Reunification: 2006
-
The year to fear for Taiwan: 2006
By Wendell Minnick
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FD10Ad02.html
The Tim Huxley of East Asia. Believe this article has been making quite a few waves recently. -
Wonder if Malaysia/Indonesia can pull the same stunt on us. If I'm not wrong, they have entire airborne divisions, all RDF within a few hours max. If I were them, I would do a 'shock and awe' on Singapore. ASTROS and arty barrage cum air strikes on armour camps, airbases etc. plus large-scale airborne inflitration. Singapore would not be able to respond for several key reasons. One, our air defence artillery is not up to par compared to our air force. Our Rapiers, Iglas and Mistrals are only short-range, low-level weapons and only I-Hawk capable of hitting long-range high-level. Once our airfields kena hit by Malaysian arty or special forces, our skies are wide open. Malaysian/Indonesian troop transports can choose to fly above range of our SAMS. Second, SAF is very formidable no doubt. But it takes time to first mobilize then deploy. Although we claim this can be done within hours but more realistically, I feel this can take days. This creates a 'window of opportunity' where the SAF would be at its weakest. Any comments?
-
well, it depends on how good your intelligence is. Somebody once mentioned that it is difficult to launch a full scale attack without warning at all, since they have to prep themselves for attack in the first place. Besides, u will have warning as well once diplomatic ties go bad. Moral of the story is to stay on your toes, and how much lead time u have will depend on how good your intel is.
-
Interesting article, but some other points to consider:
- Taiwan's military brass might be pro-unification, however, not necessarily on the PRCs terms
- On the other hand, the RoC's young conscripts are not interested in unification. Full stop
- Given the state of the US military and its present commitments, plus their companies' economic involvement in China, it is highly unlikely they will intervene.
- That effectively rules out Japan and South Korea interceding. RoK will also not be interested in sending forces south when the DPRK is still around.
- Still, an invasion of Taiwan, through any means, will likely not be a cakewalk. Unless the most important objectives as outlined in the article (decapitation) succeed. -
Hmmm...interesting to put it in a Singaporean military context, Langley
- If the situation is such that Malaysia has a few battalions of ASTROS, we will need to be worried. However currently they have 18 units IIRC.Originally posted by Langley:Wonder if Malaysia/Indonesia can pull the same stunt on us. If I'm not wrong, they have entire airborne divisions, all RDF within a few hours max. If I were them, I would do a 'shock and awe' on Singapore. ASTROS and arty barrage cum air strikes on armour camps, airbases etc. plus large-scale airborne inflitration.
- Rocketing the airbases would have a dubious effect on the RSAF's air power. It is known that ALL major jet bases are hardened, which even a direct hit from an ASTROS rocket might not penetrate the HAS.
- Cratering the runways might be an option, but you need real saturation cratering to make it effective. Not to mention you need to lay the rockets down in more or less a closely-spaced line to render a cratered runway unusable
- Blocking the runways is another option, but these would be easy to counter by sweeping the runways and/or using alternate ones.
True, but the window of opportunity cuts both ways. It is difficult to gather, prepare and deploy without attracting attention either by other physically noticing your buildup, or catching wind of it via ELINT, SIGINT or COMINT.
Singapore would not be able to respond for several key reasons. One, our air defence artillery is not up to par compared to our air force. Our Rapiers, Iglas and Mistrals are only short-range, low-level weapons and only I-Hawk capable of hitting long-range high-level. Once our airfields kena hit by Malaysian arty or special forces, our skies are wide open. Malaysian/Indonesian troop transports can choose to fly above range of our SAMS.
[/quote]
When mounting a large scale airborne invasion, the planes need to be closely spaced and not too high, to prevent misdrops and scattering the force over a wide area.
I might be wrong, but I don't think the TUDM or TNI-AU has the capability to drop entire airborne divisions at once[quote]
Second, SAF is very formidable no doubt. But it takes time to first mobilize then deploy. Although we claim this can be done within hours but more realistically, I feel this can take days. This creates a 'window of opportunity' where the SAF would be at its weakest. Any comments?
