Can we have answers for the entry of Chinese attack submarine in Teluk Sepanggar?

Can we have answers for the entry of Chinese attack submarine in Teluk Sepanggar?

An attack submarine from China recently docked in Sabah, making this the second docking of a Chinese submarine in Malaysia this year.

According to defence magazine Jane's 360, the Chinese naval vessel docked at the Royal Malaysian Navy's submarine base in Teluk Sepanggar, Sabah, between Sept 8 and 11.

Is such activity normal for a foreign nation like China now exercising/flexing its military power in the South East Asia especially in Spratley Island so near to Sabah?

What was the real intention of such attack submarines visiting Sabah especially Teluk Sepanggar?

Such thoughts can be related to statements like Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai said “Malaysia was not being ’colonised’ by China through FDI, adding that the allegations were merely political manipulation.”  Is this a valid denial?

Then we have this statement in Defence Magazine Jane’s 360 as according to the magazine, this second visit by a Chinese submarine this year was "a sign of deepening defence relationships between two South China Sea claimant states". (DE 13 Dec page 6)

I do not read the full statement/article in the Defence Magazine, but what are the “two South China Sea claimant states”?  What is the claimant about?  Who is claiming who in South China Sea?  This is very important in term of security seen or unseen as submarines are both seen and unseen at times.

Who have given permission if any to Chinese attack submarine to dock in Telok Sepanggar with the Malaysian defence installations there?  What activities were conducted during the rather long visits?

How would such visits affect our traditional defence deals with Commonwealth nations and other global deals with “friendly” nations?

Do such visits jeopardise defence vital data and information in time of turmoil in the zone?  Also Teluk Sepanggar is also our major container wharf harbour.

Why was the attack submarine not escorted by a local ship into the Bay?

I hope we can get all the appropriate answers to clear all the doubts.

Joshua Y C Kong, 18/9/2017

Set apart parochialism for harmony, unity and integrity

Set apart parochialism for harmony, unity and integrity

Despite 54 years of Malaysia since 1963, we are still very much parochial in the way we manage our politics and its impact on the society at large.

Malaya started with the Alliance of major political parties UMNO, MCA and MIC to gain support of the people to manage the nation then.

Post 1969, Alliance was slowly expanded with several more political parties to be known as Barisan Nasional or National Front or simply known as BN.  BN now has 14 political parties plus other associated NGOs to master greater support to ensure BN stays in power even with questioned tactics in politics.

Maybe we see more of BN at every General elections since 1970s.

Every candidate in the BN come from various parties in BN and the common platform or logo as approved by the Register of Society and the Election Commission Malaysia of BN is the “dacing” sign.

Under that strategy is the networking of all the component parties, but what is important is the platform of BN.

So all candidates especially those made themselves into the various seats and the Cabinet positions should only be identified as BN member and not any other political parties which should be kept at home.

Is it a departure from the national policy that some consider their own political parties as more important or prominent than BN as a registered and recognised group forward?

The names of those component parties never feature in the crucial ballot papers.  Soon after the conclusion of the General Elections, the winners harp on their own political parties in public forum.

So how can we pursue the national policy of national unity, national harmony, common identity, and possible integration when parties within BN can be off tangent? 

We read such material daily in the public forum and how can we move forward as a united nation?

Just an example to illustrate the point as it was reported that “Teo is certainly the best performing Chinese minister in the State Cabinet,” Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) deputy president Datuk Chin Su Phin.

Without prejudice, I believe all component parties in BN think and act in that manner pitting someone against others in the same family of BN.

Can such thinking do so much damage to the young nation still behaving like “babies” as it can be deemed to be “seditious” as well?

I hope this is good food for thought and that BN – the socalled ruling authority- would address this anomaly to cement better relationship amongst the matured leaders so that all people would be benefited as any division or divided society would finally cause the collapse of the house we all intend to build but likely seen as lips service only.  It seems BN has failed even after a few decades.

Lets get out of the scenario mired with “ill will concept” to steer the nation on higher ground.

Joshua Y. C. Kong  5/9/2017