reclamation works immediately.
On Sept 5, it applied to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for what is called 'provisional measures' to stop the reclamation. This process is usually swift. The tribunal may hold a hearing within two weeks and gives its decision soon after. It may rule as early as the end of this month.
-------------------------------------
WHO WILL BE IN SINGAPORE'S LEGAL TEAM?
Foreign Affairs and Law Minister S. Jayakumar said Ambassador-at-large Tommy Koh, who was the president of the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, will lead the legal team.
The minister expressed 'full confidence' in the team, which will comprise experts from the Attorney-General's Chambers, the Foreign Affairs and National Development ministries, and foreign counsel and experts.
THE UN CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA
It lays down a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world's oceans and seas. It sets out rules governing all uses of the oceans and their resources. It enshrines the idea that all problems of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be addressed as a whole.
-----------------------------------
What's happened so far
January 2002:
Malaysia raises objections to Singapore's reclamation works at Tuas and Tekong for the first time. Singapore asks for reports to back Malaysia's claims.
July 4, 2003:
One-and-a-half years later, Malaysia sends the reports and a Third Person Note, which is a diplomatic note, giving Singapore notice that it is referring the matter to international arbitration. It gives Singapore two weeks to respond and an ultimatum to also stop reclamation works within two weeks.
July 17, 2003:
Singapore replies and includes reports to show that the reclamation will not cause significant impact on the areas of concern.
August 13-14, 2003:
Officials and experts from both sides meet in Singapore to discuss each other's concerns. Singapore proposes a second meeting which it suggests Malaysia can host.
Sept 5, 2003: Malaysia closes the door on negotiations and applies to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for provisional measures to stop Singapore's reclamation works.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,208598,00.html? -
With this news article, Malaysia's PM has tried to explain his country's position concerning their actions to seek immediate resolution of their protest towards Singapore's land reclamation at Tuas and Tekong.
Does Malaysia have valid arguments that the land reclamation works have narrowed the sea lanes that will hamper the potential growth of their southern sea ports at Pasir Gudang and Tanjong Pelapas - as well as increased sea current flows that will affect soil erosion along their southern shorelines, which they claim can lead to other environmental pollution ?
DISPUTE OVER LAND RECLAMATION
Mahathir defends decision to end talks
Negotiations with Singapore failed so KL referred the problem to arbitration, says Malaysian Prime Minister
By Brendan Pereira
KUALA LUMPUR - Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said Malaysia sought international arbitration in its dispute with Singapore over reclamation at Pulau Tekong and Tuas after a series of negotiations with the Republic ended in failure.
Defending his country's course of action, he said: 'We have tried to negotiate for years but they have gone and told others that they are right in this issue.
'Previously, we opted for negotiations but negotiations failed. Surely, you don't expect us to go to war.'
He used an analogy to explain why international arbitration was a suitable option.
'When two people fight and cannot settle it, they bring the matter to a third party,' he told reporters after a day trip to his home state of Kedah.
On Friday, Malaysia referred its concerns over reclamation to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. It applied to put an immediate stop to the works being carried out.
This move came as a surprise as both countries were well into the negotiating process after Malaysia sent a diplomatic note on July 4, giving Singapore notice that it was referring the matter to international arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Malaysia also gave technical reports to back up its claim that the reclamation had damaged the environment and encroached on Malaysian territory, and demanded that Singapore respond within two weeks.
Despite the short notice, Singapore gave its reports, assuring Malaysia that the reclamation works had not, and would not, have any significant impact on the specific concerns raised by Malaysia.
At Singapore's suggestion, officials and experts met in Singapore on Aug 13 and 14. A week later, officials from both sides exchanged more technical reports.
A spokesman for Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: 'It was a good start to understanding each other's concerns. However, given the complex and highly technical nature of the subject, it was clear that further meetings were necessary, as we had only identified the issues which divide us.'