Still this scenario is one we must take note of.
Just my 0.02 -
Thanks for the clarification, viper52
I not much knowledge about airborne ops and airbase defences. But do appreciate that airborne ops enable Malaysia to avoid direct confrontation with a fully mobilized SAF in Johor and neutralize it right in Singapore where its weakest. Mabbe that's why we had such an exaggerated reaction over Ex Malindo Darsasa in Aug 1991. To sidetrack abit, was wondering if our armour and arty camps hardened as well since they are our vital units too. -
Our Elint & Humint assets would probably have detected any buildup of the scale necessary to carry out such an operation.
Given our forward-defensive strategy, the obvious choice would be to pre-empt the attack, either through diplomacy and/or military means.
Even if the ASTROs were deployed in sufficient quantity to pose a significant operational threat, they would probably already have been tagged as high-priority targets and watched closely. If the units were ever activated in a manner that suggested they would be used against us, i believe we would still have enough reaction time to deploy.
There is also the factor that US Naval assets will form a sort of tripwire deterrent similar to the 38th Parallel in Korea. Should there be any US casualties, the US would be drawn in, especially to protect the port and refinery facilities.
http://www.asianewsnet.net/template.php?No=3124&logo_name=Asian%20Voices%20Today&SectionID=7&backissue=2002-07-10
A 2002 article carried in ST and mirrored in Asia News Network questioned whether Indonesia had effective force-projection capability given the general bad condition of their equipment. The embargo from the US govt is still in existence and it is unlikely that they will lift it soon.
my 2 cents. -
The bulk of Army's capability are in NSmen. Whereas the MAF is mainly a all-regular force.
Based on the above, Sgp will have a greater risk of being "surprised" as it will take a longer time for us to mobilize and will be more obvious that we are mobilizing. -
I agree that the bulk of our forces consist of NSmen who take time to be activated.
However, if it comes down to it, the principal force that we would rely on would still be our air force to disrupt and interdict enemy activities.
A similar operations model can be found during the Six Day War where Israel found herself surrounded by hostile armies on all side and used their air force to first neutralise enemy air forces on the ground and gain air supremacy. They were then able to dictate the tempo of ground operations by striking at where the enemy armour formations were concentrating.
Our air force is a mostly regular force and probably kept on a higher state of alert than our ground forces.
Any intervention by Army units would mean actual invasion of enemy territory. I believe that if they were actually used, they would be called to used in smash and grab operations. This would mean that units such as SOF, Commando, Guards would be involved rather than the SIR units. These units also have higher alert status compared to other units.
All I am trying to say is that if the enemy is able to move several battalions of ASTROs into position to threaten us and prepare for airborne infiltration without us noticing, then maybe we really do deserve it.
Still suprise and deception are part of the Art of War and who is to say that our neighbours will not be able to achieve it.
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty"
Wendell Phillips -
Yea sure fly a complete division in a plane convoy where they are helpess againest our airpower.....Originally posted by Langley:Thanks for the clarification, viper52 I not much knowledge about airborne ops and airbase defences. But do appreciate that airborne ops enable Malaysia to avoid direct confrontation with a fully mobilized SAF in Johor and neutralize it right in Singapore where its weakest. Mabbe that's why we had such an exaggerated reaction over Ex Malindo Darsasa in Aug 1991. To sidetrack abit, was wondering if our armour and arty camps hardened as well since they are our vital units too.
