The 82-year-old former Prime Minister, who reigned for 22 years until 2003, said he penned the letter as a Malaysian who loves his country.
With his comments increasingly ‘censored’ in the pro-government mainstream media, former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad has now resorted to air his hard-hitting arguments in cyberspace.
Mahathir, who has been bitter with his successor’s administration for shelving his half-bridge project, wrote a lengthy open letter defending his stand on the matter.
Early this month, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had scrapped the project citing negative public sentiments over Singapore’s demand for the sale of sand and the use of airspace and the legal implications involving the building of the half-bridge.
However, Mahathir in his seven-page letter published in a pro-Umno website called Kelab Maya Umno, reiterated that the government had failed to defend the nation’s sovereignty.
It is believed that the letter has also been sent to all members of parliament as well as Umno leaders.
The 82-year-old former politician, who reigned for 22 years until 2003, said he penned the letter as a Malaysian who loves his country.
“I must publicise the facts in this manner because not many of my statements are being published by the mass media, although they send representatives to attend my press conferences,” he lamented.
As for the half bridge, Mahathir said the government’s decision had caused losses amounting to billions. “This is the people’s money,” he added.
The letters
“Singapore enjoys publishing letters between its leaders and Malaysian leaders with the intention of proving that it is on the right side
“The Malaysian government now believes that the problem will be resolved by itself without the need to dispute Singapore’s campaign to twist the facts. But this is just wishful thinking,” he said.
In diplomatic practice, he said letters from a certain party quoting verbal agreements purportedly reached during informal talks were not valid.
To make it valid, he added, these talks must be noted, recorded, verified and signed by both sides.
“Statements made at a press conference by one party without the sanction of the other party is also not valid,” said the former premier.
Mahathir said Lee Kuan Yew, when he was Singapore’s senior minister, was “fond of asking for four-eyed meetings with no complete agenda and then recording what transpired at the meeting in his letter to a third party”. (See link)
Based on these letters, he said Lee hoped that his colleagues would approve of the content and be bound by it.
“He (Lee) did not care if his recordings (of the meetings) were considered inaccurate and unverified,” he added
“I consider anything which does abide with diplomatic practice as invalid. His (Lee) assumptions are his alone, nothing more and nothing less.
“His actions to publish the letters as proof that I had agreed has no meaning whatsoever. Only if I had replied the letter and verified certain facts, then the relevant issues can be considered true.
“But whether it is valid and binding on us depends on an official verification and agreement from both parties,” he said.
Lee waffled
Mahathir also accused Lee of waffling about what had been described as a ‘package’ regarding negotiations over the bridge issue.
Dismissing it as ‘impractical’, he said a disagreement on any one of the issues would mean that an overall agreement could not be reached on the ‘package’.
“It was because of this, I suggested - and it was agreed to by (then Singapore premier) Goh Chok Tong - that we resolve the issues one by one and separately. This was accepted by Goh as prime minister via a letter dated Oct 14, 2002,” he added.
Among others, Mahathir said, the letter stated that: “At the end of the meeting (in Hanoi), you (Mahathir) said we need to try and resolve the water issue, the sooner the better. I agree...”
In the same letter, Mahathir noted that Goh also said:
“Because of this, I did not expect to receive your (Mahathir) letter dated Oct 7 on Oct 10 where you said ‘Malaysia has decided not to proceed with the package approach...”
After rejecting the package approach, Mahathir said he forecasted that the bridge would not be tied up with any other issue.
‘Makes no sense’
Mahathir also cited a letter from Lee to former Malaysian finance minister Daim Zainuddin, in which the Singapore leader said:
“Pertaining to Mahathir’s suggestion to build a (new) causeway, my prime minister (Goh) agrees with it but suggests that we do not demolish the (existing) Johor causeway.”
Commenting on this, Mahathir said it appeared that Singaporeans were more agreeable to having two causeways.
“This of course does not make sense because the suggestion to build the new bridge was aimed at opening the passage on both sides of the Tebrau Straits so that water could flow unbridled.
“It was not aimed at increasing the relationship capacity between Singapore and Johor. If that happened, it is just a coincidence,” he added.
Mahathir also quoted another ‘interesting’ argument from Lee (in a letter to Mahathir) that if Singapore agreed to the new bridge, it would reclaim the land in its territory up to the border with Malaysia”.
Mahathir said the border between Singapore and Malaysia at the Tebrau Straits is the deepest point of the seabed. For the Johor causeway, the border is right in the middle of the bridge.
“If Singapore does land reclamation in its territory until the border, this would mean that only the sea on the Malaysian side would remain. So what is the issue with the concept of border based on the deepest point in the seabed?” he asked.
