Thursday 13 February 2014

KRI Usman Harun: Shanmugam explains Singapore's stand

By Tham Yuen-C, The Straits Times, 13 Feb 2014

A DAY after his Indonesian counterpart said there was no ill will intended in the naming of a navy ship after two marines who set off a bomb here, Foreign Minister K. Shanmugam welcomed the overture, but he also delved into the past so as to explain more fully Singapore's stance.



The March 1965 bombing in Orchard Road, during the Confrontation when Indonesia opposed the formation of Malaysia which Singapore was then part of, targeted civilians. This was illegal under international law, the minister stressed.

The marines, Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said, were tried in court and hanged in 1968. In the subsequent years, the countries' leaders, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Suharto, made active efforts to improve ties. There was "some closure", said Mr Shanmugam.

Hence, there has to be sensitivity by both nations, to "make sure that it is behind us and not reopen it (the issue)", he added.

That was why Singapore asked Indonesia to reconsider its decision last week, when news broke of the warship's name.

The minister drew the distinction between the naming of a building in Indonesia and a ship, saying the signal is "very different". "The ship sails the seven seas, carrying that message to every land that the ship goes to as it carries that nation's flag."

Hence, in the wake of the spat, it would have been difficult for things to be business as usual, he said. Singapore pulled an invitation to Indonesia's navy chief to this week's Singapore Airshow.

Mr Shanmugam also said the naming could be seen in different ways. At its most benign, it could mean Indonesia had not considered Singapore's sensitivity. The other extreme could be Indonesia glorifies the marines' actions "rather than simply treating them as heroes who carried out their orders".

Still, he said Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa's remarks that no ill will had been intended were very constructive.

He added: "In that context, it is quite important for us to know that the marines are not being honoured for killing Singaporeans."





Need to ensure history is not reopened
The minister gave a detailed explanation of Singapore's position on Indonesia's decision to name a navy ship after two men hanged here for a fatal bombing during the Confrontation.
The Straits Times, 13 Feb 2014


QUESTION: What did the event mean at that time between the two countries, Singapore and Indonesia?

SHANMUGAM: By the time the two men were tried and before they were hanged, President Sukarno had lost power. Confrontation had stopped. President Suharto was in power. We were seeking to forge a new relationship with Indonesia.

Indonesia asked for these two men, as well as others, to be released. We released 45, including two men who had actually been sentenced to death because they had a bomb which exploded but no one died. We took into account the relationship, what we were trying to do, and so we pardoned those two because no one had died in that particular explosion.

The execution took place three years after the bombing and the killings. How could we have answered to the victims and their families and to Singaporeans if we had set these two men free? The other two who were set free had not killed anyone.

And it is significant that the second incident with the other two men happened - that bombing - occurred in April 1965, barely a month after the attack on MacDonald House. So, there must have been a perception that the first attack was successful and therefore, you know, the second attack. And there must have been plans for more. Yet we set them free. So we were also balanced.

Not pardoning Osman and Harun was actually a defining moment for Singapore in terms of our foreign policy. If we had agreed to release them, then that could have set the precedent for our relationships with all bigger countries.

And what is that precedent? That we will do - or we should do - what a bigger country asks us to do even when we have been grievously hurt. That would be a different concept of sovereignty.

It is definitional that almost every country that deals with us would be bigger than us. So we decided that is not good for us. The men were hanged.

It was not an easy decision because the British forces were withdrawing in two years. We are talking about 1968. Almost non-existent defence capability. But Mr Lee Kuan Yew stood firm. It was our sovereign decision.

The Indonesian public was very upset. Our Embassy in Jakarta was sacked. But within a few years, there was some closure. Both countries put aside the events of Confrontation. Our relationship improved.

We took active efforts - President Suharto and Mr Lee Kuan Yew - and today if you look at the relationship it is excellent, it is mutually beneficial. We were the second largest investor in Indonesia last year. We have regular consultations. In fact, last week I was in Indonesia. We keep taking steps to strengthen our relationship - keep the momentum because Indonesia and Singapore have to live together. Indonesia has really provided the stability that has allowed the entire region to prosper.


