Posted on 03/27/2015 8:28:53 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
When Lee Kuan Yew died Monday at age 91, the founding father of Singapore did not leave just his legacy as the prime minister whose authoritarian policies shaped a backwater British colony into the world’s fourth-wealthiest nation. He also left Singaporeans with one of the most formidable armies in the world. The tiny island state of 5.4 million, with a land area far smaller than New York City’s, has more fighter jets than Spain, Poland or Sweden. Its army has as many tanks as Italy, which is more than 400 times the size. Its navy boasts the only stealthy ships in the region.
The respected defense publication IHS Jane’s called the Singapore Armed Forces “the best-equipped military in Southeast Asia.”
Singapore spends more on weapons than anybody else near it. Its 2013 defense budget was $12 billion, according to an analysis published in East Asia Forum by Michael Raska, a research fellow at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University. That money has bought Singapore advanced American warplanes whose capabilities eclipse anything fielded by other states in the region. For example, it flies the latest version of the F-15, a fighter jet so lethal the U.S. has sold it only to four other nations: Israel, Japan, Saudi Arabia and South Korea.
Singapore’s defense budget dwarfs that of neighboring Indonesia, which spent $7.9 billion that year, but has 250 million people. Malaysia, which lies on Singapore’s other border, spends even less.
Those two neighbors are precisely the reason Lee Kuan Yew decided to spend so much on arms when the nation was established. But the threats facing Singapore in the future may come from further afield, including from China, experts said.
“China’s ‘threat’ lies in its future ability to dominate the South China Sea, exclude the U.S. from the Southeast Asian strategic equation, and then impose its political will on the rest of the region, Singapore included,” said Bernard Loo, associate professor of strategic studies at Nanyang Technological, in an email to IBTimes. But that is not why Singapore is armed so heavily, he added: Malaysia and Indonesia are the real reason.
When Singapore broke off in 1965 from the Federation of Malaya, Lee wanted the new nation to be able to defend itself from its northern neighbor, which later became Malaysia and with which it had until recently a contentious relationship.
“It had to do with Singapore’s utter dependence on Malaysia for sources of potable water,” Loo said. “Malaysian leaders in the past were not averse to threatening to cut off the water supplies to Singapore, if the latter did anything inimicable to Malaysia’s interests.”
As for Indonesia, it’s one of the world’s largest and most populous countries, and Lee feared its sheer size and aggressive “policy of confrontation” in the 1960s. That policy has long ended, but it “continues to worry Singapore’s leaders,” Loo said.
“If the [Singapore Armed Forces] needed to go to war to protect Singapore, the … cause of war would have been the severance of water supplies,” Loo wrote in a blog post citing Lee’s memoirs.
But Singapore is moving toward self-sufficiency in water, and relations with Malaysia and Indonesia are now warm. “Water, in other words, is no longer the casus belli of the hypothetical war that the SAF might need to fight,” Loo wrote.
The strategic focus of the Singapore Armed Forces is shifting, and the reason is found in simple economics: Singapore is a trade hub whose livelihood depends on shipping, and shipping lanes need to be protected from any disruption. The island state has the world’s second-busiest container port, and about one-quarter of world trade passes through the Straits of Malacca, which it shares with Indonesia.
Singapore now needs to “maintain its economic stature, which is dependent on exports, unimpeded trade and communications routes, and reliable external sources for essential supplies such as water, oil, and foodstuffs," Paul Burton, director for Asia-Pacific at the IHS Aerospace Defence and Security consultancy, told CNBC. "The protection of sea lanes and offshore territory is consequently a concern."
That’s why Singapore maintains an air force capable of projecting power far away from the island. Unique among Southeast Asian nations, it has a fleet of air-to-air tankers bought from the U.S., which can extend the range of Singaporean F-15s and F-16s so they can strike thousands of miles away. To do so, they have precision weapons from the U.S. and Israel, including bombs guided by laser and GPS and anti-ship missiles that can hit targets more than 60 miles (100 km) away.
Singapore policymakers do not mention China when discussing their military posture, nor is the government involved in any of the maritime disputes pitting the biggest Asian power against neighbors like Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines. But history shows that Singapore’s tiny size means it cannot wait for any enemy to get close. That lesson came from the island’s capture by Japan during World War II, a traumatic event in Singaporean memory.
