Did we win or lose?

So the big news of the week (other than the WRDC supt being sacked) was that the ICJ finally rules on a 10-year old case, and that Singapore gets to keep Pedra Branca (or Pulau Batu Puteh depending on your flavour) while Malaysia gets the Middle Rocks. Another feature the Southern Ledge is yet to be judged. Before the case results were released I personally knew nothing of these Rocks and Ledges.

For Pedra Branca, ICJ’s 16-member bench voted 12-4 in favour of Singapore. Ownership of Middle Rocks, a maritime feature 0.6 nautical miles from Pedra Branca, was voted 15-1 in favour of Malaysia. If you added them up, it’s 13 for Singapore but 19 for Malaysia on the whole case. Hmmm if my math serves me right, looks to me like Singapore lost rather than won.

Indeed, originally Singapore laid claim and managed the entire region of land and sea, including these Rocks and Ledges. Now, we have to give the Rocks back to Malaysia. It’s very likely that Malaysia will win the Southern Ledge as well considering that any piece of land not currently administered by Singapore is judged to be owned by Malaysia. Look at this map:

The Middle Rocks is a stone’s throw away from Pulau Batu Puteh. If the addendum sea lanes are to be divided, in all likelihood the resolution of sea lane division will be a thorny issue indeed. Will we begin to see sea lane territorial disputes the like of South Korea, North Korea, Japan and China routinely visit with each other?

Malaysia puts this as a “win-win” solution. I agree. From a “nothing-win” situation where Malaysia had nothing and Singapore everything, it is now a situation where Malaysia has something and Singapore now has less. To me that sounds more like a “win-lose” situation.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=597

What happened to our own brand of ideals?

The latest poster child for grassroots movement done good is the hyperspeed frenzy for belted school minibuses and stricter enforcement of child seats for children 8 years and younger. While on first glance, one would nod and agree with such an enforcement, afterall it’s for our dear children and our future, I wonder if this is yet another knee-jerk reaction in the wrong way.

The clarion call stemmed largely from an expat who lamented the gross disregard for child safety by Singaporeans at large for allowing their children free reign in the car or with doting grandparents. In the tragic event of a car crash, the child would be flung all over the place, or crushed between the doting caregiver and the front seat, or flung out of the car. In recent news, children have been flung out of cars and minibuses because (the premise goes) they weren’t belted up.

We have adopted Western laws without modification for the law of belted children in vehicles, but interestingly these same Western countries who practice these laws do not have the same family unit values that most Asian societies (like Singapore) have, that is, large families living under one roof. In most Western countries, the family unit consists of the parents and their immediate children. Children usually move out by 18 as a formal rite of passage and forge their own paths henceforth. However, Asian (and Greek so I heard) families tend to stay together, grandparents, their children and their parents. Most family sedans fit 5 adults. If each child takes up one seat via the child seat or booster, a nuclear family of 4 eliminates the possibility of grandparents being in the same car, unless that car were a big one.

Not everyone in Singapore who is raising a family is also able to afford that supersized MPV or SUV, choosing the Corolla or Sunny, and cannot afford a second car. So how do you reconcile the need for space in one car and the need to belt up?

You can’t. It is a classic clash of culture. Like bicycles on left lanes (to the irritation of drivers), thoughtless implementation of foreign practices without tweaking to suit our society is plain stupid.

http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=594