Pedra Branca and beyond…

Written by ED on May 24, 2008 – 1:58 pm - Posted in Current Affairs, Singapore |


I thought I could add on a little bit to my previous post on the verdict of Pedra Branca, ever since it was announced. Thank you for all the comments too, which are food for thoughts. I guess some of us who are really interested in the topic per se, is going through the process of acceptance. The fact is that, most Malaysians and Singaporeans in modern days are well aware of the strategic advantage of Pedra Branca.

One of the arguments by some Malaysian friends rooted primarily in the distance of Pedra Branca from Malaysia coast, and that of the distance from Singapore’s coast. Along with it, was also the attempt to strip Malaysia’s historical leaders of their powers. Ironically, by their very own people to justify their modern day claim.

Firstly, sovereignty over a piece of land goes beyond just distance. Let me cite you the example of Christmas Island, which was handed over to Australia. Again, it was British East India Company which first planted the asset on their navigational charts. Christmas Island lies more than 1400NM (1nautical mile = 1.852 kilometres) North of Australia, while Indonesia is about 270NM away. Going by distance, shouldn’t Christmas Island be given to Indonesia instead?

My personal feel is that, if a historic leader of Malaysia in the colonial times have underestimated the value of Pedra Branca, that can’t be helped. I hope this is not too offensive but a layman’s way of saying it is, Malaysia only have herself to blame. Adding more hatred towards Singapore is not going to change the fact that the Johor administration did indeed published an official statement to denounce any attempt to claim ownership of the said property in 1953.

What comes next is really ironical. Some Malaysians have argued that whoever published that statement, was not authorized to do so. I felt terribly sorry for Malaysia, in the sense that some of them had to resort to banishing their own historic leaders in national authority when they’re dead. Does the passing on of a leader in a country means any policy or decision made by that individual is automatically invalid? C’mon, we know that’s not real.

Now that Malaysia has successfully claimed Middle Rocks, what’s next? Hung previously commented that the size of Middle Rocks should not be underestimated. I had based my previous post on the size of Middle Rocks as a wasteland, even though Malaysia managed to get it now. Hung is not wrong either, except that I felt Middle Rocks were too small to place any realistic infrastructure on it. Not until extensive reclamation is carried out, against the tidal conditions there.

It is not likely to see another lighthouse being build by Malaysia, because the confusion is not going to be welcomed by seafarers. For a matter of fact, Horsburgh Lighthouse has long been regarded as the first navigational aid when entering into the waters of Singapore across worldwide navigational charts. It had been so, for decades.

It was also mentioned the control of territorial waters in that small region, which I cannot reject. Indeed, that is a big portion of the equation. However, taking into account the activity rate of Singapore and Malaysia authorities, who is more likely to be realistically be in control of the waters there? Singapore has Police Coast Guard and Navy vessels stationed 24hrs a day, 7 days a week and 365 days a year. Malaysia? I shall not comment much but if I’m allowed to speak from my personal experiences, I will just put it short as pathetic.

Now that the verdict is out, I am wondering how it can be implemented. Should any accidents happen in the area, who should be the one officially in charge of disaster management? At the looks of it, Singapore will be the one since our resources are already there. From navigational aids to life-saving vessels and even a helipad to quickly fly injured personnel to the hospital. Under this light, if Malaysia has Middle Rocks and retained the inactivity in the region all along… what’s the use of having Middle Rocks then?

If Malaysia wants to get real about the region, then it will have to invest in money and resources (particularly manpower) to plant their involvement there. But with the size of Middle Rocks, what can be built? If nothing can be built on Middle Rocks, how is Malaysia going to reinstate their Rights in the surrounding waters? Any beacon or tower is redundant, because Singapore has already accounted for those.

The only thing possible now that I foresee, is legitimate placement of Malaysian Naval ships in those waters since Middle Rocks belongs to Malaysia. But having Malaysian Naval ships appearing only for a short 1hr or 2hrs (never there on some days), I wonder what kind of control can Malaysia gain? Sovereignty, by paper?

What I figured too, the legitimacy of Malaysia in the waters surrounding Pedra Branca will make the ownership of South Ledge a big challenge for Singapore. For that, I am more aligned towards the move that whoever is realistically conducting activities there, be the one to claim ownership of South Ledge. Distance from the mentioned country, as I have demonstrated, is secondary. Just in case you think a Singaporean would be supportive of Singapore of course, then let me share that it need not even be Singapore and Malaysia, since Indonesia is also a stone-throw away. The question is, which of these countries are providing for the seafarers at large in that portion of the world?