Singapore had suggested a second meeting to be hosted by Malaysia.
But on Friday, Malaysia chose a different path, signalling that it was closing the door to further negotiations.
Malaysia has made the immediate stoppage of reclamation a precondition for talks.
Singapore said that further talks should be held without any preconditions, adding that it was disappointed that Malaysia had decided to submit the matter to arbitration and seek what is called 'provisional' measures to stop the reclamation.
Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said Malaysia was forced to take the dispute to international arbitration because Singapore had been unwilling to settle the matter at the negotiating table.
By seeking arbitration, Malaysia was doing its part to keep bilateral relations on an even keel and prevent matters from becoming tense.
Singapore, he said, had been given many opportunities to settle the matter but it had refused to budge from its position.
'They asked for evidence. We have handed over many types of reports and held discussions with them. We feel there is no other way to resolve this matter,' he told reporters after touring his parliamentary constituency in Johor.
He said Malaysia was not interested in getting involved in an argument with Singapore and would leave it to the international tribunal to decide on the dispute.
He hoped that the Hamburg-based body would issue a temporary ruling ordering Singapore to stop all reclamation immediately.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,208693,00.html?
---------------------------------------------------
The paragraphs colored in "Green" indicate that insertions are made by the Singapore State Controlled Straits Times.
Such editorial insertions is a bad habit that the Singapore Government has often objected strongly to, when practised by International Newspapers inserting "opinions" into news articles so as to influence the readers. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Doubt that Sgp gov mentioned about that. But it does object editing of its formal reply when it got published in certain paper. Note that the report is in ST, hence reflection of spg's gov posistion is inevitable, unless the KL guys like to start another blizkriez of advert propaganda, both sides will certain make their case heard in court.
DISPUTE OVER LAND RECLAMATION
Mahathir defends decision to end talks
Negotiations with Singapore failed so KL referred the problem to arbitration, says Malaysian Prime Minister
By Brendan Pereira
---------------------------------------------------
The paragraphs colored in "Green" indicate that insertions are made by the Singapore State Controlled Straits Times.
Such editorial insertions is a bad habit that the Singapore Government has often objected strongly to, when practised by International Newspapers inserting "opinions" into news articles so as to influence the readers.
It is interesting to note that only a week after the Sgp's new Defence minister Teo CK made a formal visit and met Badawi in KL, Both announced that both countries hv more to gain than current disputes. Yet, in his usual style, Dr.M unilateraly created another court case . It certainly gives an impression that his is not prepared to let Badawi ran his show another sooner when it is only weeks away from his "retirement".
Question is, can Singapore effort to be held-bound by KL's endless list of complains and veil-threats? Dr.M has in many occasion used the word "WAR" when making public comments about Singapore's relation. He may not directly refers it as a threat, but by freely employing such wording has reflected about 2 things on his belligerent nature.
1) He is prepared to flex some military muscles if he is confident that they can take on the SAF.
2) He lacks statesmanhood and, he knows, for now, choice (1) is suicidal hence the next better choice is the war of words, confrontational attitude and winning more potential international allies. Notice both countries now are playing the "Thailand card" ? -
It is also interesting that Dr M has played the "China Card" as well.
Monday's Straits Times reported that Malaysia will recognise Medical Degrees from Universities in China, and is encouraging Malaysians to attend tertiary education in China too.
Just as the Singapore Government is encouraging more younger Singaporeans to be more involved in China, and with some success; this Malaysian move can be seen as a competitive move to thwart Singapore's effort to latch onto the China market, and at the same time to circumvent any Singapore's attempts to capitalize on China's growth.
This Malaysian move is suppose to alleviate the insufficient numbers of Doctors in Malaysia, and more likely the quality of the medical professional staff.
It also serve to improve Barisan Nasional political fortune with the Malaysian Chinese at the upcoming Malaysian Election, especially when the Malay population is split between UMNO and PAS.
