- Beranda
- Komunitas
- News
- Berita Luar Negeri
How Singapore handles territorial rows better than China
TS
dragonroar
How Singapore handles territorial rows better than China
Quote:
Oct 27, 2016 10:35am

At an ICJ hearing in 2007 in relation to a territorial dispute with Malaysia, Singapore presented a lot of substantial and tangible evidence based on historical facts and international law theories. Photo: United Nations
Although Singapore and China are both governed by ethnic Chinese, the mindset, political logic and ideologies adopted by leaders of the two countries are in sharp contrast with each other, particularly over the issue of territorial disputes.
Let me give an example.
In 1979, a dispute broke out between Singapore and Malaysia over the ownership of the tiny island of Pedra Branca and the neighboring Middle Rocks and South Ledge located along the Singapore Strait. After attempts to settle it on the negotiation table had failed, Singapore took the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
During the trial, Singapore presented a lot of substantial and tangible evidence based on historical facts and international law theories.
For instance, it argued that the Sultan of Johore didn’t voice any objection whatsoever when the British colonial administration in Singapore occupied these islands and rocks in the 1850s, suggesting that Malaysia agreed with the lawful possession of these islands by the Singaporean authorities right from the beginning.
In the end, the ICJ ruled in 2008 that the island of Pedra Branca belongs to Singapore while Malaysia has sovereignty over a couple of neighboring small islands, and the case was settled peacefully.
In contrast, when it comes to the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the major argument presented by Beijing to support its claim is that the islands and the waters of the region have been Chinese territory “since ancient times”, without being able to provide any substantial and historically specific proof.
Nor is it able to present any logical evidence under the framework of the existing international law.
In other words, as far as territorial disputes are concerned, what Singapore adopts is a western kind of mindset that stresses procedure and logic, while Beijing tends to act out of nationalism. This situation has led to Singapore’s sympathies lying with its Southeast Asian neighbors with regard to their territorial disputes with Beijing.
In the meantime, leaders in Beijing have difficulty comprehending why Singapore has been reluctant to rally to their defense over the territorial claims in the South China Sea. It is because according to the “Chinese logic” embraced by Beijing leaders, the Singaporean leaders are supposed to be on their side, as they are Chinese too.
Well, what we can say is that the different stances of Singapore and Beijing on the South China Sea disputes are not only the result of their conflicting geopolitical interests, but also the conflict of two different cultures and set of values.
Source

At an ICJ hearing in 2007 in relation to a territorial dispute with Malaysia, Singapore presented a lot of substantial and tangible evidence based on historical facts and international law theories. Photo: United Nations
Although Singapore and China are both governed by ethnic Chinese, the mindset, political logic and ideologies adopted by leaders of the two countries are in sharp contrast with each other, particularly over the issue of territorial disputes.
Let me give an example.
In 1979, a dispute broke out between Singapore and Malaysia over the ownership of the tiny island of Pedra Branca and the neighboring Middle Rocks and South Ledge located along the Singapore Strait. After attempts to settle it on the negotiation table had failed, Singapore took the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
During the trial, Singapore presented a lot of substantial and tangible evidence based on historical facts and international law theories.
For instance, it argued that the Sultan of Johore didn’t voice any objection whatsoever when the British colonial administration in Singapore occupied these islands and rocks in the 1850s, suggesting that Malaysia agreed with the lawful possession of these islands by the Singaporean authorities right from the beginning.
In the end, the ICJ ruled in 2008 that the island of Pedra Branca belongs to Singapore while Malaysia has sovereignty over a couple of neighboring small islands, and the case was settled peacefully.
In contrast, when it comes to the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the major argument presented by Beijing to support its claim is that the islands and the waters of the region have been Chinese territory “since ancient times”, without being able to provide any substantial and historically specific proof.
Nor is it able to present any logical evidence under the framework of the existing international law.
In other words, as far as territorial disputes are concerned, what Singapore adopts is a western kind of mindset that stresses procedure and logic, while Beijing tends to act out of nationalism. This situation has led to Singapore’s sympathies lying with its Southeast Asian neighbors with regard to their territorial disputes with Beijing.
In the meantime, leaders in Beijing have difficulty comprehending why Singapore has been reluctant to rally to their defense over the territorial claims in the South China Sea. It is because according to the “Chinese logic” embraced by Beijing leaders, the Singaporean leaders are supposed to be on their side, as they are Chinese too.
Well, what we can say is that the different stances of Singapore and Beijing on the South China Sea disputes are not only the result of their conflicting geopolitical interests, but also the conflict of two different cultures and set of values.
Source
Spoiler for terjemahan:
Begimana Singapura nanganin masalah wilayah lebih baik ketimbang China
Meskipun Singapura dan China sama2 diperintah ame cokin, pikiran, logika politik dan ideologi yang diadopsi para pemimpin dari dua negara itu berseberangan satu sama lain, terutama masalah persengketaan wilayah.
Mari gue kasih contoh.