 



QUESTION: What does the naming of the warship now mean to us?

SHANMUGAM: It was last week that we found out that the warship was going to be named after the two marines and it was going to be called 'Usman Harun'. It is of course - as many people in Indonesia as well as some other commentators have pointed out - Indonesia's sovereign right to name the warship as it chooses. But that really is not the total answer, nor is it the end of the matter. Sovereign decisions can of course have an impact on other countries. In this case, Singapore.

Why do I say it? You know, when you name a warship like this, there are a range of interpretations possible. At the most benign, it could mean that Indonesia did not take into account our sensitivity, how Singaporeans would interpret the naming given what the marines actually did in Singapore.

At the other end of the range, much less benign, is that Indonesia glorifies their actions in Singapore rather than simply treating them as heroes who carried out their orders.

This is therefore an area where Indonesia's sovereign right to name a warship intersects with a part of our mutual history, and the Singaporean and Indonesian mutual decision to put that history behind us. There has to be sensitivity on the part of both countries to make sure that it is behind us and not reopen it, that is why we asked Indonesia to reconsider the naming of the warship.

It is one thing to name a building in Indonesia, or bury them in the Heroes' cemetery. It is quite another to name a warship - the signal is very different because the ship sails the seven seas, carrying that message to every land that the ship goes to as it carries that nation's flag. What is that message? So it would have been difficult for us to proceed as business as usual, as if nothing had happened. As a result, the TNI (Indonesian Armed Forces) chiefs and officers did not attend the (Singapore) Airshow.


QUESTION: What next?

SHANMUGAM: We have said what we think should be done. Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa made some very helpful comments yesterday. He has made clear that there was no ill will or malice intended. That is very constructive. We welcome his comments.

In that context, it is quite important for us to know that the marines are not being honoured for killing Singaporeans. It is also important that it is understood and acknowledged that the naming of the ship impacts on us and impacts on our sensitivities.









Marines' act part of a 'campaign of terror'
Name of warship reopens old issue, says Shanmugam
By Tham Yuen-C, The Straits Times, 13 Feb 2014

SINGAPORE opposes Indonesia's decision to name a ship after two marines who set off a bomb here in 1965, as it sends the wrong message about a painful period in the two countries' history that both had agreed to leave behind.

Their act targeted civilians and was part of a "campaign of terror" during the Confrontation, Foreign Minister K. Shanmugam told reporters yesterday.

Marines Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said had posed as civilians to plant a bomb at MacDonald House on Orchard Road, killing three people and injuring 33.

The incident took place at a time when Indonesia opposed the newly formed Malaysia, which Singapore was then a part of.

The bombing on March 10 was part of a spate of attacks that included hits on schools and other civil institutions using saboteurs, and which saw bombs planted across the island.

The marines were eventually tried and hanged here in 1968, but given a full military burial and recognised as heroes in Indonesia.

Indonesia has a sovereign right to name the ship as it chooses, Mr Shanmugam acknowledged, but the decision can have an impact on other countries.

In this case, it "intersects with a part of our mutual history", and the mutual decision to put that history behind us, he said.

As such, both countries have to be sensitive about the issue, to "make sure that it is behind us and not reopen it".

Singapore has hence asked Indonesia to reconsider the decision to name the vessel KRI Usman Harun, he said.

It is one thing to name a building in Indonesia after the men or bury them in the heroes' cemetery, but quite another to name a warship after them, said Mr Shanmugam.

"The signal would be very different because the ship sails the seven seas, carrying that message to every land that the ship goes to as it carries that nation's flag. What is that message?"

The minister also set out why it was necessary for Singapore to hang the two men, after they were tried in court. The Government could not have answered to the families of the victims if they had been set free, he said.

Doing so would also have set a precedent for Singapore's relationship with bigger countries, he added - that the Republic will, or should, do what a bigger country asks, even when it has been "grievously hurt".