Unfortunately, Malaysia seems to be adapt at opening its doors to talents and professionals from 'Third World Countries', and opening itself to immigration problems and misunderstandings - (the Indian I.T. engineers that had their nightmare experience at the hands of the Malaysian Immigration Department).
I wonder how will Mahatir reconcile his threats to Singaporeans to gain popularity amongst his own Malay ethnic groups, which can also antagonize the Malaysian Chinese community who still has family ties with Singapore.
Mahatir is playing with fire, by lighting a candle at both ends. -
I can only say Malaysian Foreign Affairs is "weak" and "hum".
Never deals with the problem properly, then go up to a higher level to complain or do whatever donkey thingy. Irresponsible is the word.
Just like a typical worker who doesn't resolve the problem with the co-worker, he/she goes head to the supervisor. -
Typical Mahatir.Originally posted by Atobe:It is also interesting that Dr M has played the "China Card" as well.
Monday's Straits Times reported that Malaysia will recognise Medical Degrees from Universities in China, and is encouraging Malaysians to attend tertiary education in China too.
Just as the Singapore Government is encouraging more younger Singaporeans to be more involved in China, and with some success; this Malaysian move can be seen as a competitive move to thwart Singapore's effort to latch onto the China market, and at the same time to circumvent any Singapore's attempts to capitalize on China's growth.
This Malaysian move is suppose to alleviate the insufficient numbers of Doctors in Malaysia, and more likely the quality of the medical professional staff.
It also serve to improve Barisan Nasional political fortune with the Malaysian Chinese at the upcoming Malaysian Election, especially when the Malay population is split between UMNO and PAS.
Unfortunately, Malaysia seems to be adapt at opening its doors to talents and professionals from 'Third World Countries', and opening itself to immigration problems and misunderstandings - (the Indian I.T. engineers that had their nightmare experience at the hands of the Malaysian Immigration Department).
I wonder how will Mahatir reconcile his threats to Singaporeans to gain popularity amongst his own Malay ethnic groups, which can also antagonize the Malaysian Chinese community who still has family ties with Singapore.
Mahatir is playing with fire, by lighting a candle at both ends.
That's why most political analysts said he is a BIG FAILURE in integrating different races, religions and cultures to work together as one people.
Or else, Malaysia already progresses better and perhaps even better than Singapore already.
UMNO's pampers the ethnic Malays in Malaysia too much. This causes other racial groups to be selfish on their own becuase they felt they're not treated as equals.
But sadly, since the independence of Malaysia. Only pampering methods helped UMNO to win votes of the ethnic Malays.
Politically, the Malays (UMNO), the Chineses (MCA) and the Indians (MIC) are allies but never an integrated political party.
This was especially seen when Mahatir tried to mixed different races in schools. Most races resisted this move. Especially the Chineses, who normally set up their own schools.
Another example was using of English as a medium language in all schools, especially mixed school. But the Chineses complained and were afraid they'll lose their rights in culture education. They complained that the Malays need to study 2 languages only, the Bahasa Malaysia and English. But the Chinese need to study 3 languages of Bahasa Malaysia, Chinese and English. They were scared they'll lose education level among the races. -
Did the New Straits Times of Malaysia finally spoke the truth for the objections raised by the Malaysian Government concerning Singapore's reclamation works at Tekong and Tuas ?
Interesting read from:
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/columnist/0,1886,16-209044,00.html?
SEPT 10, 2003
Reclamation puzzle? It's all about white elephants
Chua Lee Hoong
PUZZLED by why Malaysia is taking Singapore to court over reclamation that's taking place strictly within the latter's territorial waters? Well, don't be. Malaysia's New Straits Times made the reason clear in its editorial yesterday.
Commenting that reclamation works around Pulau Tekong would result in a narrowing of what it calls the Tebrau Straits and Singapore calls the Johor Straits, it noted: 'Malaysia is acting responsibly in safeguarding the future of Tanjung Pelepas and Pasir Gudang, which stand to become white elephants if reclamation continues.'