Pada 1979, persengketaan pecah antara Singapura ama Malaysia atas kepemilikan pulau Pedra Branca dan pulau-pulau tetangganya Middle Rocks dan South Ledge yang terletak di sepanjang Selat Singapura. Setelah upaya untuk menyelesaikannya pada meja negosiasi gagal, Singapura melayangkan kasusnya ke International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Pada saat pengadilan, Singapura menghadirkan bukti berdasarkan pada fakta sejarah dan teori hukum internasional.
Selain itu, mereka berpendapat bahwa Sultan Johor tidak menyuarakan apapun saat penjajah Inggris di Singapura menduduki kepulauan tersebut pada 1850an, dengan berkesimpulan bahwa Malaysia setuju dengan tindak hukum atas kepulauan tersebut oleh otoritas Singapura pada mulanya.
Pada akhirnya, ICJ memutuskan pada 2008 bahwa pulau Pedra Branca masuk Singapura sementara Malaysia memiliki kedaulatan atas sepasang pulau kecil tetangganya, dan kasus tersebut berakhir damai.
Sebaliknya, saat terjadi persengketaan wilayah di Laut China Selatan, argumen utama dipersembahkan oleh Beijing untuk mendukung klaimnya bahwa kepulauan dan perairan di wilayah tersebut telah menjadi wilayah Cina "sejak jaman kuno", tanpa menyediakan bukti spesifik apapun.
Tidak ada bukti logis yang layak diberikan menurut hukum internasional.
Dalam kata lain, saat ngadepin persengketaan wilayah, Singapura mengadopsi jenis pemikiran barat yang mengedepankan prosedur dan logika, sementara Beijing mengedepankan nasionalisme. Keadaan ini membuat simpati Singapura merebak di kalangan tetangga Asia Tenggara-nya terhadap persengketaan wilayahnya ama Beijing.
Dalam hal waktu, para pemimpin di Beijing sulit ngetahuin kepada Singapura begitu pedenya dengan pertahanan mereka atas klaim teritorial di Laut China Selatan. Hal ini karena menurut “logika cokin” yang dianut ama para pemimpin Beijing, para pemimpin Singapura pede ama posisi mereka, karena mereka cokin juga.
Selain itu, kami dapat berkata bahwa perbedaan sikap Singapura dan Beijing terhadap Laut China Selatan tak hanya menghasilkan kepentingan geopolitik mereka, namun juga konflik dua budaya dan nilai yang berbeda.
Source
Meskipun Singapura dan China sama2 diperintah ame cokin, pikiran, logika politik dan ideologi yang diadopsi para pemimpin dari dua negara itu berseberangan satu sama lain, terutama masalah persengketaan wilayah.
Mari gue kasih contoh.
Pada 1979, persengketaan pecah antara Singapura ama Malaysia atas kepemilikan pulau Pedra Branca dan pulau-pulau tetangganya Middle Rocks dan South Ledge yang terletak di sepanjang Selat Singapura. Setelah upaya untuk menyelesaikannya pada meja negosiasi gagal, Singapura melayangkan kasusnya ke International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Pada saat pengadilan, Singapura menghadirkan bukti berdasarkan pada fakta sejarah dan teori hukum internasional.
Selain itu, mereka berpendapat bahwa Sultan Johor tidak menyuarakan apapun saat penjajah Inggris di Singapura menduduki kepulauan tersebut pada 1850an, dengan berkesimpulan bahwa Malaysia setuju dengan tindak hukum atas kepulauan tersebut oleh otoritas Singapura pada mulanya.
Pada akhirnya, ICJ memutuskan pada 2008 bahwa pulau Pedra Branca masuk Singapura sementara Malaysia memiliki kedaulatan atas sepasang pulau kecil tetangganya, dan kasus tersebut berakhir damai.
Sebaliknya, saat terjadi persengketaan wilayah di Laut China Selatan, argumen utama dipersembahkan oleh Beijing untuk mendukung klaimnya bahwa kepulauan dan perairan di wilayah tersebut telah menjadi wilayah Cina "sejak jaman kuno", tanpa menyediakan bukti spesifik apapun.
Tidak ada bukti logis yang layak diberikan menurut hukum internasional.
Dalam kata lain, saat ngadepin persengketaan wilayah, Singapura mengadopsi jenis pemikiran barat yang mengedepankan prosedur dan logika, sementara Beijing mengedepankan nasionalisme. Keadaan ini membuat simpati Singapura merebak di kalangan tetangga Asia Tenggara-nya terhadap persengketaan wilayahnya ama Beijing.
Dalam hal waktu, para pemimpin di Beijing sulit ngetahuin kepada Singapura begitu pedenya dengan pertahanan mereka atas klaim teritorial di Laut China Selatan. Hal ini karena menurut “logika cokin” yang dianut ama para pemimpin Beijing, para pemimpin Singapura pede ama posisi mereka, karena mereka cokin juga.
Selain itu, kami dapat berkata bahwa perbedaan sikap Singapura dan Beijing terhadap Laut China Selatan tak hanya menghasilkan kepentingan geopolitik mereka, namun juga konflik dua budaya dan nilai yang berbeda.
Source
Diubah oleh dragonroar 28-10-2016 23:21
anasabila dan sebelahblog memberi reputasi
2
984
Kutip
1
Balasan
Komentar yang asik ya
Urutan
Terbaru
Terlama
Komentar yang asik ya
Komunitas Pilihan