My response to Benjamin's interesting comment of September 14, 2020
I think the price of Singapore's new Type 218SG submarines are average-low indicating the 218 is not a radical departure from the Type 214. Number "4" tends not to be used as it is an "unlucky number" in various Chinese languages spoken by most Singaporeans (also see "Tetraphobia"). More specifically US$900 million per 218 is reasonable given it is a larger-than-usual AIP submarine from a new supplier (TKMS) - with the price also covering spares, training, maintenance facilities, etc.
I think Singapore has to hedge a bit and does not form alliances because:
- Singapore's relatively small military would only be a small addition to the forces swallowed up by a
much larger ally (especially the US). Even Australia under ANZUS is a small addition to US forces.
- a formal alliance would normally mean Singapore would politically-legally be required to come to the
aid of an ally (say the US) if the US were "attacked".
In December 2001, following Afghanistan-based-al Qaeda's 9/11 terrorist attack on the US,
Australian SAS came to the aid of US forces fighting in Afghanistan. This was legally-politically
invoked under the ANZUS Treaty.
While Singapore is not an ally of the US Singapore is/was still contributing, with the US and Australia, to the "War On Terror" in the Middle East. Note this Straits Times article "Parliament: More SAF troops to be sent to Iraq later this year to train their security forces" of March 2, 2018
and
"including the Singapore Armed Forces and the Australian Defence Force's joint deployments in the Middle East as part of the Defeat-ISIS coalition"
Singapore may have intel (eg. sigint) relationships...made public in 2013 - with Singapore a "third party" associate member of the "Five Eyes".
"FPDA" features so little in an average Aussie's knowledge of regional arrangements that I had to look it up - yielding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Power_Defence_Arrangements . Odd that any concept of UK forces reentering the East of Suez (or east of Afghanistan) region is still entertained
and odd that the US is NOT in the FPDA arrangement. Maybe a Queen Elizabeth class carrier will visit our region in 2021?
Does Singapore buy weapons platforms of any significance from the UK? I note some very old Land Rovers and more recent snipers rifles.
Yes Australia has been building/launching/planning a grand fleet of new ships: LHDs, destroyers, offshore patrol vessels, smaller patrol boats, large frigates, supply ships, an icebreaker and last, but not least submarines. BUT Australia's ability to man and maintain all these old and new vessels is less certain.
7 comments:
FPDA was essentially create to defend Malaysia and Singapore, as a counter for expansionist Indonesian policies from the 1960s and the threat of the 'Communist Domino effect' coming down from Vietnam, which was eventually halted by the Thai's robust actions on their border.
As to why there is no American involvement in FPDA is very simple - it was formed right after the decolonisation of the British Empire by five Commonwealth countries.
https://thediplomat.com/2019/10/military-chiefs-conference-highlights-five-power-defense-arrangements/
Singapore did purchase many of its initial military equipment from the UK in the early 1970s, including Hawker Hunters, Strikemasters, Bloodhound and Rapier missiles. The Land Rovers were part of an initial batch that includes Bedford lorries and Ford M151 jeeps.
The first Singapore army rifles were SLRs, but quickly changed to M-16s on the advice of Israeli military advisors. That kicked off the whole Charted Industry of Singapore saga when an entire M-16 factory was bought from Colt turn-key, then after finishing the Singapore Army production run Colt refused to let Singapore export to countries in the region, which lead Singapore developing the SAR-80/88, an AR-18 derivative design from Sterling Arms in the UK.
Over the decades, UK military equipment purchases have been reduced, simply as they couldn't offer winning bids. The last major attempt from the UK was the BAe led Eurofighter bid in 2005 that lost to the F-15SG.
After Rapier were replaced with SPYDER in 2011, I don't think the SAF has any major equipment sourced from the UK.
Thanks Shawn C
Your comments are of your usual high standard, combining facts and analysis. There is a major gap in knowledge about Southeast Asian strategic history that it fills.
I'll turn it into an article tomorrow.
