Will China allow Sarawak the 20% oil royalty?

China's military maneurvres affecting neighbouring nations and region the past 40 years are centred on hydro-carbon deposits

China’s military maneurvres affecting neighbouring nations and region the past 40 years are centred on hydro-carbon deposits

It is amazing Sarawakian elected representatives are focused on getting the 20% oil royalty from Federal Government but completely overlooked more pertinent issues relating to the source of these hydrocarbon black gold.

The Star story:

Published: Tuesday May 6, 2014 MYT 7:33:00 PM
Updated: Tuesday May 6, 2014 MYT 7:47:04 PM

Sarawak Assembly passes resolution calling for 20 percent oil royalty



KUCHING: The Sarawak Legislative Assembly has unanimously voted in favour of a resolution to request the Federal Government for an increase in the oil royalty from 5% to 20%.

A motion on the increase was originally tabled by Chong Chieng Jen (DAP-Kota Sentosa) but an amended motion, which included seeking more development grants from the Federal Government aside from the royalty, was subsequently tabled by Abdullah Saidol (BN-Semop) and approved.

Abdullah said his motion was in line with Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem’s recent statement in support of an increased royalty.

“We plan to invite the Federal Government to revisit the royalty arrangement, which includes reviewing the relevant legislation. The Chief Minister’s statement was not mere political rhetoric but a representation of the genuine sentiment of all Sarawakians.

“This motion is about our desire to review the royalty rate to a quantum more favourable to us. It can be also construed as a request for more development funds which we can channel to rural areas where basic needs like electricity, clean water and roads are still needed,” he told the House on Tuesday.

Abdullah added that the state wished to mutually negotiate a revision of the royalty with the aim of achieving a better deal in order to accelerate development.

“We don’t want the Federal government to accommodate our request on humanitarian grounds but must be able to impress upon them that we have the right to be treated equally as a partner when we jointly formed Malaysia,” he said.

However, he said the pursuit of a higher royalty rate must not affect the close working relationship, mutual respect and cordiality between the state and Federal governments.

Meanwhile, Chong said he did not mind that his motion had been amended by a Barisan backbencher.

“Once a motion is passed, it is the House motion. It does not matter who originates the motion. This day we will make a unanimous decision and give our full support even if the motion comes from Barisan.

“What is important is that our state gets this money,” he said.


The more pressing issue that Sarawak politicians should pay attention is China’s more aggressive maneuvres based on their claim of the imaginary Nine-Dash-Line in the South China Sea.

ASEAN EEZ Vs China's imaginary 'Nine Dash Line' claims over South China Sea

ASEAN EEZ Vs China’s imaginary ‘Nine Dash Line’ claims over South China Sea

These maneuvres include Peoples’ Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) of China deploying a fully armed task force and ‘staked the claim’ of James Shoal (Beting Serupai), which is 50 nautical miles off the coast of Saarwak.

Areas within this Nine-Dash-Line are where the untapped oil and gas fields are.

Make no mistake about what China’s primary wish on the quest to stake the claim in the South China Sea, on the undefined Nine-Dash-Line. It is about hydrocarbon.

China already started to erect an oil exploration platform 120 miles off the coast of Vietnam, which is deep in Vietnamese EEZ area (as defined under UNCLOS).It is a point of grave controversy, which would reflect China’s oil interests elsewhere.

Forbes story:

ENERGY | 5/08/2014 @ 8:00AM |1,803 views

China Thwarts U.S. ‘Containment’ With Vietnam Oil Rig Standoff

Comment Now Follow Comments
Two weeks ago on his trip to Asia, President Obama drew another red line, declaring that a group of islands, claimed by both Japan and China, were covered by America’s security treaty with Japan. In the Philippines, Obama inked a 10-year agreement to increase U.S. forces there.

Though the president made a point of not visiting China on what some dubbed a “China containment tour,” he insisted “We’re not interested in containing China.”

The Chinese don’t appear to believe him. This week Beijing decided to assert its aggression in the region.
On May 3, China’s state-controlled oil giant Cnooc moved a deepwater drilling rig to a spot just 120 miles off the coast of Vietnam, smack dab in the middle of oil and gas exploration blocks that Vietnam claims as its own and where PetroVietnam and ExxonMobil have discovered big oil and gas reserves.