Without prejudice
At this point, Mahathir referred back to Lee’s letter to Daim, in which the republic’s senior minister said:
“I always inform my initiative to my prime minister. He (Goh), however, said he is leaving this matter up to me until the final stage where he will study it carefully before giving any agreement”
In another paragraph in the same letter, Mahathir said Lee wrote: “All notes or letters that I send to you (Daim) and Mahathir and vice-versa should be taken as ‘without prejudice’, that is there will be no agreement until all the issues are agreed to and signed by both prime ministers”.
Commenting on this, Mahathir said it is clear that Lee was not empowered to decide on anything because he needed to inform Goh.
As for Mahathir’s proposal to build the KTM (railway) terminal in Johor Baru, Lee in a letter dated Dec 10, 2001, said:
“I hope that you will also consider the long-term importance and quality of KTM’s service. Since 1923, the train has been a valuable mode of transportation... I feel that keeping the railway connection between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore profits both countries... However, because KTM belongs to your country, Singapore will abide by your decision.”
In this letter, Mahathir said Lee pledged to “abide by my decision. But he could also say that Goh did not agree and all our letters should be treated without prejudice”.
“When he, Goh or myself put our views onto paper, it reflects what we think. But because it is done without prejudice, it is not binding on us.
“Therefore, the issue of waffling and shifting the goalpost does not arise. The position of the goalpost has not been decided. Since it is all based on the concept of without prejudice, it is nothing more than mere suggestions,” he said.
‘Final commitment’
Mahathir also cited another letter from Goh dated April 11, 2002, where he said: “I have decided to personally handle our discussion about the two-way package”.
Mahathir then mocked, “Only now, someone in power is talking (for Singapore)”.
He said in what can be considered a ‘final commitment’, Goh wrote:
“Between a new bridge to replace the whole causeway and one that replaces only the Malaysian side, I prefer the first option.
“Once the new bridge is completed, the causeway can be knocked down, which I prefer to be done after 2007. But if you wish to proceed immediately to replace just your side of the causeway with a bridge, I shall accept it, though I think this is not ideal."
What conclusion can be made from this statement? asked Mahathir.
“There is no mention of sand from Malaysia nor opening the airspace to the Singaporean air force. There is also no mention of nostalgia, the only priority is that the causeway is demolished after 2007,” he said.
He said now it is argued that if Malaysia touches the pipes that channel water to Singapore, it will be seen as an ‘act of war’.
‘Act of war’
The clause in the ‘Wayleave Agreement’ with Singapore is clear enough on this, noted Mahathir.
Below is what has been agreed on the water pipes:
“That the licensee (Singapore) shall take full responsibility financially or otherwise for any alteration to the pipeline that may become necessary by reason of any alterations or improvements made or to be made on the Johor causeway and on receiving not less than six months previous notice in writing from the licensors (Malaysia) shall thereupon carry out the alteration in accordance with such notice and shall have no claim for any compensation.”
Reiterating that the agreement was clear on this issue, he said if Singapore refused to carry out the alteration, “that would probably mount to an act of war and not the other way around”.
The former premier also noted that when preliminary work began on the new bridge, there were no protests or demands for sand and airspace.
“Where did these demands come from? What is the link between the expansion of Singapore’s territory with us building a bridge in our own territory?” he asked.
Mahathir said the demands were ‘baseless’ and beyond his comprehension.
‘Don’t give in’
“It is the Malaysian people’s right not to sell sand to Singapore or open up the airspace to it. But the people never said they were ready to sacrifice the bridge.
“What they wanted was not to give in to Singapore’s demands. They wanted the bridge and they also wanted their government to dispute Singapore’s demands because legally, Malaysia does not have to entertain these terms,” he added.
Mahathir said that Singapore’s actions were expected and reiterated that the Malaysian government had failed to defend the nation’s sovereignty.
“Let Malaysians, especially the Malays and namely those in Johor, remember that the English had lied to the sultan (of Johor-Riau) into surrendering Singapore to them for free.
Like Penang, Lumut and Malacca, Mahathir said Singapore should have been returned when the English left.
But Singapore had become so foreign that it could no longer be a part of Malaysia, he added.
'You are afraid'
“Will Malaysia now give more land to Singapore so that it can expand its territory and population. Giving our seabed is akin to giving our soil. There is no difference to this than giving up Johor. Are we that poor that we need to sell our soil to others.
“The coming Malaysian generations will curse us if we do all this since we have the right to build a bridge on our soil and our sea as an independent and sovereign state.
“It is enough that we gave Singapore (to the English). There is no need to give up more of our land to Singapore even if there are those who opine that we can only build a bridge in our country if Singapore agrees,” he said.
Mahathir said Malaysians have never shared the same opinion and in an outright attack on his successor’s administration, added: “Don’t put words into the people’s mouths, just because you are afraid of protecting the rights and sovereignty of the country and the people.”