That would be a different concept of sovereignty, he said, and added that the incident was a defining moment for Singapore's foreign policy. "Almost every country that deals with us would be bigger than us. So, we decided that that is not good for us."

It was not an easy decision, as the British forces were withdrawing in two years.

But then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew stood firm, despite Singapore's almost non-existent defence capability at that time, Mr Shanmugam said, recalling also that the Singapore Embassy in Jakarta was sacked.

But Singapore was also "balanced" in its approach, the minister pointed out.

The Confrontation had ended by the time Suharto took over from Sukarno in 1967, and Singapore was then seeking to forge a new relationship with Indonesia.

Jakarta asked for the two, as well as others, to be released.

Singapore released 45 people, including two men who had been sentenced to death for setting off another bomb, though there were no deaths that time.

"We took into account the relationship... and so we pardoned those two because no one had died in that particular explosion."

Both countries also put aside the events of the Confrontation, with then President Suharto and Mr Lee making a special effort to build ties.

"Today, if you look at the relationship, it is excellent, it is mutually beneficial," Mr Shanmugam said. Singapore was Indonesia's second-largest investor last year, and both countries have regular consultations.

"We keep taking steps to strengthen our relationship, keep the momentum, because Indonesia and Singapore have to live together. Indonesia has really provided the stability that has allowed the entire region to prosper," he said.





'No shades of grey' in MacDonald House bombing
By Tham Yuen-C, The Straits Times, 13 Feb 2014

THE 1965 bombing of MacDonald House was targeted at civilians, and was clearly against international law, Foreign Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

When Indonesian marines Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said planted the bomb in the Orchard Road building on March 10 that year, they were not in uniform, but posing as civilians.

The explosion killed three civilians and injured 33 others.

Mr Shanmugam said the attack was part of a "campaign of terror" that was contrary to the laws of war, adding that there was "nothing subjective about Geneva Conventions".

Under the conventions - a set of international treaties and protocols that lay down the rules for the humanitarian treatment of people during conflict - attacks against civilians are prohibited.

Some commentators recently said the two men were merely following military orders when they carried out the attack.

They argued that it was thus all right for the duo to be considered "heroes". The two men were executed in Singapore, but were viewed as heroes in Indonesia and given a full military burial there.

Mr Shanmugam, however, said there were "no shades of grey" in what they did.

"If it happens now, if people plant bombs to kill civilians, historians won't be debating on how to characterise it," he said.

The bombing was part of a spate of attacks carried out in Singapore, during which schools and other civilian institutions were also targeted.

It took place during the Confrontation that Indonesia's then President Sukarno pursued against Malaysia, which included Singapore at that time.

Mr Shanmugam noted that the two men had been tried in court in Singapore and were sentenced to death for their crime.

The case had also gone all the way up to the Privy Council in London, and Britain's court of appeal had upheld the decision of the Singapore courts, and found the two men guilty too.









Indonesia 'meant no ill will' in naming of ship
Jakarta takes S'pore's expressions of concern very seriously, says minister
By Zakir Hussain,Indonesia Bureau Chief And Zubaidah Nazeer, Indonesia Correspondent In Jakarta, The Straits Times, 12 Feb 2014

INDONESIA'S Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa stressed that his country meant no ill will or malice when it decided to name a new frigate KRI Usman Harun after two marines behind a 1965 bombing in Orchard Road that killed three and injured 33.

"No ill intent was meant, no malice, no unfriendly outlook," he said repeatedly in a hastily convened interview with Singapore media. Jakarta took the recent expressions of concern from Singapore "very seriously", he added.

"Indonesia really values its relationship with Singapore in all its dimensions, and we are very keen to continue on that track."

Dr Marty's conciliatory comments are an attempt by Jakarta to defuse tensions that have dominated headlines over the past week, and come a day after Defence Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro and Indonesian Armed Forces chief Moeldoko sought to downplay the row.

Officials have also kept President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono abreast of the developments, and have sought his guidance, he added.