And there you have it. Beneath the mumbo jumbo about sedimentation, damage to the marine environment and preservation of Malaysia's right of maritime access to its coastline, the crux is simple: bilateral economic competition.
It's a competition that has become more intense since Malaysia decided in the late 1990s to develop its Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) to rival Singapore's PSA Corp.
Malaysia thinks reclamation works at Pulau Tekong will stymie its development. Pasir Gudang, opposite Singapore's Pasir Ris, is a feeder port through which a lot of cargo transit, some on their way west to the PTP, and some north either to Senai Airport or the inland peninsula.
At present, most cargo vessels approach Pasir Gudang from the east through Singapore waters south of Pulau Tekong, instead of through Malaysian waters to the north, as the latter are shallower.
On Aug 27, Business Times also broke the story that the Sembawang shipyard - a former British base which does mostly repairs now - will be moving to Tuas. The move is part of SembCorp Marine's consolidation of ageing shipward facilities now spread between Jurong and Sembawang.
For Malaysia, however, the impending move must have sent alarm bells ringing: Once the Sembawang shipyard is closed, Singapore won't need a deep-water passageway for ships in those straits. It would have nothing to lose if it decided to build a bridge between Pulau Tekong and the mainland. Malaysia's Pasir Gudang goose would be cooked!
Ah, now the penny drops! That is why Malaysia is rushing to replace its end of the Causeway with a bridge. For no matter how crooked or unsightly it would be, it would serve one crucial purpose: allow ships to pass through. A crooked cat is still a cat as long as it catches mice.
So is this a cat-and-mouse game in which one side is choking off access and the other scrambling to open new access lines?
Nationalistic Singaporeans with no love for the northern neighbour would see it that way. But Malaysia would be loath to be the mouse to the Singapore cat.
For one, they would have been caught napping if so. This is because reclamation works at Pulau Tekong and Pulau Ubin were announced in Parliament as early as January 1992, but Malaysia did not voice objections until January last year.
In fact, then Malaysian Transport Minister, Dr Ling Liong Sik, told the Malaysian Parliament in February last year that Singapore's reclamation works had not affected the navigation line leading to Pasir Gudang. The Marine Department, he said, had investigated the matter, and found no impact.
As for Tanjung Pelepas, it's too far away from any reclamation works to be affected.
To my mind, the port factor aside, there's another reason why Malaysia would want to refer the reclamation matter to international arbitration.
It's related to the Pedra Branca case which Singapore and Malaysia recently referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). When there are two cases involving the same two countries, what are the chances of the same country winning both? The law of averages - and of human nature - would say these are lower than that of both countries winning a case each.
To be sure, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which is hearing the reclamation case, is an entirely different panel from the ICJ. The ICJ is a 15-member bench while the ITLOS has 21 members.
The fraternity of distinguished experts in public international law is, however, a small one. Members of the two panels must be nominated by member states, and are elected by secret ballot. Politics has featured often in the history of both panels; as many judgments have been made on political grounds as on their legal merits.
How will the reclamation case pan out in court? The merits of the case are obviously in Singapore's favour; it would take severely contorted legal logic to argue that reclamation works in Singapore waters have caused serious prejudice to Malaysia's rights of maritime passage.
But Malaysia, clearly, is basing its arguments on more than law, at least to its domestic audience. Editorials in both the Malay and English press flog the old line about the claims of friendship and neighbourliness.
Putting it with polish but disingenuity, the New Straits Times said: '(Singapore) should decide once and for all if civility should be the order of the day in dealings with Malaysia. Mere lip service will not do. Like justice, friendship must not only be maintained but be seen to be accomplished.'
Let the law, and only the law, decide.