Vietnam has demanded that Beijing call it off. In the past day Chinese and Vietnamese vessels have been in a standoff near the rig, with Chinese ships reportedly spraying water at the Vietnamese. On May 4, Chinese ships reportedly rammed Vietnamese vessels.

Chinese media quoted a government spokeswoman as insisting that not only had the rig been positioned in Chinese waters near the Paracel Islands, but that Beijing urged Vietnam to stop interfering.

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Tuesday that Cnooc’s actions were “provocative and unhelpful to the maintenance of peace and stability in the region.”

China’s spokeswoman said, according to Xinhua news service, that the U.S. is in no position to make irresponsible remarks on China’s affairs.
The $1 billion Cnooc 981 rig was the first advanced drillship built in China. ((AP Photo/Xinhua, Jin Liangkuai, File)

Indeed how could anyone seriously believe that the Obama Administration would do anything to thwart the Cnooc rig’s operations. Obama failed to take action when his own red line was crossed in Syria. Vladimir Putin’s cronies laugh at U.S. sanctions imposed after the Crimea takeover. Iraq is hurtling toward civil war. Iran is ever closer to the bomb.

Ernest Bower and Gregory Polling of the Center For Strategic & International Studies summed it up in their analysis yesterday (see their entire piece, with maps, here):

The implications of these developments are significant. The fact that the Chinese moved ahead in placing their rig immediately after President Obama’s visit to four Asian countries in late April underlines Beijing’s commitment to test the resolve of Vietnam, its ASEAN neighbors and Washington. Beijing may also be attempting to substantially change the facts on the seas by moving while it perceives Washington to be distracted by Russian aggression inUkraine, developments in Nigeria, and Syria. If China believes Washington is distracted, in an increasingly insular and isolationist mood and unwilling to back up relatively strong security assertions made to Japan and the Philippines and repeated during President Obama’s trip, these developments south of the Paracel Islands could have long term regional and global consequences.

Analysts in China see it pretty much the same way. In an op-ed in China Daily, Liu Weidong wrote:

Although Obama claimed the U.S. was not trying to contain China, what he has done shows clearly it is. …

The U.S.’ intention of returning to the Asian-Pacific region is to achieve a balance in favor of the US, and that was the main goal of Obama’s Asia trip this time. But this is an unbalanced approach because it is in favor of the countries that have disputes with China, so China is forced to seek a counterbalance. Obama’s unprecedented promise to support Japan in the territorial dispute with China over islands in the East China Sea is enough to show the US’ concern over China’s new legally established Air Defence Identification Zone in the East China Sea. Also facing frustrations in Syria and Crimea, the US is becoming unreasonably tough with China in a bid to maintain its image as the undisputed global leader.

Objectively speaking, the U.S.’ rebalancing strategy in the Asia-Pacific region is aimed at achieving a strategic balance between China and Japan that will prevent war between them but also prevent their reconciliation. It will also make both countries woo the US, which will help reinforce the U.S.’ dominant position as an “offshore balancer”.

It’s not the first time China has invaded the Paracel Islands with a drilling rig. It did the same thing back in 2012, at which time Cnooc Chairman Wang Yilin said, “Large deepwater drilling rigs are our mobile national territory and strategic weapon for promoting the development of the country’s offshore oil industry.” Taking him literally, it means that Cnooc’s drilling rigs are akin to ships in the Chinese Navy.

No one expects the Obama administration to respond to China’s aggression. But it’s worth keeping in mind that in its $19 billion acquisition of Canada-based Nexen last year, Cnooc acquired some 200 exploration leases in the Gulf of Mexico. Those leases were altered as a condition of U.S. approval of the deal, with Cnooc forced to give up operatorship of the blocks. But if Cnooc really considers its drilling rigs “mobile national territory” then perhaps the Federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management should apply some special scrutiny when Cnooc and its partners request permits to drill off U.S. shores.


Probably Sarawak elected representatives should be more concerned in providing the Federal Government the full support to ward of China’s claim on what is clearly part of Malaysia’s EEZ as defined by the United Nations Convention Law of the Seas (UNCLOS). Rather than trying to gain political mileage of being champion against the formula which Sarawak already proven to immensely benefitted.

