Building A Bridge Too Far...?

Lust Mondae, I hurt two tunes -- one hAPpy, one Blue.


Happy Headline1

New bridge moves a step closer to reality

According to the local media, especially played up in the New Straits Times,

"Malaysia and Singapore have achieved agreement in principle on a number of issues under negotiations including the construction of a straight bridge to replace the Johor Causeway, quoting Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar on Sunday.

But according to the channelnewsasia.com:

Blue-sy Headline2:

But Singapore is Surprised

Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo says Singapore is surprised and disappointed with Malaysia’s decision to carry on with construction work on the bridge to replace the Malaysian side of the Causeway.

Jest a li'l more from NST, Frontpage

KOTA TINGGI, JOHOR, Sun
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malaysia and Singapore have agreed in principle to build a bridge to replace the Causeway.

The agreement was reached at the conclusion of the fifth round of negotiations between senior officials from the two countries in Putrajaya yesterday.

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, who confirmed this, said an official announcement on the accord could be expected soon.

"We have agreed on the main points of agreement for the building of a full bridge," he said.

It is learnt that some minor technical details have yet to be resolved. Once these are cleared, an official announcement will be made, followed by the signing of the agreement by the two Prime Ministers.

Syed Hamid, who is MP for Kota Tinggi, was speaking after launching Umno Kota Tinggi division’s annual Family Day here today.

The Singapore delegation at yesterday’s talks was led by its Foreign Affairs Ministry permanent secretary Peter Ho, while the Malaysian side was headed by ambassador-at-large Tan Sri Ahmad Fuzi Abdul Razak, former Wisma Putra secretary-general.

While Syed Hamid declined to elaborate on the salient points of the agreement, it is learnt the protracted negotiations have finally reached a settlement for the building of a straight bridge.

Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his Singapore counterpart Lee Hsien Loong last met in Putrajaya in February last year, but no decision was reached.

Prior to Saturday’s talks, officials from both sides had met four times in Malaysia and Singapore without making any headway.

The negotiations had all along been based on the principle of quid pro quo, with Singapore wanting the right to use Johor airspace for training flights by its Armed Forces jets.

The republic, in addition, had sought a long-term concession for the supply of sand from Johor for its massive on-going coastal land reclamation work.

Malaysia, apparently, acceded to both these requests.

Syed Hamid explained that airspace for Singapore’s military jets would not infringe Malaysia’s sovereign territorial rights.

"The airspace can be used only for specific purposes like holding joint military activities. We are not compromising on our sovereignty, territorial rights or national interests," he said.

The need to open Johor airspace to Singapore jets was also warranted by the fact that Malaysia was a party to the five-nation joint air exercise with Singapore, Australia, Britain and New Zealand.

He said Singapore and Malaysia were already sharing intelligence information on terrorists and pirate activities through their "eye-in-the- sky" facilities.

Asked about the "scenic bridge" under construction now, Syed Hamid said this was merely a contingency measure in the event the talks failed.

It was announced on Monday that construction of the bridge was under way and due to be completed by April 2009.

Singapore had previously delayed an agreement on the bridge because it claimed there were no clear "balance of benefits" to proceed with the project.



Jest a li'l more from channelnewsasia.com :


Singapore surprised with Malaysia's bridge decision: FM George Yeo
Date : 12 March 2006 1634 hrs (SST)


SINGAPORE : Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo says Singapore is surprised and disappointed with Malaysia's decision to carry on with construction work on the bridge to replace the Malaysian side of the Causeway.

While no deadline has been set to resolve this issue, Mr Yeo hopes that the negotiations will result in a balance of benefits for both sides.

Mr Yeo was speaking at a community event in Aljunied GRC on Sunday.

Malaysia has symbolically launched construction on what has been called the "scenic" or half-bridge to replace the Causeway, which is expected to be operational by 2009.

Mr Yeo says: "I am surprised and a little disappointed, of course negotiations are on in Kuala Lumpur on the full bridge and both sides are negotiating in good faith.

"When Syed Hamid and I met during the games, we agreed that there is no change in position and now we hear of a symbolic launch of a half-bridge and that they are going to proceed, so we are asking for clarification."

Mr Yeo also reiterates that both sides should aim to resolve the bridge issue soon.

Mr Yeo says: "We should not drag it forever, that's what I and Syed Hamid agreed, but we should negotiate as quickly as we can because there is no point in having this indecision. It must represent a balance of benefits and both sides must be happy."

At the same time, he says no artificial deadlines have been set for both sides to reach a conclusion on the bridge, and he adds that Singapore is prepared to have it both ways - to resolve it as soon as possible or even as long as necessary.

Singapore has sent a third-party note to Malaysia on the matter over the weekend, and Malaysia is expected to respond over the next few days. - CNA/de



The Ides of March is a XXXXXXXSpecial Day in the life of a Perhaps wedNURSEdae Childe, Desiderata.
So to uplift the spirits, I am honoured to run a Double Feature/Post today -- quite rare -- from a "dear fellow Malaysian abroad", BAKRI MUSA,
who is familiar to many surfers in Blogswrold and who I had the privilege to first acquaint way back in 2000.

On receiving his feature that follows, Desiderata emailed him thus:

"...it's always a pleasure to receive your mail.
Hope you're in the pink of health,
and workWISE, sailing with the US-Malaysian wind!
Also, add the Msian-Sinland wind ...they need a li'l
help from Citizen Joe like you and me, rite!

I'd be hnoured to run your article this WedNURSEDae!
There's a reAson...so wait for the surprise, eh?

THanks again,
Keep wella!

