Singapore and Indonesian corrupters
The Singapore Embassy's letter to The Jakarta Post on March 6 reminds us that an open debate about Singaporean exploitation of Indonesian assets is long overdue.
In the decades that followed the embarrassing excesses of Sukarno's policy of Konfrontasi (confrontation) in the early-mid 1960s, Indonesia's diplomats have taken care to treat it's near neighbors with utmost civility. Some may say too much.
But for too long, our civility has not been reciprocated. In this new era of reform, it is time to bring a long list of outstanding bilateral issues into the public spotlight.
The debate on the extradition of Indonesian corrupters, which has been ongoing for over three decades, is just one of many Singaporean actions to have inflicted losses on Indonesia.
Singapore's arguments that they cannot easily apprehend known Indonesian corrupters is specious. When Singapore wants to arrest somebody, even without showing evidence or laying charges, they can and do. Singapore's Changi jail has a special section where known foreign drug dealers are detained indefinitely. When it suits Singapore's purpose to detain somebody, they do so. Former premier Lee Kuan Yew said just the other day that Indonesia should implement a Singapore style ISA law.
When it comes to the rampant smuggling of refined oil products, logs, tin and sand into Singapore, the small republic likes to innocently say things like "Singapore does not condone smuggling of any kind". This is a half truth. Indeed when it comes to things that Singapore does not want, such as tobacco products, drugs or illegal labor, Singapore polices its borders zealously and effectively.
But when it suits Singapore's interests, smuggling of Indonesian products is not only allowed but indeed encouraged. Tens of billions of tons of sand is just one example. Singapore in fact provides smugglers of products from Indonesia with special "barter ports" where they don't even need proper ship documentation to bring ashore their illicit tin, fish and logs.
On the ship's return journey, Singapore exports its unwanted waste: old cars, clothes, tree branches, furniture -- and even mud.
When the Singapore Embassy makes statements like: "... the import of sea sand was undertaken by commercial contractors, not the Singapore government", the argument is only half true, as it was ultimately Singapore government policies, contracts and money that caused the trade to occur. Singapore must therefore share responsibility for the harm caused by this illegal business.
KARI SAUKKONEN Business and current affairs observer Semarang