nah that wont work....flying those planes over hostile land in johor where the SAF can shoot them down?wont work either....then empty spaces to land the troops are also quite limited so i guess no more then 2000-4000 can be dropped at any1 time with supplies.They shld be contained by the PDF and reserve units....after which Air defence and planes will bomb them to hell
and also they cant be resupplied anymore.Honestly with the RSAF like this it'd be hard to invade us -
Originally posted by Langley:Wonder if Malaysia/Indonesia can pull the same stunt on us. If I'm not wrong, they have entire airborne divisions, all RDF within a few hours max. If I were them, I would do a 'shock and awe' on Singapore. ASTROS and arty barrage cum air strikes on armour camps, airbases etc. plus large-scale airborne inflitration. Singapore would not be able to respond for several key reasons. One, our air defence artillery is not up to par compared to our air force. Our Rapiers, Iglas and Mistrals are only short-range, low-level weapons and only I-Hawk capable of hitting long-range high-level. Once our airfields kena hit by Malaysian arty or special forces, our skies are wide open. Malaysian/Indonesian troop transports can choose to fly above range of our SAMS. Second, SAF is very formidable no doubt. But it takes time to first mobilize then deploy. Although we claim this can be done within hours but more realistically, I feel this can take days. This creates a 'window of opportunity' where the SAF would be at its weakest. Any comments?
Doubt our immediate neighbours have sufficient capabilities to ochestrate a 'shock and awe'. Even with battallions of ASTROS or entire airborne divisions for that matter. Do note that 'shock and awe' is not like any other force-on-force attrition kind of plan, they must be able to take out our key capabilities over a short period of time and with devastating effect to achieve any kind of shock or awe.They have no criuse missiles, or even have an air force capable of achieving air superiority. -
Thanks for the article kurios55Originally posted by kurios55:
http://www.asianewsnet.net/template.php?No=3124&logo_name=Asian%20Voices%20Today&SectionID=7&backissue=2002-07-10
A 2002 article carried in ST and mirrored in Asia News Network questioned whether Indonesia had effective force-projection capability given the general bad condition of their equipment. The embargo from the US govt is still in existence and it is unlikely that they will lift it soon.
my 2 cents.
Clarified quite abit of stuff over Indonesia. However, does anyone have information on Malaysia's airborne forces? -
The minute they start to buildup in the prelude to a war? China/US/Japan/Korea will send their warships here to prevent any breakout.Originally posted by Langley:Wonder if Malaysia/Indonesia can pull the same stunt on us. If I'm not wrong, they have entire airborne divisions, all RDF within a few hours max. If I were them, I would do a 'shock and awe' on Singapore. ASTROS and arty barrage cum air strikes on armour camps, airbases etc. plus large-scale airborne inflitration. Singapore would not be able to respond for several key reasons. One, our air defence artillery is not up to par compared to our air force. Our Rapiers, Iglas and Mistrals are only short-range, low-level weapons and only I-Hawk capable of hitting long-range high-level. Once our airfields kena hit by Malaysian arty or special forces, our skies are wide open. Malaysian/Indonesian troop transports can choose to fly above range of our SAMS. Second, SAF is very formidable no doubt. But it takes time to first mobilize then deploy. Although we claim this can be done within hours but more realistically, I feel this can take days. This creates a 'window of opportunity' where the SAF would be at its weakest. Any comments?
why?
Because we are the guardians of the oldest shipping route in the world. One quater of world's trade shipping pass thru this area, we already hold the lifelines of at least half a dozen countries by their balls in our hands by just happening to be where we are.
Half of the world's oil is shipped thru here, most of it going to China and China has only 7 days oil reserve. If conflict is imminent a reroute of 1000km shipping for china's oil will take upto 2 weeks. u think China will allow a conflict in the region here? What abt Japan and Korea oil & raw materials?
If war is imminent we have nothing to worry, we just fight a little bit ... then somebody will come in and "own" the problem. -
Supposing our worst case scenairo happens and Malaysia successfully occupies Singapore, how exactly is our much-vaunted ally, the US, going to come to our aid? When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, the US built up its forces in neighbouring Saudi Arabia for almost a year (Operation Desert Shield) before launching Operation Desert Storm. But our Muslim neighbours would NEVER allow the US to launch a major war from their territories. So, even if the US wanted to liberate an occupied Singapore, how are they going to do so? Deploy Marine Expeditionary Forces from Guam? Airborne insertion by the 101st or 82nd? Even then, they are all lightly armed forces with only light armour and arty and would not last against an overwhelmingly superior force. Just to point out that even if the US wanted to liberate us, it would be very difficult. Unless Malaysia really pisses the US off and the US pressurizes Thailand (long-time US ally) to launch armoured units from southern Thailand. Not a very likely scenairo though. All in, I don't think Singapore can count on the US or anybody to come to our aid in the event of an invasion. They may be able to provide air and naval support but definitely not land forces. And remember, wars are won or lost on land.
