Putrajaya, we have a problem

IN the last two weeks, those who have been following the South China Sea issue were in a state of “confusion”.

They were wondering why Malaysia would need to discuss its own maritime territory with China. Is there a new policy under this unity government on the South China Sea?

It started with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s speech at the Prime Minister’s Department monthly gathering on April 4.

Fresh from an official trip to China which he described as the most successful, the Prime Minister revealed that during his “four-eyed” meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, he raised the PETRONAS oil and gas exploration issue in the South China Sea.

“As PETRONAS has one of its biggest oil platforms in the South China Sea, the revenue is important for Malaysia.

“However, as China is claiming that it has rights to it, I am willing to sit down and discuss, but as we are a small country dependent on the revenue, we will continue to assert our rights to it,” Anwar said.

His remarks caused uneasiness and further anxiety the next day when in the Dewan Rakyat, Anwar said the matter was raised during his trip to China because both parties have overlapping claims.

We have a problem here, Putrajaya.

It has been the long-standing position of Malaysia, held onto by previous prime ministers, that the area where PETRONAS is conducting its exploration is in accordance with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) that there are no overlapping entitlements between Malaysia and China in the South China Sea.

Saying Malaysia is willing to negotiate is like giving away our sovereign rights. This is non- negotiable.

“This right is very important to Malaysia because it allows us to conduct activities in our waters. When we say we are willing to negotiate, are we prepared to give away our rights in the waters?

“One thing about Malaysia is that we have never changed our stand on the South China Sea issue, and we must keep it as pristine as we can. You cannot shoot off just like that. The language is used for a reason,” said an official.

In January, Defence Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan used the word “disputed” in relation to Beting Patinggi Ali while explaining to the media that Malaysia has enough assets to defend itself following reports of another sighting of a Chinese Coast Guard vessel in the resource-rich area off Sarawak.

It is understood the Defence Ministry was alerted to the faux pas and a statement was later issued to clarify that Malaysia has never acknowledged any claims from any parties as the area is within its Exclusive Economic Zone: “Preserving and protecting the nation’s sovereignty will always be the priority of the ministry and the Armed Forces,” said the statement.

Both the Foreign Minister and Defence Minister have been very careful with any replies to questions about the South China Sea in Parliament. To their credit, both have stuck to the script because any wrong choice of words can be misinterpreted by foreign countries, especially the ones with interests in the area.

Former prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin jumped on the bandwagon when he criticised Anwar’s careless remark about Malaysia being open to negotiation on PETRONAS exploration activities. He argued well and raised pertinent points. Those familiar with the issue agreed with Muhyiddin.

Asked for his reaction to Muhyiddin’s statement, Anwar stressed that the area belongs to Malaysia: “But now, China says no, this is an overlapping region. I said OK, if that’s the case. Let’s talk.”

Maybe no one has informed the Prime Minister that he should just steer clear of the words negotiation or overlapping claims when it comes to this issue. He is only adding to the confusion.

Wisma Putra in return had to issue a statement to clarify that Malaysia’s position on the South China Sea is consistent and remains unchanged.

“The Government of Malaysia is unequivocally and firmly committed to protecting Malaysia’s sovereignty, sovereign rights and interests in its maritime areas in the South China Sea, as depicted by our 1979 Map.

“The statement issued on April 8 said Malaysia firmly held the view that matters related to the South China Sea must be resolved peacefully and constructively, in accordance with the universally recognised principles of international law, including the 1982 Unclos.

“By stating the term ‘negotiation’ in Parliament on April 4, the Prime Minister made the point that issues relating to the South China Sea should be discussed or resolved in a peaceful manner, utilising existing platforms and through diplomatic channels, and without compromising Malaysia’s principled position, to avoid any escalation of disputes and the threat or use of force,” said the statement.

It is common practice that during any foreign visit, the Prime Minister would be briefed on important issues, and surely for this China trip, that process did take place.

What really transpired during his four-eyed meeting with another world leader is anyone’s guess but is it wise to publicly announce the details?

After the Prime Minister’s remarks, questions remain unanswered: did Anwar open the door to entertaining China’s policy to negotiate maritime boundaries with Malaysia? Was he wrongly advised or was it a case of confusion over South China Sea matters?

Maritime boundaries are just one part of the South China Sea equation, but the most important part. At the Asean level, there are ongoing negotiations between the regional bloc’s member states and China for a Code of Conduct which aims to manage tensions in the South China Sea.

As for bilateral issues with China, Beijing has and will continue to raise its version of overlapping claims with Malaysia in the South China Sea.

Malaysia has defended its position very well over the years every time this issue came to the table.

With Wisma Putra’s damage control statement, perhaps the Prime Minister needs to explain in Parliament what he meant when he spoke on South China Sea as he has caused an unnecessary polemic on Malaysia’s foreign policy.