Speech by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen at the Committee of Supply Debate 2012
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Speech by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen at the Committee of Supply Debate 2012 06 Mar 2012 Let me thank Members for their questions and comments. Over the years, MINDEF has been grateful to receive very strong support from Singaporeans and Members in this House. I think we all share this deep conviction that Singapore must be able to defend itself, to keep the right to determine our own future and protect our way of life. I find it also significant that MPs and NCMPs from all political parties as well as NMPs support our defence policies. That's important. But MINDEF is also mindful that this trust has been earned over the years through careful spending and the equitable implementation of all our policies, and I want to reassure this House that MINDEF will endeavour to maintain and deepen this trust, and it is in that spirit that I welcome the opportunity to respond to queries from honourable Members. I will although have to add a caveat. The questions are all encompassing and look way into the future. I think it will take many days to respond to all these questions, so with your indulgence, I will just touch on the main points, and then we can carry on with the clarifications. • Regional Security Environment • Defence Expenditure and the 3rd Generation SAF • National Service • Bilateral Defence Relations • Regional Security Architecture • Full Spectrum of Operations Regional Security Environment Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked for an update on the regional security environment, and the US- China relationship. Sir, indeed, the US-China relationship remains central to the continued stability and security of this region. The US has been and is a "resident power" - I'm using a term that former US Defense Secretary Robert Gates used - it has been a resident power in the Asia-Pacific for over half a century, whose presence has been a vital force for stability and prosperity. It has been long enough here in the Asia-Pacific for us to assess the contributions and the role of the US' presence. And I think, on balance, history will be kind to their presence here. To quote former Indonesian Defence Minister Dr Juwono Sudarsono, "America's 'forward presence'... provided vital 'strategic assurance', guaranteeing regional and financial growth. America's dominance over the global commons was the critical pillar enabling all East Asia export- based strategies, augmenting Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China to develop their trade, finance, investment and banking reach." This is a quote from the former Indonesian Defence Minister. Malaysian PM Dato' Sri Najib Razak, as the keynote speaker at the Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD) 2011, said, "The United States has long been a modernising and moderating force within our region, supporting democratic institutions, improving governance and fostering respect for human rights." However, China's recent rise has also presented tremendous economic opportunities for countries within and beyond the region. China is now the top trading partner of ASEAN, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Australia. By virtue of its geography and growing influence, China will play a critical role in regional security and stability. This interplay of relations between the US, a resident power, and China, a rising power, how they accommodate each other's interests and relate with other countries in the region, will inevitably affect relationships with and between ASEAN countries. And we recognise that there is bound to be competition between the US and China, but also urge both sides to expand the common grounds to cooperate, to develop a relationship based on mutual trust and common understanding. So we were therefore heartened that during Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping's recent visit to the US, it was announced that both sides would hold the fourth round of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue and the second round of the Strategic Security Dialogue in China this May. There are also traditional potential flashpoints in Asia such as the Korean Peninsula and the South China Sea as many Members noted including Dr Lim and Ms Ellen Lee. In the South China Sea, activities by states to assert their claims could cause tensions, and as Members rightly pointed out, non-traditional security challenges continue to confront us. The Mumbai attacks in 2008, and the Jakarta hotel bombings in 2009, remind us that terrorism remains a persistent threat to all nations. Our intelligence assessment for terrorism is that Singapore continues to be a target of terrorists. Piracy is another challenge. As a maritime trading nation, we have a vested interest in ensuring that sea routes continue to be safe and open. I have briefly described the common security challenges that countries within this region must respond to. Dr Lim, Ms Ellen Lee, Mr Ong Teng Koon, Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Alvin Yeo have rightly pointed out that the SAF will now have to deal with a wider theatre of operations that includes non-traditional threats related to terrorism, maritime security, piracy and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR). They also asked if MINDEF and the SAF were responding adequately to these new scenarios. At the same time, Members have raised questions about our defence spending. In addressing these questions - how much we need to spend, why and what for - I would like all of us to bear in mind what we are up against and what we need to protect. I think that's the first starting point. For Singapore, the harsh reality is that our defence needs are also determined, or more accurately, compounded by our geography and limited natural resources. Nothing will change the fact that we are a small island of just over 700 square kilometres. We are also one of most densely-populated countries in the world with no strategic depth. What does that mean? It means that we lack any hinterland to buffer our people and infrastructure against attacks. The sea is at our backs. With an economy that is highly dependent on global trade to survive, we need to ensure the continuity of our lines of communication and trade through air, sea and land. Many of you here, if not all of you, will remember SARS in 2003. SARS provided a bitter foretaste of what would happen if the flows of people and goods were disrupted, and that was only for a few weeks. Trade came down, confidence was lost, and businesses bombed. There were severe impacts. These constraints are immutable and have been recognised since Independence. Dr Goh Keng Swee, who played a seminal role in building the SAF from scratch understood clearly the almost insurmountable difficulties and inherent challenges. He also understood the imperative. If you look at our archives, it is a treasure trove of information. He had two pieces of sagely advice. First, in 1973, when Singapore was still relatively poor and undeveloped, Dr Goh said, "The curious thing about Singaporeans in general is that they are very optimistic that war will never occur in Singapore. This attitude of the general public is all right for the economic progress of Singapore but it should never be that of the policy makers in the public sector. We have to think of such eventualities and make preparation well in advance." Let me give you a second quote. This was one in 1984, when our nation was on a much firmer footing, Dr Goh added, "The most dependable guarantee of our Independence is a strong SAF. A strong SAF in turn depends on the political will to make the effort and pay the price." His advice therefore: prepare for unthinkable eventualities well in advance and maintain the political will for a strong defence. This is why we invest considerable amounts each year on defence. But more than that, as Mrs Lina Chiam, Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Pritam Singh said, we require each Singaporean male to commit himself to many years of National Service. Can we keep up that political will? We have many opportunity costs, divergent needs, individual aspirations. Can we keep up that political will which Dr Goh quite presciently pointed out that we needed to do? We must. Because, to paraphrase a famous statesman, we dare not tempt others with our weakness. Who said that? The then US President John F Kennedy. How much more so this reality, for a small country like ours. We dare not tempt others with our weakness, because as a "jewel of Asia", we dare not tempt others because we certainly have more to protect today. Sir, this is not a theoretical threat, only relevant in the distant past. In 1990, it took only one day for Iraqi forces to seize control of Kuwait, considered a small rich country but really is 25 times the size of Singapore. Just last month, Defence Minister of the Philippines, Voltaire Gazmin, said, "Without a deterrent force, we can be easily pushed around, our territories will be violated." Without a deterrent force, we can be easily pushed around, our territories will be violated. Defence Expenditure and the 3rd Generation SAF No one, no country, wants to be violated. Dr Lim rightly pointed out that we remain vulnerable. He and Mr Pritam Singh have asked the right questions. How does Singapore, a small country with little natural resources, defend itself against traditional and non-traditional threats? What kind of SAF do we need? How will we know when we have achieved it? Sir, these immutable constraints force us to leverage on technology, innovation and unflinching human will to overcome our limitations. Translated to stark military terms, we have to know more, see first, and respond sharply and decisively to disable, if not destroy, would-be aggressors.