Kelantan, which is under PAS control, is reaffirming their stake for the 20% oil royalty after the Sarawak State Assembly resolution.

Sin Chew Jit Poh story:

After Sarawak, Kelantan now seeks 20% oil royalty

News 2014-05-08 13:47

The country’s first inland oil well on Canada Hill, Miri, Sarawak. Photo courtesy: Sin Chew Daily

Translated by DOMINIC LOH
Sin Chew Daily

May 7, Sin Chew Daily — The Sarawak state legislative assembly passed a resolution to seek to increase the current oil royalty from the federal government from 5% to 20%, and this has set a precedent for other oil-producing states which are seeking to do the same.

Kelantan state assemblyman Datuk Husam Musa said the Sarawak motion was a courageous landmark move and he believed other states would soon follow suit, asking the federal government to increase their oil royalties to 20%.

“There are four oil-producing states in the country, namely Kelantan, Terengganu, Sabah and Sarawak. These four states have helped create tremendous wealth annually for the federal government, collectively contributing some 48% of the government’s revenue. However, these four states remain the poorest, which is ironical.”

The Salor state assemblyman cum PAS vice president told Sin Chew Daily it is time for the federal government and Petronas to review the oil revenue distribution structure. Besides higher oil royalties, Husam said these four states should also be entitled to shares in Petronas.

“Currently Petronas is 100% controlled by the federal government. We want the federal government to distribute the company’s shares to the state governments.”

Petronas stopped disbursing oil royalty to the Kelantan state government since 2005, owing the state government some RM1.7 billion of oil royalty every year.

Husam said there are several oil producing areas in Kelantan, and based on the state government’s estimates four years ago, the Kelantan/Thailand offshore area alone generates some US$8.5 billion (RM25.1 billion) in oil revenue annually. If the state government is entitled to 5% of oil royalty, that would be approximately RM1.7 billion every year.

On August 30. 2010, the state government filed a suit at the High Court against Petronas and the federal government for breaching the contract while pursuing the unpaid royalties owed by the federal government since 1998. Petronas signed the agreements in 1974 with all state governments to pay 5% oil royalties to the state governments annually.

“I believe the number of MPs from these four states is enough to get the Parliament to amend the relevant act,” Husam said.



The irony is that unlike Sarawak’s oil and gas fields, areas where oil being extracted off the coast of Kelantan, is not part of China’s claim on the Nine-Dash-Line.

In the final analysis, no one in Malaysia would benefit from Sarawak politicians’ insistence for the seemingly ‘Penny wise, pound foolish’ on the controversial oil royalty issue when where this reside which is part of Malaysia’s EEZ would be taken away lock, stock and barrel by China through the means of deadly force.

Published in: on May 8, 2014 at 22:30  Comments (20)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/will-china-allow-sarawak-the-20-oil-royalty/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

20 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Anwar boleh tawarkan 50% jika menjadi PM. BN Akan runtuh ler. Yang masih bodoh, kerajaan Trengganu Dan Sabah.

    Kan duit tu untuk pembangunan negeri masing-masing. Apa masalahnya? Kurang ketirisan Dan Mungkin Rakyat Negeri dapat menikmati lebih manfaat seperti dahulu sebelum Akta Petroleum di laksanakan.

    Cuma tukar jer pengurusan duit drp Persekutuan kepada Negeri masing-masing.

    • Talk about totally missing the point.

    • Er, Anwar can offer 50% if he’s the PM? I thought this article is about China’s systematic unilateral territory-grabbing attitude, bullying others whilst shouting about peaceful rise. No wonder you’re obsessed about Anwar, otak letak dalam tupperware (kalau ada otak la). Since you chose to comment from that perspective, let’s jog the memory lane for a while. Anwar promised so many things and will continue to promise many more, otherwise macam mana nak pastikan ‘api perjuangan’ melayu2 anti-GST (tapi tak tahu apa itu GST) yg sokong pakatan utk terus buat demonstrasi jalanan kan? ‘Api perjuangan’ tu penting, so selagi boleh tipu, tipu je lah.