The writer is Features Editor of The Straits Times. E-mail: [email protected] -
I would have thought that finally by sending the issue to the international tribunal (which is not pro-Malaysia anyway) is something that we should be happy about.
Samething as the Malaysia-Brunei issue .. they sent the matter to the Hague ..
As long as they send the matter to some arbitration committee rather than hold protest marches or demostrations, shouldn't we be happy? -
double post
-
Originally posted by kenhor:
A tussle with Singapore is very unlike the oil field dispute with Brunei, and nor was any provisional measure being requested by the KL gov at the Hague. In fact, Malaysian patrol vessel had been reported to gave chase of a French oil company exploration team under contract by the Brunei gov.
More interesting about this lastest Malaysian gov apparent attempt to dig more into the Singapore's reclaimation plan, is their interest in sensitive Pulau Tekong.
According to the Press Release on Case-12, the ITLOS, the KL issued 4 demands towards Singapore in thru the tibunal, some with little relevant to their concern about shipping land business:
Pending the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, Malaysia seeks the prescription of the following provisional measures:
[color=blue](#2) to the extent it has not already done so, provide Malaysia with full information as to the current and projected works, including in particular their proposed extent, their method of construction, the origin and kind of materials used, and designs for coastal protection and remediation (if any);
(#3) afford Malaysia a full opportunity to comment upon the works andtheir potential impacts having regard, inter alia, to the information provided;
and
(#4) agree to negotiate with Malaysia concerning any remaining
unresolved issues.
What #2 has got to do with their complain ? I thought they are more worried about their rights of passage thru the straits ?
Didn't Singapore provided sufficient info for discussion in #3 ?
So what is #4 for when they themselves brokeoff the negotiation in only 2 weeks of resumed talk ??? -
Here is an article from Alexander's Gas and Oil Magazine about the Brunei conflict.
Brunei and Malaysia continue to discuss oil sharing formula
02-06-03 Malaysia has offered an oil sharing formula to Brunei to resolve the drilling dispute in the Sultanate's offshore waters, reliable sources said. It said Brunei was considering the matter. Both parties are inclined to come to an amicable settlement, sources added.
Leaders of both countries met to discuss the issue and some progress has been reportedly made. Meanwhile, the French operator Total has been forced to abort its planned exploration drilling off Brunei Darussalam at the 11th hour. The drilling was aborted following intervention from the Malaysian government, which disputes the sovereignty of the waters.
Total had been preparing to spud a wildcat well on its deep-water Block J production sharing contract and actually had its chosen rig on location when the Malaysian Navy turned up to put a stop to its operations. There followed a few days' stand-off when the Bruneian Navy came to lend its support to the French. However, the Malaysian government apparently got the upper hand, and Totalelected to stop its planned drilling.
Total earlier had its site survey vessels driven away by the Malaysian Navy. A company insider earlier told that it would not have signed the PSC for Block J had it not been assured by the sultanate that sovereignty was not in doubt. Partners in the Block J PSC are operator Total with 60 %, BHP Billiton 25 %, and Amerada Hess 15 %.
The Malaysian authorities maintain that Block J and adjacent Block K, for which a Shell-led consortium is negotiating a PSC with Brunei, lie in its territorial waters. A couple of months before the French company signed for Block J in March, Malaysia awarded two blocks -- designated L and M -- to Murphy. These blocks off Sabah virtually overlap the Block J and K PSCs which, according to Brunei, are located in its exclusive economic zone.
Source: Brudirect.com
You see how the same news from Brunei sources differ from ST account of the news
Malaysia, Brunei fail to end offshore oil row
From the ST
22 Aug 2003 11:26
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 22 (Reuters) - Talks between Brunei and Malaysia failed on Friday to settle rival territorial claims on oil-rich waters off Borneo island, with Kuala Lumpur saying its proposal made in May was its best offer.
Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said after a meeting between Brunei's Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad that it was now up to Brunei to consider the proposal.