Meantime, it occurs to me although Britain refused to be involved in the Second Indochina War (1960-1975) https://nzhistory.govt.nz/files/documents/vietnam-fact-sheet5.pdf as Britain didn't have the money and had too many other commitments.
Britain may have made a deal with the US for Britain to be the major partner creating the FPDA. The FPDA helped contain/avoid many of the strategic pressures in other Southeast Asian countries that fighting in Indochina could have radiated out to. Without the FPDA the US may have found itself fighting in those other Southeast Asian countries!?
Pete
Hello Pete,
Yes, the UK had plenty of other issues to deal with in the 1960s, with the end of de-colonialization leading to bushfire wars occurring all across the globe, while Indonesia in the early 1960s was aligning with the Communist Bloc for weapons and quite busy stirring up South East Asia, from the Western New Guinea issue with the Dutch, to Confrontation with Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei, to East Timor.
It was only when Sukarno was replaced in 1967 that their expansionist policies stopped, with the exception of East Timor.
FPDA always stuck me as a Commonwealth 'boys club' with the UK, Australia and New Zealand taking over defence of three former colony until they could defend themselves, which for Singapore was around 1989, and Brunei finally became an independent country in 1984.
Do also note the SEATO defense bloc that existed from 1954 to 1977, which Thailand and the Phillipines were members of, while at that time many current SEA countries were still French or British colonies.
I wonder whether is the FPDA is still relevant in today's time. Even so how much substance does it hold?
Hi Benjamin
Difficult to predict future happenings to test whether the FPDA is still relevant.
I can see that Indonesia may become a Southeast Asian regional power which may need some collective balancing by at least 3 FPDA members (Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei).
Particularly claims over undersea oil and gas fields between some of those countries may cause tension.
Ambalat oil claims have long caused tension between Indonesia and Malaysia - see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2009/06/indonesia-gets-apology-from-malaysian.html
Regards
Pete
I wonder if given a scenario where Singapore or Malaysia is threatened or at risk, how will the FPDA proceed? Politically and militarily. Which nation will be willing to come to assist. How much capablility can be provided.
Speaking of the issue with Australia undermanned warships, i recall an article where Taiwan is facing the same issue but more serious than Australia. 2 Articles
https://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/15/china-threat-invasion-conscription-taiwans-military-is-a-hollow-shell/&ved=2ahUKEwjn_LHziv3rAhX37nMBHT2ZDWsQFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0kSZgy_taCJP7UhFRxncqU&cshid=1600788789603
https://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/20/taiwan-military-flashy-american-weapons-no-ammo/&ved=2ahUKEwjb48ePi_3rAhUimuYKHRoWAd8QFjADegQIChAJ&usg=AOvVaw3PB65O0RJa87SjI0U6UIlv&cshid=1600788859178
Hi Benjamin [at September 23, 2020 at 1:34 AM]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Power_Defence_Arrangements#History indicates:
"Under the Five Powers Defence Arrangements, the five 'powers' (Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore and the UK) are to consult each other "immediately" in the event or threat of an armed attack on any of the five countries for the purpose of deciding what measures should be taken jointly or separately in response. There is no specific commitment to intervene militarily."
COMMENT
Indonesia was a known threat when FPDA was set up. Indonesia still has a mild military force of containable size.
BUT it is unknown how FPDA would work if one or more of the powers came under attack or was in conflict with, lets say CHINA, which has a force too large for a distant UK + the other 4 "Powers" to handle. This is especially if PLA forces advanced south, primarily on land, without relying on more vulnerable sea forces.
Thanks for https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/15/china-threat-invasion-conscription-taiwans-military-is-a-hollow-shell/ and https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/20/taiwan-military-flashy-american-weapons-no-ammo/ .
COMMENT
It certainly looks like Taiwan would need US naval-air deterence and participation to hold back PLA forces (say 10+km from Taiwan's shore) BEFORE Taiwan's depleted army was forced to fight PLA amphibious forces landing on Taiwan.
Pete
Post a Comment