YL, DEsi..."

~~~~~~~~


> A Bridge That Stirs Troubled Waters
M. Bakri Musa

[From the Sun Thursday March 9, 2006]


The water in the narrow Strait of Johore is usually
calm. In fact it is unhealthily stagnant, as the
causeway had effectively dammed the waterway and
stopped the natural ebb and flow of the tide across
it.

This will soon change if Malaysia were to proceed
with its planned suspended bridge. The bridge
threatens to stir the water, literally and
figuratively.

The new structure would not increase capacity, as
it would still have the same number of lanes as the
existing causeway. Even if the lanes were
increased, the bridge would not appreciably increase
the capacity, as the other (Singapore) half of the
causeway remains the same.

The suspended bridge could markedly improve the
marine ecology, as there would once again be free
flow of tide across the strait, at least on the
Malaysian side. That would reduce the stagnancy and
the stench, as well as enhance the esthetics and the
marine environment.

If that is the reason for the bridge, then I would
applaud its proponents for their ecological
consciousness.

That objective could however be achieved
just as effectively and at a considerably lower
price by burrowing a series of wide tunnels. This
retrofit could be done without disrupting traffic.
There are already a few culverts, but they have
silted up for lack of maintenance, as are the drains
and rivers in town. There is no assurance that the
more expensive bridge would not be similarly
neglected. Even with the new bridge, the strait
would still be blocked because the existing causeway
would remain to carry the railroad. Transferring
the tracks onto the crooked bridge would be the
height of folly; I have yet to see a curved railroad
bridge.

Of course the much cheaper tunnel
alternative would entail correspondingly smaller
profits, and, let us also openly acknowledge, less
generous “commissions” and “Kopi Oh!” money. This
more than anything else is what drives this common
sense-defying and exorbitantly expensive project.

Underwater tunnels, being not visible, would
not give rise to bragging rights. There would be no
showpiece monument for visitors to behold as they
drive across.

I do not dismiss this vanity aspect to the
bridge. A beautiful suspended bridge on the
Malaysian half would be a spectacular contrast to
the drab causeway on the Singapore side, remnant of
the utilitarian, low budget, and “good enough for
the natives” colonial mentality.
Singaporeans, being residents of a First World city,
would not be easily impressed with the suspended
bridge; their reactions would likely be one of
detached bemusement. They and other foreign
visitors would more likely be impressed with
Malaysia if our customs and immigration counters
were more efficient, and clean.

Considering our culture, I do not minimize
the “show off” factor to the new bridge. Drive
through the exclusive residential areas of Klang
Valley, and we see palatial mansions behind gilded
gates and ornate fences. Step outside the
well-manicured and immaculately maintained grounds
and the stark reality of urban Malaysia hits you:
roadside brushes uncut, rubbish all over, and drains
plugged.
Yet, for a fraction of the price of these expensive
gates and brick fences they could have the drains
covered and thus effectively expand their usable
land and simultaneously eliminate the stench. If
they would jointly maintain their common public
areas instead of having to depend on the city, the
enhanced esthetic, health and other benefits would
far outweigh the costs, not to mention the increase
to their property values.

The owners of these ostentatious residences
are also likely to be the ones responsible for our
public polices. So it is not surprising that they
would want to build an expensive bridge to show off
to visitors when the money could have been better
spent sprucing up the waterfront and cleaning up the
deadly polluted Sengget River.

If there were to be a bridge, let it be
right across, replacing the entire causeway.
Apparently, Singapore’s opposition is over the cost,
especially in relation to the expected benefits. If
that were the case, make the project subject to the
realities of the marketplace.
One way would be to invite potential concessionaires
and allow them to charge toll fees. This would
spare both governments the expense, with the risk
borne entirely by the operators and the revenues
paid by users on both sides. Another would be to
privatize the project, with the two neighbors owning
equal shares and the project funded through private
financing to be repaid by user fees. To ensure
transparency and to get the best price, open the
bidding to international competition.

A joint venture with Singapore on this
bridge might teach Malaysia a lesson or two, like
how to get the best contract and run an efficient
public utility. The most important lesson would be
how much cheaper a project would cost if it were
subjected to rigorous competition and spared of
corruption.

If either option were to happen, the new
bridge would truly symbolize the physical, social,
economic and other bonds linking the two nations.]

This half bridge proposal has already
created considerable anxiety across the causeway.
There are those who think that anything that would
provoke such reactions in Singapore must
automatically be good for Malaysia.

This is an exception; scraping the project
would spare Malaysia the unneeded expense and at the
same time improve relations with our neighbor.

~~~~~~~

DESIDERATA: As initial comments, I would like to endorse the writer's view in general. Just add I had the "privilege" of some 12 years exposure to diplomacy serving as a Press Officer/Journalist and I think Malaysia should not have proceeded to build the bridge without full and final agrement from Singapore. One country treat a project as fait accompli by laying the foundation stones with brick and mortar whhile the concept and acceptance in spirit and letter of the law in international relations han not been inked.

A seond point I'd add is to appeal to Malaysians abroad -- whether as stuudents like howsy in lundun, and sabrina tan in the LOTR landescape; and as expatriate and non-ex professionals like Bajri in the USA -- to continue to lend their perspectives to Malaysian issues. We do need to take part in this Clash of the Minds exercise, and let not some monkeys in that auguist House currently in session to build rickety bridges without doing any brainwork of their cells, if any.
Malaysians -- local or overseas -- owe it to themselves, and their offspring, to take part fully in the democratic process presently available, despite all its weaknesses and constraints, and NOT let some "you are not patriotc" voices distract us from a meaningly discourse.

Desi warmly welcomes ER to respond to Bakri's views via Comments. Maybe you have yet some valuable -- nay, even ingenious -- ideas on BUILDING BRIDGES OF GOODWILL WITH OUR NEIGHBOURS.
In line with our Esteemed Prime Minister's Pak Lah's recent call on the international stage, remember?