Exploration activities in the disputed area have been halted after the Malaysian navy earlier this year chased off a drilling team belonging to a consortium led by France's Total.
blah blah blah
Noticed how the ST forgot to mention anything about the Malaysian and Brunei navy having a standoff at sea for A FEW DAYS!
This is why we should not trust the ST for any Malaysia reporting ... they are bound to leave out the facts as it suits them. Find an independant source if possible. -
Huh ? Another wastage of bandwidth here...notice how this thread diverge into another round of no-no-Singapore bashing while avoiding the Dr.M's taxi-cab factor ?Originally posted by kenhor:Here is an article from Alexander's Gas and Oil Magazine about the Brunei conflict ...blah blah bla.....This is why we should not trust the ST for any Malaysia reporting ... they are bound to leave out the facts as it suits them. Find an independant source if possible.
Oei. Wakeup.! You still shell shocked from Mumbi blast ? -
Anything that exposes the ST as a pack of lies is never a waste of bandwith.
-
Originally posted by kenhor:
Anything that exposes the ST as a pack of lies is never a waste of bandwith.
Anything ? Need i say more about wastages ?
Save your breath. You hardly even touch the issue of this threat itself. -
A tussle with Singapore is very unlike the oil field dispute with Brunei, and nor was any provisional measure being requested by the KL gov at the Hague. In fact, Malaysian patrol vessel had been reported to gave chase of a French oil company exploration team under contract by the Brunei gov.
I didn't divert the question. It was you who brought up the story of the Total ship being chased off by the Malaysians. I showed you the error of the ST reporting.
As I said in my previous post, as long as the Malaysians send the protest to the Hague, rather than sit around buring flags, why should we be unhappy? -
Originally posted by kenhor:
Didn't diverg from the threat ?
I didn't divert the question. It was you who brought up the story of the Total ship being chased off by the Malaysians. I showed you the error of the ST reporting.
So what's the pt of bring up the Brunei issue in the 1st place ?
To tell the world how ST lies about the its reportings or there WAS a standoff between Brunei and Malaysian patrols? Address the core issue, don't skirt around like a shadow play that is going nowhere.
On 17 September 2003 · 02:26 PM ken ken
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would have thought that finally by sending the issue to the international tribunal (which is not pro-Malaysia anyway) is something that we should be happy about.
Samething as the Malaysia-Brunei issue .. -
For the sack of those who has adverse reaction to any reportings from Singapore's media,such ST or CNA, Below is the latest news from source from Malaysia's official press.
September 19, 2003 20:08 PM
Syed Hamid: 32-member Team To Defend M'sia At International Tribunal
PUTRAJAYA, Sept 19 (Bernama) -- Malaysia will despatch a 32-member team to Hamburg to attend the oral hearings concerning the land reclamation by Singapore in and around the Straits of Johor at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).
In announcing this, Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said Friday that the Ministry's Secretary-General, Tan Sri Ahmad Fuzi Abdul Razak, would lead the team representing the Government as its agent at the hearings.
He added that the Malaysian Ambassador to Germany, Datuk Kamal Ismaun, would be the co-agent during the hearings when the Tribunal would decide whether Malaysia was entitled to a provisional order for Singapore to stop the reclamation.
"The court will decide whether we (Malaysia) are entitled for the provisional order to have the land reclamation work (by Singapore) stopped," he told newsmen after presenting a mock cheque for RM3 million to the Red Crescent Society of Malaysia for humanitarian and relief fund for the Iraqi people.
Malaysia decided to take the matter to the International Tribunal after two meetings between the Malaysian and Singapore Governments for the indefinite stoppage of the reclamation work proved futile, he added.
"The court can now decide. We have had two meetings asking them (Singapore) to stop, but they do not want to stop," said Syed Hamid.
He also said that the three-day oral hearings was only the beginning of a legal process during which the court could grant Malaysia the provisional order for the land reclamation work to stop.
