Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©New Straits Times (Used by permission)

THE foreign minister has expressed both surprise and dismay at the announcement by Singapore's senior minister of state that the republic intends to claim territorial waters and an exclusive economic zone around Pedra Branca, which was awarded to it by the International Court of Justice in May. The foreign minister's chagrin is understandable because one would have thought this would have been brought up at meetings of the technical committee expressly set up to deal with the matter of maritime boundaries and zones and other unresolved issues thrown up by the ICJ ruling. Considering the fact that Pedra Branca is merely 0.6 nautical miles from Middle Rocks -- and that it may just be a rock itself rather than an island -- the question of jurisdiction over waters so close to Malaysian territory is indeed a matter on which Singapore should not make any unilateral decision.

On the other hand, there seems nothing in the reply to a question in Singapore's Parliament to suggest that the island nation will act unilaterally. On the contrary, there is a commitment to "negotiate" with those neighbouring countries whose maritime claims overlap with theirs, as clearly is the case with the waters surrounding Pedra Branca. Moreover, there is nothing really new about the recent announcement in Singapore's Parliament, as made clear by the reference to similar claims issued in 1980 and May 23 this year -- the day of the ICJ decision. In fact, it was a standard ministerial reply that restated, almost verbatim, the established policy position that Singapore would pursue its claim to a territorial sea limit and an exclusive economic zone, consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, whose "precise coordinates" would be announced at "an appropriate time". Although it was a stock response to a question put forward in Parliament, it nevertheless did not help matters that Singapore's unwavering position was reasserted in such an open and public manner.

Be that as it may, the fact that what appears to be a routine regurgitation of standard policy can ruffle diplomatic feathers serves to show that it does not take much to make waves between two countries with a lot of contentious issues to settle. While the ICJ judgment may have brought "closure" to one source of friction, it has also thrown up other tricky rocks to navigate. It is to be hoped that both sides will sit down and negotiate the choppy bilateral waters in a more sensitive manner and work together to find amicable solutions.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed