BILATERAL TIES: We should make our position clear and not be lulled into a false sense of security
WHEN news broke about Singapore’s involvement as an active partner in the United States- inspired spying spree, targeting neighbouring Malaysia and Indonesia, among other friendly nations, I was not at all surprised.
It is well-known in our intelligence circles that under the guidance of their new found Israeli friends, Singapore started to operate a network of spies and informers to focus primarily on our armed forces as soon as they were shown the door in 1965, believing to this day, in spite of indications to the contrary, that Malaysia is their real enemy.
The Singapore High Commission in Kuala Lumpur was established soon after. Although thin on the ground, it comprised some of their most experienced police officers with strong Malaysian family ties and other connections.
Their job was made easy by the fact that we had little to hide as ours was and continues to remain a largely open society.
In this latest incident, they neither denied nor confirmed their involvement, and this response is somewhat unusual because the convention I am familiar with is to deny outright in a situation such as this.
This little innovation is Singapore’s little contribution to dignifying diplomatic shenanigans à la Singapura. However, what I find extremely vulgar is their foreign minister making a desperate attempt to tell us, with hand on his heart, that Singapore would not do anything to damage our interests and the apparently happy relations both our countries enjoy.
He would say that, wouldn’t he? A nice try. To take him at face value is to go back through time and swallow the British line that they acquired their vast colonial territories in a fit of absent-mindedness. Please spare us our blushes.
All this reminded me of my column of Oct 18, 2006, appearing under the title “Singapore is simply a neighbour too far” in which I said among other things, “We must concede that Singapore has every right to pursue her own agenda as it sees fit. We can only hope that Singapore will grant us a similar right to follow ours without screaming foul play at every opportunity and imputing improper motives,” into the bargain.
Seven years later, nothing I wrote about the state of our relations with Singapore then has changed and I have taken the liberty of revisiting a few of my earlier remarks which continue to be relevant in today’s circumstances.
In that article I also made the point that Singapore was not an unknown quantity to Malaysia. Former president B.J. Habibi of Indonesia — no doubt driven to utter exasperation in his dealings with a soulless, legalistic and opportunistic Singapore — dropped his diplomatic guard and dismissed the miniscule republic as nothing but a “Little Red Dot”.
We know exactly how Habibi must have felt. We have long put up with their brand of negotiating brashness. We once entertained the somewhat naive hope that the historical ties that were supposed to underpin our relations must mean something to them.
Sentiments and goodwill cut no ice with them. We have to adopt a cold, clinical and legalistic approach ourselves, as they do. How often have we ended up drawing the short straw in our negotiations with her?
She has made it quite clear that she has no time for sentimental nonsense about a shared political and social past. It operates with one aim in mind, and that is to exact the maximum advantage she can wangle out of any deal.
Singapore is not particularly obsessed with ethical niceties. Is she not one of the world’s great money laundering centres providing shelter for illicit funds from the whole of Asean, including Malaysia? And yet able to hoodwink the world into believing that Singapore’s financial dealings are totally “kosher”?
Our relations with a neighbour such as Singapore must be circumscribed by the most formal and correct behaviour, taking nothing from her that is not rightly ours, and giving her nothing that is not due to her under the law.
We must perforce adopt a policy of minimum engagement, which I believe to be appropriate given a relationship that has never been known for its convergence of views on even the most pedestrian of issues. Singapore has to earn our trust before we let our guard down.
We should make our position entirely clear and not allow ourselves to be lulled into a false sense of security. In dealing with xenophobic Singapore that has to use Gurkha mercenaries to protect her leaders, not even trusting her own citizens, we must never neglect to read the fine print or risk being taken for a ride.
In the spirit of Christmas, I wish Singapore “Happy Spying”.
Happy spying, Singapore
0 comments:
Post a Comment