For some Malaysian politicians (and I believe a minority of their citizens), Singapore bashing is an integral part of their internal domestic political discourse - which we as Singaporeans have no control over.
You can see this type of
boorish behaviour by a minority of Malaysians in a number of threads. Even something as harmless as Raymond posting
old pictures of his prior military service in the 1980s is subject to a negative comment. Why is there a need for a Malaysian forum member, who claims to be a member of the Malaysian Armed Forces, denigrate the capabilities of the Singapore commando unit, especially since our forces were fighting side by side during the Konfrontasi (1963 to 1966) and we are members in the
FPDA?
I think nobody here denies that many countries out there have their reasons (good reasons) for keeping some things secret.
While Singapore diplomats are constrained in their ability to clarify, I on the other hand can speak my mind as a private individual. In fact,
BBC as characterized certain incidents as lies perpetuated by Malaysian politicians like Tun Dr Mahathir (Dr M).
One such lie is the 'manufactured dispute' over Pedra Branca island, which coincided to Dr M's rise and consolidation in power. This dispute
originated in 1979, when Malaysia published a map claiming Pedra Branca as their territory for the first time, when Singapore and our predecessors, the British, have been in occupation of the light house on for Pedra Branca more than 150 years. The area around Pedra Branca is a navigation hazard and as a port, we administer it (in fact, the
ICJ determined that Pedra Branca belongs to Singapore). For Dr M, inciting nationalistic emotions and 'manufacturing a dispute' is a useful way of appearing as a leader.
IMO, Dr M manufactured the territorial dispute as a means to gain or maintain power. So keeping some things 'secret' denies Dr M further talking points. In fact, Dr M has been
reported by Malaysians (click on the link to read the shocking attitude) to have said:
"...Don’t you know we are at war with Singapore?”
Why would a politician characterize Malaysia and Singapore to be at war (given that we are each others' largest trading partners)? I think the
Neil Khor writing in Malaysiakini on 29 May 2008, explains the manufactured dispute of Pedra Branca best:
"...There are three ways to maintain power, or rather three ways to convince others to submit to one’s will. The first strategy is to provide them with an alternative that motivates them to submit. The slave would rather toil under the hot sun than suffer the pain of the lash...
Second, provide them with compensation that will buy their submission... Politicians may vote or even cross the floor for such compensatory benefits.
Third, and perhaps most effectively, power can be maintained by conditioning people to think in a particular way. Malays are ‘weak’ and if not adequately protected, they will ‘fall victim’ to their fellow Malaysians. Over time, Malays no longer differentiate between their own legs and the crutches that hold them up.
In my last letter, I mentioned that we are currently witnessing the ‘endgame of the Mahathir myth’. The Mahathir myth is made up of a combination of threats, compensation as well as conditioning. It is all held together in the personality of Dr Mahathir Mohamad..." **
As such, IMO, Dr M tries to condition certain Malaysians that Singapore is an ungrateful 'little red dot'. Therefore, there is a need to 'put Singapore in our place'. Just in case we don't get the message, on 9 August 1991 (on Singapore's 26th National Day), an airborne assault exercise, codenamed
Pukul Habis (Malay for 'Total Wipeout') was conducted by Malaysian-Indonesian paratroopers in a drop zone just 18km from Singapore in Johor.
In fact the mere publication of '
Defending the Lion City: The Armed Forces of Singapore (2000)' was used by Tabloid Malay Mail, in 2003, to propose the idea - that the SAF is planning to lay waste to Malaysia's Army and infrastructure in the event of war. As such, it is necessary for the Malays in Malaysia to be united and stand up against 'ungrateful' Singapore.
Question: Would Singapore want to start a war with a country with a population 4 to 5 times bigger than ours? What have we got to gain?
BTW, the Singapore government was so sick of the misrepresentations that they put the relevant documents online in 2003, thereby proving that Dr M and his cronies released distorted statements (read the
BBC interview transcript for the lies). He was caught out on his lies. As Singapore's Foreign Minister at that time explained:
"...the Malaysians engaged in a whole barrage of accusations and allegations against Singapore... particularly on the issue of water negotiations. And we were accused of being the unreasonable party. Various other false statements were made, that the water agreements were fixed by the British and a colonial imposition when it was not true.
These were agreements signed by independent Malaya and reaffirmed as guarantees in Separation Agreement... and we were painted as the unreasonable party, when we were in fact trying to accommodate Malaysia at every turn, we had no choice. We had to set out the facts in a persuasive and conclusive manner and the only way to do that was to disclose the documents...
....Our position is that when we have disagreements concerning important treaties and agreements, such as the Water Agreements, the issue really is, observance of agreements... when statements were made that they will pass or enact a domestic law to nullify these Agreements, and we said, that's not the way - that's not in keeping with international law and accepted conventions of settling international disputes..."
Therefore Dr M hit back, he poisoned the waters via the 2003 Tabloid Malay Mail story, which I note coincided with other ongoing Malaysia - Singapore negotiations that Dr M wanted to scuttle.
Question: Why the lapse of 3 years to raise the issue of a book which mentions the speculated existence of a Singaporean MBT?
In my eyes it was merely a discussion about the difficulties one faces if one wants to hide a tank force.
The problems of such a task are much bigger than hiding some SOFs due to the nature of armoured forces. This is not made easier by a conscript system and the need to train in foreign countries.
Since all our guys are or were conscripts, we know that anything not declassified, should remain that way - which means everyone is in on the same secret. Isn't getting everyone in on the secret a good way to keep the secret?
I do now believe that they exist but nevertheless it makes for an interesting discussion.
Yes, as usual it is a pleasure to enter into a discussion with you.
Edit: Once you understand the issues that Singaporeans face, in terms of regional environment, it is easy to understand my support for acquiring new weapon platforms, such as, the Leopard 2A4 and other weapon systems.
-----------------------
** Footnote: There is this myth that Malaysia lost Pedra Branca to Singapore when Malaysia decided to take the case to the ICJ. I say they are WRONG and their view is not informed by a valid understanding of international law. The Malaysian Government cannot unilaterally change their mind in 1979 and try to further sub-divide a portion of Singapore (in this case Pedra Branca) by retrospective action. If they could Singapore would not be a sovereign state. 