      Kurang ketirisan jika pengurusan duit ditukar kepada negeri? Why must be so pessimistic? Kalau Husam Musa dulu boleh keluar kenyataan nak carigali minyak atas tanah di Kelantan, why sampai hari ni pun cangkul tak nampak lagi? Pi gali lah. Bijak mengurus? Dulu masa zaman krisis kewangan 1997-1998, ramai ahli-ahli ‘ekonomi’ PAS yang kutuk Kerajaan Pusat dan bagi macam-macam ‘idea bernas’ kononnya untuk selamatkan ekonomi Malaysia. Maklumlah, itulah zaman PAS sibuk dakwa ramai golongan professional masuk PAS. So, kalau ramai sangat yang bijak pandai, kenapa dari dulu sampai sekarang PAS sibuk merengek pasal duit royalti? Kenapa PAS tiada strategi ekonomi yang mapan untuk menarik pelaburan asing ke negeri Kelantan? Wujud peluang pekerjaan dan suasana ekonomi yang kondusif? Kenapa ahli-ahli PAS bebal sangat nak main watak budak kena dera? Sampai bila? Kalau UMNO tahan duit, bijak-pandai PAS sepatutnya gunakan peluang untuk tunjuk yang tanpa duit royalti minyak pun, PAS boleh bangunkan Kelantan hasil dayafikir golongan professional yang melambak dalam PAS. Tariklah minat para pelabur asing dari Timur Tengah, negara-negara Arab yang Islamik dan kaya petro-dollar untuk melabur di serambi Mekah, for sure they’ll feel more at home in Kota Bharu than Kuala Lumpur yang bergelumang dengan maksiat kan? Ajak la pak-pak Arab buat projek. Bukan ke orang-orang Kelantan semua pandai berniaga? Rather than prove that PAS is capable to progressively develop a state and is a credible, more ‘Islamic’ alternative to UMNO, PAS continue to merengek tak tentu pasal. If PAS can demonstrate that Kelantan is more prosperous in many ways under PAS ‘Islamic’ rule despite not having duit royalti minyak, a lot of other things can be achieved relatively easy including hudud, without resorting to publicity stunts like that non-viable dinar/dirham Kelantan. Kes HIV kat Kelantan pun tak boleh nak handle, how on earth you want to pioneer Islamic finance? Bila PKR dan DAP suruh turun padang, maka berjujuran lah semuanya keluar bawak anak-bini buat demo macam lembu kena cucuk hidung.

      Tanah Kelantan pun orang cakap telah digadai pada cina DAP Perak, nak urus sumber minyak? Silap hari bulan semua jual pada China. Kalau madrasah berumur lebih 100 tahun pun PAS Kedah cakap boleh roboh, sebab nak buat pusat beli-belah, tak tahu la apa lagi PAS sanggup jual-beli. Cuba pujuk Guan Eng untuk roboh rumah kedai di P. Pinang untuk buat surau, tengok apa rakan Pakatan tu jawab. Isu kalimah ‘Allah’ jangan cakapla, bayang-bayang PAS tak nampak langsung. Kalau dulu sanggup berbaring atas jalan bantah konsert dan cara hidup hedonistik, pehal kat Selangor angkat muka pun tak berani? Kalau dulu boleh anjur majlis doa ‘KO UMNO’ sampai penuh satu stadium, pehal PAS tak sanggup nak kumpul jemaah penuh dua stadium untuk doa Selangor bebas krisis air?

      Kalau bab ketirisan, PAS sendiri sudah parah ketirisan identiti dan jatidiri sendiri, jadi barua Anwar si Anugerah Tuhan. Dulu tak boleh kerjasama dengan kapir, sekarang kapir mati pun pi tunduk kepala. Bodo. You see, Sarawak is in a different position, along with Sabah, they have special arrangement within the Federation. Ketua Menteri Sarawak dan Sabah boleh halang Rafizi Jambu dari masuk negeri mereka, MB Kelantan boleh halang Shahrizat Lembu dari jumpa akak-akak kat Pasar Besar Siti Khadijah? So, if Sarawak asked for 20%, janganla perasan lebih sangat yang korang are at equal footing. Dulu masa perintah Kedah boleh sekat duit ADUN BN, sekarang korang meminta-minta pulak, memang tak tahu malu ya?

      Before Anwar can give 50%, tell Anwar to ask for a 300% raise to his salary as Penasihat Ekonomi Negeri Selangor from Tan Sri Khalid. Dia tak nak merasa gaji RM3 sebulan? But then again, Anwat promises soooooooo many things, dulu, kini dan selamanya.