The issue surfaced last Wednesday, when Singapore Foreign Minister K. Shanmugam phoned Dr Marty to raise concerns about a newspaper report stating that the Indonesian Navy would name a new vessel after marines Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said, who were convicted and hanged for attacks which killed civilians in Singapore in 1968.

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean and Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen also called their counterparts, who maintained that the duo had been declared national heroes after their deaths and that the navy traditionally named ships after the country's heroes.

The matter escalated over the weekend, when Singapore cancelled invitations for 100 officers to the Singapore Airshow, as well as a planned meeting. Top defence officials, including General Moeldoko, then cancelled their scheduled visits to Singapore.

Dr Marty said yesterday that from Indonesia's perspective, the issue of the marines' attack had been closed in 1973, when then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew sprinkled flowers on the graves of the men in a symbolic gesture that repaired frayed ties. Dr Marty said officials felt naming the ship after the marines would not cause a furore as that chapter was closed.

"The impression or the view was, perhaps, this is no longer a sensitive matter. But obviously, it still is, from Singapore's side," he said. "That sensitivity has been registered, and we are aware of it. At the same time, we are keen to ensure there is a sense of mutual respect... and we can both move forward."

Dr Marty added that Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs had sent Indonesia a note to register its position and concerns. He planned to reply soon, to underscore Indonesia's resolve and commitment to manage the issue and continue developing bilateral ties.

"The recent episode of the past one week reminds us that while relations are very strong and very close, we need to constantly nurture this relationship and ensure there are no unintended complications that arise from decisions made from whichever side," he added. And this, he said, meant being able to "put ourselves in the other's shoes to empathise".

He disagreed that the current tensions were a "spat", citing a ministerial meeting held in Singapore yesterday between the two sides to boost economic links.

"There has been some misunderstanding and a communication gap," Dr Marty said.

"Let us now let the dust settle and move forward."

In Singapore, the Defence Ministry said in response to media queries that parliamentary questions about the matter have been filed. "Minister for Defence will address these issues in Parliament next week," said the ministry's spokesman Kenneth Liow.





Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa on the current row with Singapore over the naming of an Indonesian warship.

ON HIS BASIC MESSAGE

What I am addressing now is the basic message that no ill intent, no ill will and no malice is intended. It is just one of those things. It has happened, let's quickly move on; we want to get it behind us.


ON INDONESIA'S STRATEGIC INTEREST

It is in our strategic interest to have very close and friendly relations with all of our neighbours. But this is the reality of modern-day international relations - the sources of complications may be multi-faceted.


ON SINGAPORE'S PROTEST NOTE

We have received a note from the Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I believe it was (sent) yesterday, and it explained Singapore's position, especially its concerns. It simply puts on paper what had been registered verbally or orally as well.


ON MAINTAINING BILATERAL TIES

The key challenge for us is not to allow the matter to define what Indonesia-Singapore relations are.

Some may want to portray Indonesia as a country that is trying to throw its weight around, in terms of its defence outlook and posture, but that is certainly not the case.

We do not feel threatened by Singapore because we know it is not in Singapore's DNA to look at Indonesia as a foe. For Indonesia, we do not look at Singapore as a party with whom we have any ill intent or threats emanating from. It is more about how we manage misunderstandings. So I am keen to project this message that no malice is intended and we should move forward.






Singapore, Jakarta teams meet to boost economic ties
Meeting held amid strong stand by Indonesian media on diplomatic row
By Zubaidah Nazeer Indonesia Correspondent And Zakir Hussain Indonesia Bureau Chief In JakartaThe Straits Times, 12 Feb 2014

AN INDONESIAN delegation led by Coordinating Minister for Economic Affairs Hatta Rajasa was in Singapore for a meeting yesterday, amid a diplomatic row over Jakarta's decision to name a frigate after two marines who bombed MacDonald House in 1965.

