View Comments (30)

• As a note, the USS Gabrielle Giffords is one of the first warships to be armed with the NSM missile.

  I must say that the continued presence of US navy is one of the reasons why the west capella is still there at the location drilling for oil for Petronas.

• So like, should we be okay with USA intruding into SCS but not okay when China does the same?

• We may not have said anything publicly but like in the past; we may have issued protests via silent back door channels. At times dealing with bilateral issues silently may be result in the status quo being maintained rather than things escalating.

  On USN FONOPS; they are intended mainly at China to show that the U.S. does not recognise its claims but in reality they are also intended to show that any claims but any claimant which restricts access to international waters; will not be tolerated.

• @ joe

  You have to really understand what UNCLOS law is, and what EEZ is.

  Basically

  - EEZ is a space where the coastal country have exclusive economic rights to that area. Economic activity includes petroleum extraction, minerals extraction, fishing rights, etc.
  - EEZ usually extends 200NM from our coast.
  - Other countries cannot do economic activities in our EEZ, that includes fishing (which vietnam and china are rampantly doing in our EEZ), oil exploration like sesimic studies the Chinese ship is doing around west capella
  - What they could do is a free innocent passage of ships in the EEZ, as the EEZ is considered high seas and not a part of a nations territory. Why USA is doing FONOPS, is to reinforce this fact. Passing through is allowed, but loitering for long periods and harassing economic activities like what Chinese coast guard is doing is IMO against the spirit of UNCLOS. Why you see US Navy ships never stops or loiter at any area.
  - China 9 dash line says that the south china sea is china's territory. Why I think we should describe the chinese action as colonizing our seas. I would also suggest KDN to monitor and destroy all atlas and globes made in china that is sold in malaysia, as most show the 9-dash line on it.

• joe "So like, should we be okay with USA intruding into SCS but not okay when China does the same?"

  There is a lot of difference in what the two countries are doing.

  China claims that it possesses the features within the nine dash line on the claimed basis of historical discovery, and that those features it deems to be islands generate territorial waters (12nm surrounding which are considered sovereign territory) and EEZs (200nm surrounding within which countries have exclusive economic rights). In addition, it seeks to redefine the concept of innocent passage as defined by UNCLOS, under which foreign ships and aircraft may transit. This means it seeks to block and interfere with our economic activity and potentially right to transit, within what we claim as our territorial waters and EEZ.

  The US does not claim to possess features in the South China Sea and does not recognise China's claims nor its right to redefine the concept of innocent passage. As such, it performs transits within 12nm of China's claims and in doing so, does not seek to interfere with our economic activity and right to transit.

• @joe

  If you were in charge of RMN and to procure ships for modernisation of RMN and MMEA, what is your opinion that we do? What's your wish list?

• That lie the problem with the chinese..They blatantly disregard the unclos and once said that unclos ruling is non binding like when unclos ruled that china got no right to claim the scs from the philiphines back then..Like it or not we must take measure to ensure this will not happen again..whatever it is..station bm5 permenantly there for example at the edge of our eez waters..sure bm5 alone cant stop plan n ccg to invade our waters but at least we got to maintain our presence there..If not then maybe the chinese think that we will bow down to them and if that happen, im afraid we will lose as much as 3/5 of our eez waters..

• I think Malaysia welcomes US presence there, and historically Malaysia is closer to the US than China, save for some hiccups courtesy of the previous PM.

  I really hope this is a wake up call to modernise our forces.

• ASM - “historically Malaysia is closer to the US than China””

  Indeed. Unlike other countries we don’t go out of our way to ingratiate ourselves with Uncle Sam and we don’t widely publicise the defence relationship. Ironically it was Mahathir who brought the bilateral defence relationship to a new level during a visit to the Pentagon in 1984.

  Contrary to some misconceptions some have; exercises like Cope Taufan, Keris Strike, CARAT, SEACAT and others are of great benefit to us. Not too mention the other forms of engagements we have with the U.S. military.

• @Daniel
  The question would start from what are the roles and responsibilities of TLDM & MMEA (and Marine Police to that effect). IMHO both TLDM & MMEA should have peace time responsibilities to perform safeguarding & constabulary duties but with clearly defined area of jurisdiction. For MMEA, they have the role to perform patrols, interdiction, boarding & seizing, arrests, & other law enforcement duties from say 10miles inwards from shore & up til 200miles towards the seas and includes riverine patrols.

  This is where I would have absorbed Marine Police into MMEA and give them equal jurisdiction powers par with PDRM. For that purpose, I would greatly increase MMEA presence on the shoreline from bases at seaside kampungs or towns or strategic islands, conducting patrols & interdiction with fast boats. Further out to sea would be handled by MMEA NGPC & Damen OPVs, they are suitably configured but we need more of them.

  Do MMEA need large OPVs? Sure, if their intention is to intimidate and strike fear, much like US SWAT moves into theater via APCs and MRAPs. Otherwise a couple based toward open seas like SCS would be useful for patrols during monsoon seasons & storms, thereby ensuring we have constant watch.

  My goal for MMEA is law enforcement role, constant presence, fast reaction to situations which will involve them.

  For TLDM, their peacetime responsibilities is pretty much the same constabulary role but from 200miles and out towards open seas. I would stick to the 15-to-5 plan with fleet made of Maharajalelas, LMS, MRSS, Scorpene. I am not too keen on continuing the NGPV if they are priced as the last built. This should be reduced down by 30-40% or else replaced with more modern & price competitive ships. The Maharajalelas would perform multiple duties as GP frigate, AD frigate, ASub frigate, based on different equipment & weapons they are fitted out for. If I could and money not an objective, I would trade 1 for 1 the Maharajalelas for Formidables.

  The LMS to me, should form the bulk of the TLDM replacing the FACs, corvettes, minesweeper & even NGPV roles. This can be done by leveraging their sheer numbers & flexibility of the various mission modules which we should develop to fulfill these roles. Another role I could envision is PASKAL ELINT & insertion force on surface targets.

  I also envision 3 MRSS, each based at East Coast, West Coast, & Sabah/Sarawak for the purpose of rapid response to military deployments or humanitarian and disaster relief operations at each side of the coast.

  Another bugbear is MPA operations. My take is for this job to be run solely by TLDM, with pilots trained from their rotary airwing. These could be either based at TUDM airbases but managed by TLDM personnel or at TLDM onshore bases enhanced with runways. I have no preference on the plane type, either ATR72 or CN-235/295 or Hercs would do fine as we are familiar with them one way or another.

  My vision for TLDM is peacetime constabulary role non-overlap with MMEA, but a highly flexible force with maximising punch for a smallish. It won't defeat a larger and better equipped adversary but it should give it a heck of a bloody nose.