-
Thailand is always a good option.
Anyway ASEAN will never allow that kind of thing to happen, and the US dosen't really have to go gung ho, there are plenty of strings it can pull to screw up nations which they consider offending, and they can certainly screw up years of economic progress which Malaysia or whatever potential unlikely agressor has put in.
In the end it's pro and cons. Unless Malaysia is taken over by an idealistic (PAS), rather then the loud mouthed, and sometimes irrational but ultimately pragamatic government they now have, chances of such horror stories are unlikely. And if the recent elections are anything to go by, parties like PAS are kinda out of favour.
Unless they are blind idealistists, why on earth would any nation see the invasion of Singapore as a profitable undertaking considering how much it could screw up their economy and irrrate an arbitary superpower? -
If we say that the our doctrine is to utilize the "elite" formations of the Army ie SOF, Commandos and Guards in a potential conflict, why should we train and maintain such a large orbat. There is a lot of cost involve even just for the sole purposes of buying and maintaining the equipment for these SIR and NS units. Not to forget the cost of calling them back for ICT ($$$) and sending them overseas for training and so on and then not using them in a conflict.
Also if we are only relying on the active forces we wouldn't have restructured our formations from 1 active and 2 reserve Inf DIvision to 3 (mixed active/NSmen) Combined arms Div. -
'To make intervention possible, the SAF would need to disable the Malaysian armed forces with a brutal and fearless pre-emptive offensive, or ar least to retain the capability to execute such an offensive after absorbing an initial Malaysian onslaught. Probably in conjunction with electronic attacks on the Malaysian armed forces' communications and sensors (such as radars), the SAF would first attempt to establish air superiority by devastating the Malaysian air force on the ground (in the first few hours of any conflict), before mounting further air strikes againist other military targets. Singapore's army would then seize the initiative on the ground, with Commandos-infiltrated by air and sea-and helimobile Guards units securing the Malaysian side of the Causeway (in Johor Bahru) and the 'second link' bridge (to the south-west of Johor Bahru). Combined arms forces, most importantly armoured battle groups equipped with light tanks and other AFCs, would then cross into Johor and conduct a rapidly paced advance into the peninsula, supported by Guards battalions and their associated RSAF transport helicopter squandrons. RSAF strike aircraft and armed helicopters would provide close air support.'Originally posted by spencer99:If we say that the our doctrine is to utilize the "elite" formations of the Army ie SOF, Commandos and Guards in a potential conflict, why should we train and maintain such a large orbat. There is a lot of cost involve even just for the sole purposes of buying and maintaining the equipment for these SIR and NS units. Not to forget the cost of calling them back for ICT ($$$) and sending them overseas for training and so on and then not using them in a conflict. Also if we are only relying on the active forces we wouldn't have restructured our formations from 1 active and 2 reserve Inf DIvision to 3 (mixed active/NSmen) Combined arms Div.