Looking at the situation, I wonder if Singapore is going to continue doing free labour for Malaysia. Using Straits of Johor as an example again, you will hardly see Malaysian authorities in the waters. The entire stretch of waters is being patrolled by Singapore Police Coast Guard, with at least 10 patrol boats 24hrs a day. That explains why Singapore is always the one picking up illegal immigrants up North.

As for South Ledge? I seriously have no idea. Like i said in my previous post, I will be thankful enough if Malaysia will be more proactive in joint operations with Singapore after going through such a lengthy dispute. Otherwise, I will be thinking… why even bother to kick up such a fuss if Malaysia is not going to be active there?



7 Comments to “Pedra Branca and beyond…”

  1. Yuhui Says:

    Hi there,

    I enjoyed reading your entries about Pedra Branca. Your pictures were really awesome! Very inspiring to see such a clear sky, definitely something we don’t get on the mainland, haha!

    My take on the case is that Singapore came very close to losing, since ICJ had ruled that Johor did actually own that group of islands from time immemorial.

    I also think that though the media constantly harped that the issue was about sovereignty, it really should be about territory, especially with regards to how the Law of the Sea is applied.

    See my entry here:
    http://yuhuissingaporeblogger.blogspot.com/2008/05/bittersweet-pedra-branca-victory-for.html

    [Reply]

  2. Terkilan - Pulau Batu Putih/Pedra Branca! « Tembam’s Weblog Says:

    [...] * Pedra Branca and beyond [...]

  3. The Void Deck Says:

    Hi Endoh - I hear you. Sometimes people just look at geography in deciding state territoriality. Fair assumption, but history also has an important quirky role to play. I come across people who say PB is closer to Malaysia and therefore should be theirs. With a glint in my eye, I would tease that Falklands should then be Argentina’s, but tell that to the Brits and they would send in another expedition force to take it back from Argentina again by force. Also, Alaska should be Canada’s and not the USA. What about Guam then I would ask.

    [Reply]

  4. The Void Deck Says:

    Hi Yuhui - After some futile attempt to understand island, islet and rock in UNCLOS, I now rethink there is some room for contention with regards to UNCLOS and Middle Rocks. According to Article 121(3) of UNCLOS: “Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.” So this whole idea of Malaysia winning wasteland Middle Rocks is controversial in terms of its territoriality and UNCLOS.

    How hollow is Malaysia’s victory with respect to that Article 121 - how much sea space can they claim from an economic point of view? But the area around PB is more than an economic asset. The problem of the application of UNCLOS on archipelagos. Spratleys is an interesting sabre-rattling nightmare.

    [Reply]

  5. Yuhui Says:

    Hey Void Deck,

    Well, given today’s technological sophistication, it should be no problem for Malaysia to set up some contraption on Middle Rocks, then claim that it has economic use/life, and then claim the EEZ around it.

    [Reply]

  6. chan chin chow Says:

    I’ve read some comments from Malaysian leaders. They have learned a lot from ICJ ruling. They have to because people of Malaysia wanted them to.

    Internal Affairs Minister said Malaysia will built a structure on Middle Rocks. From my not so intelligent analytical mind, it is understood that Malaysia did not have enough resource and vessel to be in the area 24 hours a day. A structure for maritime agencies’ boats there is viable solution for Malaysian presence in the long run. By the way, it is not impossible to build structure on the wasteland in today’s civil engineering. You will have idea about it if you see the helipad structure of Pulau Batu Puteh.

    I’ve also read from Singapore side that the area around Pulau Batu Puteh has not much fish and not fish paradise. In Malaysia side, the fisherman association of the area eagerly wanted to fish there because from their experience a long time ago (when Singapore was in Malaysia) there are a lot of fish there . They are small coast fisherman who don’t have the capability to fish in the open sea.

    I agree that Malaysian have to thank Singapore’s approach of “give less and take more”.

    [Reply]

  7. silver pack Says:

    congrates to singapore.

    time to buy more warships to patrol those huge waters.

    [Reply]

Leave a Comment