"The last thing the Singaporeans want is to fight last-ditch battles on Singaporean soil. A lot of this goes back to the fall of Singapore in 1942,” Richard Bitzinger, a senior fellow at Nanyang Technological, told Flight Global magazine.“They never want to have this happen again. They will take the war to the enemy."
Some of my Singaporean friends told me that the government holds you responsible for the care of your elderly parents, too. They said you can be fined or jailed if they are found to be neglected.
Singapore airport had dozens of PC’s scattered throughout the airport, where free internet was available to passengers. Ultra-modern design. Hong Kong airport was also well organized and clean. I received my checked in bag very quickly. Taipei airport was also good.
But Manila airport was a zoo. Overcrowded and poorly laid out.
May be I should encourage my kids to live there hahaha..
You got it wrong. Singapore rewards responsible people and does not empower bandits with the ability to punish responsible people.
Sadly out west, irresponsibility is praised and it is the adult who is scrutinized
I forgot about that, they reached a trade agreement where they can now sell medical gums, but still no gum just for fun.
So possession of gum is legal, but not selling it.
Singapore spends under 4% of its GDP on the military. That is hardly a disproportionate amount.
It’s pretty early here, but I still love a good comedian at any hour.
The F-35 is truly a masterpiece if you’re comparing it to a lada.
The F-15 is a battle tested and rough, tough fighter and interceptor.
The F-35 is a colossal waste of cash.
Their military is on par with the Texas National Guard.
The society is fraying from different areas. There are various laws that keep everyone in 'check'.
There is no free speech. No right of assembly. State run newspapers. Proselytizing is frowned upon. There is a vast importation of foreign workers. You will be charged with sedition for making racist comments on the internet. The Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act will not allow you to speak ill of other religions.
It is a anti free corporate state. A great place to visit, but I feel for the citizens.
The Israelis have signed up for 33 of these planes, so they may disagree. I've been reading journalistic critiques of new weapon systems for donkey's years. The unspoken premise has nothing to do with the merits of specific new weapon systems, and everything to do with the following core assumption: "It'll be a great day when education gets all the money it wants and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy bombers."
Considering that most of the personnel are draftees, that's not a surprise. The question is - how do the region's other defense establishments compare with the TNG?
Indonesia stands out in SE Asia. And they have shifted in their military buildup do to the Chinese advance in the South China Sea. They have competent forces, and their Kopassus is the real deal.
My problem is, it’s a slow, unmaneuverable one trick pony. If it’s stealth is negated, it’s just a slow moving target.
There are radars and technologies now that can defeat the stealth aspect.
It’s far better to focus on fast with lots of firepower. I think it’s a massive waste of public funds going after this aircraft which will be obsolete by time it goes mainstream.
Criticisms of stealth are overdone. Military establishments around the globe, including both USAF and customers for the F-35, have tried to get around stealth and failed. This is why all major weapons manufacturers, including Russia and China are trying to get in on the game. Customers for these big and expensive weapons systems have a lot at stake, and not just in dollar terms.
The average journalist operates from the following premises: (1) war is bad, (2) if the US military had no new weapon systems, war would end, (3) new US weapon systems are bad. From there, they go on to quote only the people who support their premises. Now, you might say that this is biased journalism. I think it's defensible. How could a journalist, a non-specialist by definition, even begin to figure out the merits of something as complicated as a new weapon system? It's a complete crapshoot, in terms of getting it right. Given the time constraints on his ability to find out enough to evaluate the subject at hand, why not simply adopt a contrarian/his default leftist position?
The singaporeans are one of the few people who really like their government - and not just for show. You can freely leave if you don’t like it, but not many do.
well, Indians and Chinese (the 3rd and 1st largest ethnicities in Singapore) have a history of spitting on the streets, so Singapore wanted to break that. They did and the streets are clean
You’re wrong—that’s not true anymore.
Australian hearings on the F-35 project. They touch on a great many issues, including exchange ratios:
Note: this topic is from . Thanks sukhoi-30mki.
We had a fine military made up of conscripts that handled the type of combat our current military could never handle: Pusan, Tet, The Bulge, etc. The U.S. Army couldn’t handle a Tet offensive or a Bulge...too many females in the ranks incapable of fighting as infantry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.