---Tim Huxley, Defending the Lion City (59) -
Originally posted by Langley:Supposing our worst case scenairo happens and Malaysia successfully occupies Singapore, how exactly is our much-vaunted ally, the US, going to come to our aid? When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, the US built up its forces in neighbouring Saudi Arabia for almost a year (Operation Desert Shield) before launching Operation Desert Storm. But our Muslim neighbours would NEVER allow the US to launch a major war from their territories. So, even if the US wanted to liberate an occupied Singapore, how are they going to do so? Deploy Marine Expeditionary Forces from Guam? Airborne insertion by the 101st or 82nd? Even then, they are all lightly armed forces with only light armour and arty and would not last against an overwhelmingly superior force. Just to point out that even if the US wanted to liberate us, it would be very difficult. Unless Malaysia really pisses the US off and the US pressurizes Thailand (long-time US ally) to launch armoured units from southern Thailand. Not a very likely scenairo though. All in, I don't think Singapore can count on the US or anybody to come to our aid in the event of an invasion. They may be able to provide air and naval support but definitely not land forces. And remember, wars are won or lost on land. First of all, it took the US military SIX months to deploy in Saudi Arabia, not almost a year. No offence, but you seem to have an impression that any liberation of Singapore needs to have a large amount of ground troops, i don't think thats the case. Assuming the SAF could hold out an MAF onslaught for at least a week, it's more than enough for US intervention considering their navy has several carrier strike groups in the pacific. Huge ground troops are not neccessary for an effective response. And considering US 'places not bases' strategy, in the near future each carrier battle grp itself can respond to a MRC independently. A possible situation would be...(if the US chooses to fight on our side) say a CBG comes within the theatre, launch precision strikes on MAF's military centre of gravity (key targets- communications, command and control), followed by other military targets, then perhaps can leave the rest for us..And all these within the first or second week of the war.
If you're talking about US help after Singapore falls...i still doubt we need a lot of their ground troops, assuming the remnants will be taking MAF on out in the streets, there'll be heavy urban fighting. They will realise it's a non-zero sum game, and that will probably deter any invasion in the first place.
I haven't served my NS yet, but i have faith that Singapore can at least hold out in defence for at least 2-3 weeks before capitulation. (Blind faith perhaps?)
-
I am not saying that the rest of our Orbat will not be utilised in an event of a conflict. I am saying that the operational capabilities of units such as SOF, Commandos, Guards make them more likely to be used in the opening phases of any intervention.
The stated maximum range is 80km for the ASTROS system using fin-stabalized rockets. Assuming that they are aimed at our military bases and airbases, that would mean that they could be situated up to 40-60km away from the border.
In order for our infantry and armour formations to penetrate that distance, they would first have to cross the straits either via amphibious crossing or through the Causeway. The Causeway would probably be taken but not used as main axis of advance as it is a natural chokepoint and units bunched up along the road would be sitting ducks.
If air-mobile units such as the above were used, they could go in almost immediately after the air defences were neutralised. This would maximise shock and minimise enemy reaction time.
Which part of our Orbat that would be used would depend on our objectives in such an operation.
Would it be limited in nature to destroy the immediate threats (F-18 squadron at Butterworth along with radar site, ADA in Johor, Astros battalions, proposed commando camp at Mersing etc.)?
Or would we bite the bullet and actually established a security zone in Johor? In such a scenario, this would mean the long term deployment of troops.
Of course, in the short term, there are immediate benefits to such an approach.
It would
1. Secure our water supply.
2. Eliminate the threat of PTP.
3. Make sure we always have a place to go shopping and eat seafood!!
If we decided that we wanted to hold on to territory, we would also need to factor in the political cost and regional implications of such a move. This is because of the difference in political cost of an actual invasion versus a pre-emptive action.
If our troops were committed to an actual invasion, there would also be widespread disruption to our own economy, especially considering that the majority of our troops are NSmen.
An actual invasion would also be used as a rallying cry for the general populace to strike back at us. Whilst I believe that military targets are fair game, there is no way that Singapore would want to be seen killing civillians. Furthermore, if we do not stay around, there is nothing for them to hit back at.