      Ciao dahling!

      P.S. China is a thick-skin bully in the making.

  2. *Comment deleted

    You know you are no longer allowed to share your thoughts in here. Why still come?

    • Well done, Big Dog. The bloke should be given the Hudud treatment on his tongue. Been nasty any time anywhere he appears. Not one single bit of positive contribution to discussions at hand.

  3. Will some one work out the many billions of Ringgit spent on the defence of the country externally (military) and internally (Police) and other expenditures incurred by the Federal Government since the formation of Malaysia, and the proportion a State like Sarawak with a long coastline and land borders with Kalimantan should bear.

    Taking into account not just military hardware and Police weapons, but also detection devices, helicopter patrols, Police boats for travelling upstream into the interior still lacking in road access. Then show whether justifiable or not the royalty payments to them thus far.

    And provide an element for goodwill – the spirit of togetherness that obligates them to accept the principle the rich states helping the poorer states like Perlis and Malacca which are also member states of the Federation.

  4. And would some one work out the tax contribution made by the Kelantan State Government to the Federal Government in terms of items and services that are derived from other states.

    The number of factories in Kelantan, for example – how many of them producing goods and services that bring tax revenue to the Federal Government.

    Then work out the same as for Sarawak the Federal government defence and internal security expenditure that should be apportioned to Kelantan.

    Would some one tell that Husam to go round getting support from the Members of Parliament to amend the relevant act that he spoke about.

    Talk ko.. oops, he’s not related to Teresa Kok even via Hudud .. maybe he talks spenda only – he’s related to Stopa Spenda of the same party certainly.

  5. As far as I know, annual allocation given to Sabah and Sarawak are higher compared to the other states. In part, this is recognizing that the 2 states contribute more in term of petroleum revenue to the nation. If more royalty were given to the 2 states, should they not receive lower allocation?

    One more thing to consider is that Malaysian citizen has been moving around a lot. Sabahan and Sarawakian would still enjoy development in other states such as university students and migrant workers. In the long term, its about development all over the nation, not just for particular states.

  6. The blog post is on attempts to get a higher percentage of the oil royalty and the Chinese bullying in the South Chinese Sea.

    No other word fits the blocking of a Filipino ship sending supplies to their troops on an isolated island and the ramming of a Vietnamese ship by the Chinese Navy – bullying.

    And their maneuvres that included a fully armed task force staking a claim’ on James Shoal (Beting Serupai) 50 nautical miles off the coast of Sarawak are certainly menacing and should have sent some shivers through the spine of those proposing and passing the motion in the Sarawak State Assembly. .

    And should have jolted their minds on the Federal Government’s needs to have adequate funds to improve the defences of the country from such external threats. Imagine, China’s menacing just 50 miles away from the Sarawak coast.

    A resolution at the State Assembly so soon after Taib Mahmud left the CM’s post? Leading some people to ask whether it’s possible that he had wanted it – done in the rather unusual manner – but let the asking be done by his successor Adenan Satem to avoid nasty reactions like looking into the endless Opposition corruption accusations on him.

    However, as Taib has always delivered election successes for BN, and while stating I an not condoning corruption, I won’t comment on those beyond hoping that any further action on the oil royalty request should be dealt through negotiation and minus the hoo hah.

  7. On the Chinese menace, what can we do? And what are we doing?

    1. We can keep on denouncing them, shouting and yelling at them, demonstrating on the streets and elsewhere, fully complying with the PAA.

    But strange, none of such demos has happened. Especially the DAP and the Chinese tsunami people. Do their dislike for UMNO, the Malays, Islam etc = condoning mainland China’s evil acts against us = lack of loyalty and no patriotism to their country of adoption, as compared to their country of origin? If not, when can we see Lim Guan Eng no longer looking to Sun Yat Sen and China, but to our YDP Agong and Malaysia?

    2. It’s ridiculous to think of fighting China. But we certainly must do our utmost to defend our country and align ourselves with the relevant Super Powers for help in the event of armed conflict. The Five Power Defence Arrangements that came into force in 1971 is a loose consultative body although it has provided deterrence against others trying to monkey around us.

