At the end of last year, a mini furore was unleashed when secret documents were unveiled to show that Singapore was helping the US and Australia spy on its neighbour, Indonesia. It was not improbable that a major fall-out would occur however, Indonesia, being gracious and perhaps not wanting to upset inter-country ties, did try to smooth over the incident. It took steps to verify the reports, seek clarification from its trusted neighbour, Singapore, and in his remarks, Dr Yudhoyono referred to Singapore and South Korea as “friends”, noting that the allegations of their involvement in monitoring undersea communications were not specific to Indonesia, but in Asia. And so, that was the end of the sorry saga as far as we know.
The recent incident of Indonesia naming its refitted frigate after two dead marines is leading up to a different outcome. The duo were members of Indonesia’s special Operations Corps Command, which is today the Marine Corps, and had been ordered to infiltrate Singapore during Indonesia’s Confrontation with Malaysia at that time when the then-president Sukarno had opposed the formation of Malaysia, which Singapore was part of from September 1963 to August 1965, as a puppet state of the British.
The bombing claimed the lives of three people and injured 33 others.
Both marines were charged in court on March 16 for the bombing and ordered to be hung. Despite President Suharto’s personal request on 11 October 1968 that the sentence either be commuted to life imprisonment or at least be delayed the convicted marines were hung in Changi Jail on Oct 17, 1968. Giving in to Sukarno’s request could perhaps be seen as allowing Indonesia to violate Singapore’s sovereignty.
To repair ties, then-Singapore-PM Lee Kuan Yew laid flowers on the graves of the two marines in Jakarta saying “There should not be any more problems over this issue.”
Today, Indonesia exercised its sovereign powers to name its own Navy ship after their own heroes. Their heroes are not our heroes, their ships are not ours. While we could voice our concern and explain our sentiments, we cannot impose these on our neighbour. Doing so would be to intervene with Indonesia’s sovereignty.
We have said our piece, let them make their own decisions. Instead, Singapore’s 2nd Defence Minister Chan Chun Sing decided to cancel a planned meeting with his Indonesia counterpart deputy defence minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin scheduled to be held on 11 Feb, Tuesday, taking this altercation to the next level. This smacks of nothing short of throwing a temper tantrum because it cannot get in own ways in its neighbour’s affairs.
I am not arguing whether Indonesia was right or wrong in choosing to name its refitted frigate after their two dead marines. I definitely acknowledge Singapore’s rights to voice its concerns. Yet, is it right for Singapore to insist? Would it allow another country to impinge on its own rights to run its country its own way? For crying out loud, Singapore rejected the UN’s call to set up an independent electoral commission to ensure fairness and as observance of true democracy:
Singapore’s first human rights review by the United Nations has officially concluded, with the Government agreeing to ratify UN Conventions on issues like the rights of disabled persons.
However, it rejected calls from member countries in the UN to establish bodies such as a human rights institution and an independent electoral commission locally, arguing that they are not necessary.
It also rejected suggestions to establish a body to monitor child rights, as well as to implement UN rules on the treatment of women prisoners.
Interestingly, the Jakarta Post wrote a scathing report on the insensitivity of Indonesia’s ship-naming decision (MSM REPORTS INDONESIA "PULLED OUT" OF AIRSHOW WHILE INDONESIAN NEWS SAYS THEY WERE 'UNINVITED') and called it “scoring a few political points” in an election year while the Singapore media was silent on any such reflective reporting.
It is not untenable that the PAP is trying to create a perception of instability in the country so as to score its own political points and harness its often-used scare tactics to steer the citizenry to vote for the PAP once again in the coming election. No doubt the PAP government will sing the familiar tune of region instability, need to protect Singapore’s sovereignty, our neighbours are all hostile and scary and how small and vulnerable we are. These all despite the abrasive leadership the PAP has been providing in the last 50 years.
Lee Kuan Yew once said it’s all about perception…marketing. Well, they’ve used this many times, if not in every, election.
Cass