Malaysia needs to identify its enemies before a proper defence policy can be mooted to secure the safety and security of the nation, a senior researcher in the area of defence, Lam Choong Wah, said.

Otherwise the country would be spending billions of ringgit, with there being no clear enemy in sight, said Lam, a former journalist who is currently attached to the NGO Research for Social Advancement (Refsa).

“Who is our enemy? If we are unable to identify our enemy or enemies, then we will not be able to allocate our money into the right sectors,” he said at a forum to launch his research and book, “Are we protected? Malaysian Defence Uncovered” in Penang last night.

“For example if our enemies are pirates from the Philippines, do we need to spend so much money on conventional equipment like tanks, big ships and submarines?” he asked.

Lam ( photo ) said such conventional weaponry are not suitable for unconventional or jungle warfare, since special vehicles like helicopters are better in remote areas.

He added that during the early years of Merdeka, Malaya’s enemies were clearly the Communist Party of Malaya and Indonesia, which declared a confrontation with Malaysia in 1965, though it never took off.

He noted that during the height of the territorial dispute with Singapore over Pedra Banca (Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge) in 2002, the island state appeared to be the enemy.

Then, Lam said, former foreign minister Syed Hamid Albar and former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad “threatened” war with Singapore if it refused to compromise on the dispute.

Eventually, the International Court of Justice settled the dispute in 2008 with the declaration that Batu Puteh belongs to Singapore and Middle Rocks to Malaysia.

Political concerns, rather than military demands

“Is Singapore Malaysia’s enemy? Although there is no official declaration, my research shows that we do have an arms race with the island republic in the purchase of weapons, with the two countries appearing to be competing in the area of arms procurement,” Lam said.

“From what I learnt, this scenario is based more on political concerns, rather than military demands. Arms procurement should be based on the needs of the end users - the demands of the air force or army - but it is always based on political needs,” he added.

Lam said Malaysia’s defence policy is currently a much neglected area, and the Defence Ministry’s budget is unjustifiable.

“No one cares about it, and no one wants to touch it because it has nothing to do with the people’s daily lives and does not concern our livelihood, economy, transport or child care,” Lam said.

He explained that the country’s defence spending consumed a lot of money every year.

For example, before 2009, it was the second ministry with the highest budget - RM15 billion - which was to be spent on “development and operations”, Lam said.

He said it was timely now to look into a proper defence policy as the Defence Ministry has already consumed about RM80 billion from 1966 to 2015.

“Do we feel safer after having spent so much money in this sector? For citizens in the peninsula, we might feel safe, but how about our fellow men and women in Sabah, where there are frequent cases of kidnapping, and not so long ago, an invasion from Sulu, where civilians and police personnel were killed?” Lam asked.

He proposed that Malaysia publishes a White Paper on Defence, something most developed countries have done.

He said Malaysia’s neighbours Indonesia, Cambodia, Brunei, the Philippines and even communist-ruled Vietnam have also published their white papers on defence.

“Without a white paper, it is no wonder that our transparency perception is low, and we rank among countries like Afghanistan, Rwanda and Tanzania,” Lam said.

“African countries like Botswana, Ghana and Kenya rank higher than us in transparency, while Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Papua New Guinea also rank higher than us.”