I also think that we do not have the propensity to endure casualties to our troops. If we got caught in such a quagmire similar to Iraq, with daily casualties, our leaders would soon find themselves inundated with calls to our troops back.
add 1 more cent.. hehe
-
Yeap you're right. Iraq invaded on August 2, 1990 and got kicked out of Kuwait on Feb 27, 1991. Bit lazy to check the dates upOriginally posted by Jazzswing:First of all, it took the US military SIX months to deploy in Saudi Arabia, not almost a year. No offence, but you seem to have an impression that any liberation of Singapore needs to have a large amount of ground troops, i don't think thats the case. Assuming the SAF could hold out an MAF onslaught for at least a week, it's more than enough for US intervention considering their navy has several carrier strike groups in the pacific. Huge ground troops are not neccessary for an effective response. And considering US 'places not bases' strategy, in the near future each carrier battle grp itself can respond to a MRC independently. A possible situation would be...(if the US chooses to fight on our side) say a CBG comes within the theatre, launch precision strikes on MAF's military centre of gravity (key targets- communications, command and control), followed by other military targets, then perhaps can leave the rest for us..And all these within the first or second week of the war.
And yeap, I failed to consider what if Singapore was capable of holding on for quite a while. In that case, what you said about American naval and air assests giving our ground forces a boost in the arm would be right on Still, I feel that what WWII has taught us is that Singapore cannot survive for long if cut off from her food and water supply in Johor. Hence, until we secure self-sufficiency in water at least, Singapore has to fight a short war... and win. If Malaysia manages to protract the conflict, we're as good as dead.If you're talking about US help after Singapore falls...i still doubt we need a lot of their ground troops, assuming the remnants will be taking MAF on out in the streets, there'll be heavy urban fighting. They will realise it's a non-zero sum game, and that will probably deter any invasion in the first place.
The same thing applies here. If Singapore has fallen, there's not much point in carrying on the struggle aka Iraq or Somalia. With no food and water, the Malaysian army does not have to engage in bitter FIBUA with remnants of the SAF. It just has to pinpoint and isolate pockets of opposition and wait out the war, like how the US encircled Iraqi cities instead of entering them during the invasion last year. Of course, I'm not sure how effective this strategy would be since, unlike Iraq, Singapore is so heavily built-up. The MAF may really have to do FIBUA if they kena heavily attacked by us with MGs, LAWs and mortars and got no place to take cover. But still, given our resource constraints, we wouldn't put up too long of a fight. Political will wise, I'm not very sure. We have a pragmatic nature and would not have the stomach for heavy casualties. However, since the invading hordes may bloody well rape our women and rip us bare (think the anti-Chinese riots in Jakarta 1998, except on a bigger scale), I think I would fight. Indeed, I feel those NSmen with families would really fight in wartime since everything they have is here.
I haven't served my NS yet, but i have faith that Singapore can at least hold out in defence for at least 2-3 weeks before capitulation. (Blind faith perhaps?) -
Heh, I agree with you. Occupation zone in southern Johor would be crazy. How to man? I NSman liao leh. Wait kena recall from job/studies to do duty there and maybe even die there. Morale will fall and the economy seriously affected. An occupation zone in southern Johor would transform Singapore instantly into the Israel of Southeast Asia, as Huxley pointed out. We compare ourselves to Israel all the time but c'mon on, we haven't really experienced what it's like to fear being killed by a suicide bomber everytime we take a SBS bus or go Orchard. Israel pulled out of southern Lebanon for a reason. We shouldn't be stupid enough to repeat that lesson. Hence, Singapore doesn't really have any strong reason to fight an offensive war since we realistically cannot expect to occupy any territory from our neighbours.Originally posted by kurios55:Or would we bite the bullet and actually established a security zone in Johor? In such a scenario, this would mean the long term deployment of troops.
Of course, in the short term, there are immediate benefits to such an approach.
It would
1. Secure our water supply.
2. Eliminate the threat of PTP.
3. Make sure we always have a place to go shopping and eat seafood!!
If we decided that we wanted to hold on to territory, we would also need to factor in the political cost and regional implications of such a move. This is because of the difference in political cost of an actual invasion versus a pre-emptive action.
If our troops were committed to an actual invasion, there would also be widespread disruption to our own economy, especially considering that the majority of our troops are NSmen.
An actual invasion would also be used as a rallying cry for the general populace to strike back at us. Whilst I believe that military targets are fair game, there is no way that Singapore would want to be seen killing civillians. Furthermore, if we do not stay around, there is nothing for them to hit back at.
