[Edited/Amended in Jan 2024.
Yes, it is incongruous that I "refresh" this post just as Johor and Singpaore are looking forward to more cooperation and working towards passport-free travel between Johor and Singapore. But yes, I am hopeful for a "common market" for Johor and Singapore. This post is just a reaction to the video from a few years back.]
There is this speculative video on YouTube:
The video assumes that for whatever reason, and in whatever scenario, diplomacy has broken down, and war has been declared. This is an attempt to argue against the assumptions.
1) Singapore is not worth conquering.
Most invasions/occupations are for tangible benefits - land, oil, natural resources, etc. Singapore has limited land. Malaysia has LOTS of land (compared to SG). They don't need SG's land. SG has NO NATURAL RESOURCES. No gold. No oil. We even have to import SAND! But, you might say, SG is richer than MY! So wouldn't MY want to take those riches?
But... the source of SG's wealth CANNOT be taken. It is intangible.
SG is rich because it is well-run, well-organised, well-maintained, and stable. Guess what happens after a war?
SG is only worth conquering if you can take it almost bloodlessly, or with a minimum of fuss and damage, leaving most of the infrastructure and organisation undamaged. Which is why SG invest in defence - to make it messy.
SG is a small country and eminently "takeable" in war. Eventually. But the ashes the victor will have will be a pyrrhic victory.
Well, you may say, maybe THAT is the whole point - destroy SG so that Penang, or Port Klang, or Johor's PTP can become the new shipping hub and enjoy some of the wealth that SG is getting. Sure... shipping companies will shift their operations to the belligerent country that had warred on their previous (peaceful) base of operations. It speaks to the stability and integrity of that country and its ports. No, they would probably shift their operations to Indonesian ports. Or Thai. Or Philippines.
2) BUT... War may not be a rational decision.
Even if (1) above is true, couldn't MY invade for other reasons - jealousy, payback (for some imagined or real slight), to put SG in its place ("respect your abang!"), Mahathir got up off the wrong side of the bed...?
The point is, while there are NO rational reason for Malaysia to invade/try to conquer SG, a prudent defence does not plan based on what the opponent will (reasonably) do, but what it CAN do. Google "Pukul Habis".
In 1991, Malaysia and Indonesia had a joint military exercise involving all three branches of their military. In Johor. Just 20 km (or less) from SG. On SG's 26th National Day. With SG having a new PM (GCT, just took over from LKY). And a lot of the SG military would be tied up with the National Day celebrations. And the Malaysia (and Indonesian) military were massed just 20 km from SG.
Oh, and in case you don't speak Malay, "Pukul Habis" means "total wipeout". If you were the new PM of SG, and you got this briefing, what would you do? Would you think that MY was planning to invade while you were celebrating your National Day with all your defences down? Oh, just one more thing to consider: Mahathir was the PM of MY at that time.
Oh, another thing to consider: When a country conducts military exercises, it is courteous to give notice to your neighbours that you are doing so to avoid causing alarm. It is a neighbourly thing to do, and Malaysia prides itself on its manners, courtesy and good neighbourliness. Oh, yeah, my point: they FORGOT to inform SG.
So how did SG find out? Well, you can't mobilise troops and equipment for a military exercise without being noticed. SG would have intelligence agents and source monitoring Malaysia. And also, I think the Indonesians were more courteous. Oh, and a third thing I forgot (or rather, I hope I don't have to spell this out): there have been a few instances in recent history when the start of an invasion began with a so-called "military exercise". (Then, i guess, they "accidentally" cross the border, and "inadvertently" secured some strategic bases, and before you know it, they had "unintentionally" occupied some territory. Just an honest mistake! Any army could make that mistake! Can't it? e.g. Russo-Ukraine war.)
3) Peace is the real achievement.
It is easy to start a war. But it is difficult to end it. And there are no winners, only losers and worse losers. Singapore's defence strategy is to be so difficult to invade that it is not worth the trouble. And the outcome of war will not prove who is right, only who is left. Oh, and a comment on the video. It's interesting, but it is only one version or one speculation as to the possible strategies and tactics. I would have liked to see some strategic moves. SG is so small, that ANY attack would likely take out some strategic asset. So, the question would be, "what strategic asset in MY would SG target?". Also what would be the opening gambit or pre-emptive strike? The blowing up of the causeway and the second link?
Critique of the scenario/Alternative scenario
The scenario in the video assumes that SG would take a passive or reactive role.
I think not.
The best defence is a good offence. Especially, when one does not have "strategic depth". Singapore's defence doctrine has always been, fight on their soil. We don't have enough land to fight on. All our land has vital infrastructures or residences. If we have to fight on Singapore soil, we have already lost in some ways.
Our airforce will need to establish air superiority and complete air dominance. That means taking out any enemy aircraft that is in the air and any time, and extending our air dominance over the WHOLE of Peninsula Malaysia. Eventually, this will mean damaging or destroying enemy air bases, and suppressing all flights.
Reinforcements from East Malaysia would have to be repelled and kept out of the fray.
Once air superiority or dominance is established, the next objectives would be to pin back their naval forces, and seize strategic assets, or destroy strategic targets. Or targets of national pride. Like the KL twin towers.
Or the water treatment plants in Johor.
Singapore will not start a war. But we intend to finish anything started.
Malaysia has probably already assessed that Singapore would be a tough nut to crack (since 1969), and that the Malaysian forces may not be able to prevail. That will still their hand.
So our defence policy has worked in this case.
Depending on the diplomatic situation, if there is the possibility of Johor taking our side (what with the possibility of greater cooperation), Singapore may want to consider the how to work that in our favour. Realistically, this was a possibility when KL was antagonistic to Johor (i.e. Mahathir was PM and had a beef with the Johor Sultanate). But with an amiable Anwar, and the Johor Sultan taking over the Kingship, it is unlikely. Also unlikely that Malaysia will "test" Singapore belligerently.
No comments:
Post a Comment