"Pending the legal process from its end, Singapore will continue with the reclamation. So in order for us to stop them from doing it we have to get the provisional order.
"(and) because we think this is a case within the law of the sea convention, we sent it to the Tribunal of the Law of the Sea," he said.
-- BERNAMA -
Like I said in my first post on this matter, its good that the Malaysians sent the matter to the Hague. Neutral Arbitration is definately preferable to any attempt at rabble rousing.
According to Brunei Sources, and Malaysian sources, there was a standoff for a few days. I don't know where the ST got the news that the Malaysians chased off the Total ship. So since the incident happend in waters near the 2 participants, and neutrals (like Total and Murphy Oil were involved), I will definately believe in the Brunei version of the events.
In which they clearly state that the Burnei navy was dispatched and was involved in a few day standoff against the Malaysian navy, but after which the Malaysian government got the upper hand. -
Originally posted by kenhor: I don't know where the ST got the news that the Malaysians chased off the Total ship.
Malaysia, Brunei Fail to End Oil Row Reuters
KUALA LUMPUR, 23 August 2003 �E
...exploration activities in the disputed area have been halted after the Malaysian navy earlier this year chased off a drilling team belonging to a consortium led by FranceÂ’s Total.....
.
This little report also exposes KL's intend on any neighbours which it perceives to be weak and hence victimised for its own regional intend. This is exactly how the Malaysian gov had hinted to Brunei when its FM Syed Hamid was quoted "think we have moved nearer to a final solution,�Ehe said, adding it was possible to resolve the issue before Mahathir steps down in October.
Funny how he could figure out the schedule of the "final solution" based on KL's likes ?.
further extracts:
"Brunei, a tiny nation of 330,000 people surrounded on all sides by Malaysia, lacks the muscle to back up its claim, however, and may lose more by digging in against its neighbor.
"Head I win, Tail you lose".....Malaysian-style -
more accurately, it was reported by reuters which later resold the news to ST and others.
Malaysia, Brunei Fail to End Oil Row
Reuters
KUALA LUMPUR, 23 August 2003 — Talks between Brunei and Malaysia failed yesterday to settle rival territorial claims on oil-rich waters off Borneo island, with Kuala Lumpur saying its proposal made in May was its best offer. -
Originally posted by Gun:
Another Malaysian style:
[b]
Malaysia, Brunei Fail to End Oil Row Reuters
KUALA LUMPUR, 23 August 2003 �E
...exploration activities in the disputed area have been halted after the Malaysian navy earlier this year chased off a drilling team belonging to a consortium led by FranceÂ’s Total.....
.
This little report also exposes KL's intend on any neighbours which it perceives to be weak and hence victimised for its own regional intend. This is exactly how the Malaysian gov had hinted to Brunei when its FM Syed Hamid was quoted "think we have moved nearer to a final solution,�Ehe said, adding it was possible to resolve the issue before Mahathir steps down in October.
Funny how he could figure out the schedule of the "final solution" based on KL's likes ?.
further extracts:
"Brunei, a tiny nation of 330,000 people surrounded on all sides by Malaysia, lacks the muscle to back up its claim, however, and may lose more by digging in against its neighbor.
"Head I win, Tail you lose".....Malaysian-style[/b]
"Win-Win" Solution; I Win - I Win....
-
Originally posted by nismoS132:
more accurately, it was reported by reuters which later resold the news to ST and others.
So why is kenhor claims that this is a lie created by Singapore's media ?
-
Curious why this kenhor chap choosed to repeat his same article in the MilitaryNuts forum when tripwire had in fact already mentioned the same Brunei-vs-Malaysia AFP news back in August ?Originally posted by kenhor:Here is an article from Alexander's Gas and Oil Magazine about the Brunei conflict....
This is why we should not trust the ST for any Malaysia reporting ... blah blah blah
Why does kenhor suffers from such selective memory recollection disablity ?