    But there was no real monkeying around like China is doing to day. UK may no longer be an “active” Super Power, but they are still a formidable force and needs to be relied upon for help. US may have their military presence in this region with the agreement signed with the Philippines, and in the Far East in their traditional role of protecting Taiwan, South Korea and the “war-renouncing” / militarily disadvantageous Japan. But where the TPPA affords Malaysia an opportunity to be under the US umbrella, why not. Many of the pros and cons to signing the TPPA are valid both ways, resulting in more or less equal weight to signing and not signing. But remember, having US at our back is better than having China. Or Anwar.

    3. Build up our military strength. A lot of discussion been going on and no harm in having more. Especially the kind that will jolt the minds of our political masters.

  8. China has not been great in history. China is not great now. And judging from the behaviour of the communist Chinese in the last 50-60 years, China will never be great.

    It’s a matter of their lacking a sense of responsibility. Worse than that, it’s plain, outright cheating, done since thousands of years ago, like said by professors of history and written about in past comments here. Done by no less than officials in the Emperors’ palaces, to suit certain socio-political objectives, bending and corrupting their own history in the process. Imagine that of a people who are now 1.2 billion in the world.

    And claiming to be the only ones civilized, being “the Middle Kingdom”, all around them and far away being “uncivilized”. Until in later times they realized those not being true, as pointed out by professors of history like Prof Wang Gung Wu. And, perhaps shamed, those in this country – the DAP members and supporters – even opposed History being taught in schools.

    They are still showing a lack of responsibility now – in the South China Seas. Whatever the basis of their claims to islands or rock outgrowths, they should be resorting to rules of internal law and leaving matters to the United Nations. Hell, they have been a member of the UN Security Council – one of five who can say no and a resolution will be aborted – in the same category as US, UK, France and Russia, they by virtue of being the most populous nation though not having contributed much to the winning of the Second World War.

    Yes, shout and yell at China, including on the streets to the extent allowed under the law. But, importantly, the Government must also protest by bringing the matter up at the United Nations. Individually, or through ASEAN, perhaps lobbying the other members jointly with the other aggrieved parties – Philippines, Brunei and Vietnam. Especially when Malaysia takes its turn as Chairman of ASEAN in 2005.

    • And do prepare for our case fully before bringing it to the United Nations. We must avoid losing again, like we did over Pulau Batu Putih to Singapore during Pak Lah’s time.

      Bringing the matter up to UN together with the Philippines, Brunei and Vietnam through ASEAN will ensure better chances of success. Jointly, we can engage the best of lawyers on international law in the world, conduct the most thorough of research pertaining to our rights on those islands and provide the most potent arguments on our cases. And most importantly, we would be having a voice as a group of independent nations that have been playing increasingly important role in maintaining peace and stability in our region. That which has now been threatened by the Chinese menace in the South China Sea.

      True, ASEAN is not a political but an economic co-operation grouping. But claims on those islands are very much economic as they pertain to the EEZ – oil, fishing rights etc.

      Question is: would DS Najib do it? He might not want to do it as Pak Lah’s image suffered quite a bit for the loss of Batu Putih. But doing it as a group through ASEAN increases our chances of winning. And such a huge accolade there will be to Najib if we win over Beting Serupai 50 miles off Sarawak – likely to be oil-rich in that EEZ.

    • There you go –

      “Asean voices concern over maritime tension with China

      Asean foreign ministers are speaking in one voice to express the grouping’s grave concern over incidents of maritime clashes between its members and China.

      The ministers said the issue has to be addressed as the region’s security “is at threat with the increased tension” in the area.

      To reflect the seriousness of the matter, the Asean ministers will issue a stand-alone statement on the South China Sea.

      Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman said the tension did not only affect claimant states but the entire region.

      The foreign ministers would also call for continuous engagement and urge all parties to act in accordance with international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.”

      But nobody talks about bringing the matter to UN. I support the idea.

      • The UN Security Council? Where China is a permanent member with the right of veto. I doubt that any UNSC resolution that China disapproves of is going to be passed.

        And now we have the government campaigning for Malaysia to be elected as one of the non-permanent members of the UNSC in the next round of elections to fill these seats.

        Of course, all the permanent members of the UNSC will have to concur in this.

        Including China.

        Anybody see the irony here?