I also think that we do not have the propensity to endure casualties to our troops. If we got caught in such a quagmire similar to Iraq, with daily casualties, our leaders would soon find themselves inundated with calls to our troops back.
add 1 more cent.. hehe -
Malaysia does not want to fight a protracted war as well. In the case of any outbreak of hostilities. A protracted war will greatly screw up their nation as well. Unless it is a zero sum game, which is very unlikely, the use of military force would be measured, somewhat limited to reduce damage on either side where the point of the war is not to crush your enemy, but hurt him enough to make him more willing to see things your way.
Stories like ASTROS 2 bombardment blanketing Singapore are far-fetched for the very reason we are not living with neighbours would want to see us destroyed at any cost. And besides, given the fact that there are plenty of civillian and assets from other militaries in Singapore, anyhow shooting rockets into the nation will probably hurt the attacker more in the long run. Sure you can fight a war but when your palm oil kenna santioned and people are forced to buy US soy oil, you might want to think twice about using your toys as if they are some trump card.
While we cannot rely on nations like the US to fight a war for us, it would be more foolish to think that we do not need them as allies.
Who would dare to bully Singapore, if it not only has a credible armed force, but also healthy relations with other nations which bully boy will not dare to offend. -
I agreeOriginally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Stories like ASTROS 2 bombardment blanketing Singapore are far-fetched for the very reason we are not living with neighbours would want to see us destroyed at any cost. And besides, given the fact that there are plenty of civillian and assets from other militaries in Singapore, anyhow shooting rockets into the nation will probably hurt the attacker more in the long run. Sure you can fight a war but when your palm oil kenna santioned and people are forced to buy US soy oil, you might want to think twice about using your toys as if they are some trump card.
While we cannot rely on nations like the US to fight a war for us, it would be more foolish to think that we do not need them as allies.
Who would dare to bully Singapore, if it not only has a credible armed force, but also healthy relations with other nations which bully boy will not dare to offend.
Its not just palm oil or rubber. Malaysia's economy has now moved into manufacturing but it, and most of ASEAN, export their manufactured goods mostly to the G7 countries. So any sanctions from them would hurt Malaysia greatly. And in Malaysia and Indonesia, just as in Singapore, economic performance very important in social stability. Just look at 1997. Still, this does not mean that there will never be any wars in the region given all our tensions. I never meant to say that our relations with the US are not important. Just that I wanted to take a look at how exactly the US would respond to any threat to Singapore and kinda concluded that it wouldn't be easy to support us 
-
By 2006 the first of the 3 varyvag copies which china is producing will roll off from production.Originally posted by Langley:Supposing our worst case scenairo happens and Malaysia successfully occupies Singapore, how exactly is our much-vaunted ally, the US, going to come to our aid? ... ....
.....All in, I don't think Singapore can count on the US or anybody to come to our aid in the event of an invasion. They may be able to provide air and naval support but definitely not land forces. And remember, wars are won or lost on land.
Supposing mayalsia occupies us. China will send her warships to these region on the pretext of a peacekeeping force and to guard her shipping, once that happens Japan will become suspicious thinking that china is again trying to hold japanese hostage as it did in the diaoyutai episode, she too will send her warships here on that same pretext along with phillippines,korea and vietnam who previously had coastal clashes with china.
The US seeing Chinese warships in proximity of our region may think china is out to blockade taiwan in the first re-unification manevours will also send warships.
Everybody will be here on the pretext of peacekeeping force but in reality suspicious of everybody else.
That's why they will ensure that
1) no violence breaks out
2) Singapore's health and survival
3) and they will ensure that everybody leaves the immediate region once episode is over or not at all.
That last point is the reason why malaysia or indoesia in today's context will NOT ty to occupy singapore. -
I think the previous post has point out a very possible seanario that many have left out..With the vital shipping lane...many countries especially China (assuming they have an operational carrier force by then) will try to protect their own interests.