Mr Hatta and Singapore's Minister for Trade and Industry Lim Hng Kiang co-chaired the meeting, during which both sides noted good progress made across six joint economic working groups, a Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) statement said. The groups were set up to enhance bilateral cooperation in investments, civil aviation, tourism, manpower and agri-business, as well as in Batam, Bintan and Karimum, and other special economic zones.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa highlighted the meeting as an example of how very close relations are between the two countries.

In an interview with The Straits Times yesterday, he said tensions over the naming of KRI Usman Harun resulted from "miscommunication".

But "the overall picture is a very healthy one", he added.

His comments came as the Indonesian media took its strongest stand yet on the issue, with several newspapers and broadcasters giving it prominence.

The Republika newspaper said in an editorial that the row was among several which reflected a lack of respect for Indonesia by neighbouring countries. MetroTV said in a commentary that Singapore was "playing with fire".

In the interview, Dr Marty said bilateral ties were "developing very, very well in the economic area, trade, investment, people to people, and tourism". He noted that Singapore is the largest source of visitors to Indonesia and a growing number of Indonesians are going there for their studies.

After Japan, Singapore is the second-largest source of foreign investment, hitting US$4.6 billion (S$5.8 billion) last year, Indonesia's Investment Coordinating Board said in its latest report.

Boosting such investments was on the agenda when economic officials from the two countries met yesterday.

"The meeting underscored the strong economic relations between Singapore and Indonesia and the mutual interest to strengthen economic collaboration," the MTI statement said.

Last year, bilateral trade reached $74.8 billion, making Indonesia the second-largest trading partner for Singapore among Asean countries. Indonesia was also Singapore's top source of tourists in 2012, according to the MTI.

Several media outlets recognised the value of this cooperation. In an editorial titled "Too much to lose for Indonesia and Singapore" yesterday, the Jakarta Globe daily said the present diplomatic friction should not be allowed to undermine relations. "Indonesia and Singapore have in the past also experienced tensions in their relations but have also found a way to move forward. It must be so again, as there is too much to lose on both sides," it said.

In another editorial, the Bisnis Indonesia daily said: "Singapore's prosperity cannot be separated from the contributions of Indonesia... Equality and mutual respect are key to productive bilateral relations."

Dr Marty dismissed any suggestions that Indonesia "is trying to throw its weight around". He said the two countries' ministers have very good communications.

"So I'm hopeful that we can get back on track again."





Batam business body told to scrap plan for statue of marines
The Straits Times, 17 Feb 2014

JAKARTA - Riau Islands Governor Muhammad Sani told the Batam chapter of the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) to scrap its plan to build a statue in honour of former marines Osman Mohamed Ali and Harun Said to prevent further friction with Singapore.

The duo were convicted and hanged in Singapore for bombing MacDonald House in 1965.

"With the current situation, please reconsider (the plan) and do not add more problems," Mr Sani was quoted as saying by Antara news agency yesterday.

He said there was no doubt both Osman and Harun were national heroes as their names had been immortalised on street signs and the recently christened warship KRI Usman Harun.

The move has drawn strong condemnation from Singapore, which considers the two men terrorists for bombing a civilian target.

Mr Sani said Batam Kadin should not add fuel to the fire and should bear in mind that Batam is a stone's throw from Singapore.

"What is the benefit for us?" he asked.

The Batam Free Trade Zone Management Agency is said to be still reviewing the building permit for the Usman-Harun statue.

Agency spokesman and One Roof Integrated Services director Dwi Djoko Wiwoho had said earlier that there were several factors to consider regarding the permit for the statue: aesthetics, maintaining good relations and Batam's location.

He noted that there were many Singaporean businessmen investing in Batam.

Mr Dwi said, however, that both Usman and Harun were national heroes who should be remembered and respected.

But Batam resident Parulian said the plan to build a statue for the two marines was "weird" because it touched on political issues that he said should be dealt with only by the central government.

"Kadin is a group of businessmen, so they should just deal with business," he said.

"What if Singaporeans pull their investment?"

JAKARTA POST/ASIA NEWS NETWORK




Related

No comments:

Post a Comment