      • No. But I see the baloney in your argument. Compromise and always kasi your bontot for whatever you want? Ever heard of integrity and arguing co-operation in other matters like, say, promising continued palm oil supplies that China badly needs to feed its hungry and need-to-be-oiled 1.2 billion people?

        So, you are saying it’s OK for China to be irresponsible and not subscribe to the rule of international law? You supporting China? You ever support Malaysia? Can you give examples?

        Where it directly involves its own interests, can China not take a different, though not necessarily opposing path? Ever heard such things as abstaining from any resolution being put out?

        It’s ok not to support Malaysia if you are not a citizen. Ever heard of such things as loyalty, nationalism and patriotism? Isn’t this a case of China claiming territories that Malaysia also claims? isn’t it clear where your loyalty should lie?

        Or you packed your bags already to cabut once you have enough money? Go to Canada, man, you don’t have to wait for enough money – they say they allow you to get employment while waiting for your pemanent residence card there.

  9. No such thing as China giving 20% oil royalty, no such thing as China gobbling Sarawak or any of our territories – the clearly demarcated land mass or even rocky outcrops jutting out from the sea.

    We’ll fight to the end to preserve Malaysia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Like has been done by nations all over the world for so many centuries.

    And nobody should have nasty ideas about getting out of the Federation that was formed after adequate determination of the wishes of the Sarawak and Sabah people under the Cobbold Commission and the Joint Committees.

    And there is no provision for secession by any state under the Constitution. Singapore did not secede but was “kicked out” by Tengku A Rahman. And any other leader wanting to “kick” out any state after this will himself get kicked out, I’m sure. Nations go to war to protect their territorial integrity and the citizens must go to war against any such leader who even thinks of doing a damn stupid Tengku A Rahman again.

    And let it be known that there are thousands of the Malaysian Police personnel and brigades of Malaysian troops – emphasis on the word Malaysian – in Sabah and Sarawak whose duties are to preserve the territorial integrity of this country against any threat, internal and/or external.

    Yes, Big Dog’s question in the above post is rhetorical and designed to show the folly of actions by politicians. But we need to react to show that loyalty, nationalism and patriotism exists and is pervasive among the citizens of this country.

    • Well, just where does rhetoric meet reality?

      Are we looking for our own “Winston Churchill” who can emulate what he did for Britain in the dark days of Nazi aggression and the Battle of Britain?

      Or has modern technology totally changed the face of military doctrines and strategies? Where electronics and cyber warfare outweigh boots on the ground and where air power and missiles can reduce a country’s infrastructure to rubble?

      As for Singapore – it’s telling, isn’t it, that it is now courted as a source of investments and skills, even by Malaysia?

      Maybe the Tunku was way more far-sighted than people give him credit for!

      • Don’t talk about Tengku A Rahman, man – it only shows you are as stupid and nuts as the old man, willing to give away a piece of prized territory for free. And I agree that throughout history nations went to war to protect and preserve their territorial integrity and national sovereignty.

        Again, have you heard those words? What school you went to – Chinese schools? Never learnt history? Don’t like history? Like the DAP that even opposed History being made compulsory in schools? Don’t want the younger generation to know that they caused the race riots of 1969?

        Glamourizing Singapore again? What’s it with you? Your balls squeezed by LKY every time you wanna come out here?

        What “courted as a source of investments and skills, even by Malaysia” you talkin’ about? Ever heard Najib and LSL talking about economic co-operation, jointly promoting opportunities in each other’s territories? Singapore has unlimited investment funds? Temasik still got a lot? Didn’t read about the foreign investors in Singapore also wanting to invest in Malaysia in synergistic industries? Where have you been all this while – Republic of Congo?

        See, I have not accused you, have I? Only asking you questions. But you don’t have answers c/w solid and verifiable facts, only opinions. And my opinions are as good as yours. Even better. I say so and I m right. Mentioning Churchill and all as if you are well read. I am – I read your intention and nonsense well, hehe.

      • “Are we looking for our own “Winston Churchill” – are you a Malaysian?

        But you don’t sound a Red Bean by using single question marks and exclamation marks – Red Beans always use multiple ???????? and !!!!!!

        But Singapore-adoring and Tengku-admiring, maybe you are an ordinary DAP or DAP-ish fellow.

        Anyway, when commenting without offending, no problem.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: