Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Singapore dismisses paper's insinuation

The Straits Times, January 24, 2007

SINGAPORE said its communications facilities in Thailand are solely for maintaining contact with SAF troops training there and are open to the Thai authorities.

In a statement issued last night, the Ministry of Defence dispelled claims that Singapore is abusing its access to training facilities in Thailand and in other countries.

It was responding to media queries about an article published in Thai newspaper The Nation yesterday in which Professor Des Ball, a defence analyst at the Australian National University, said Singapore's takeover of the Thaicom satellite and AIS mobile phone company is a 'tragedy' for Thailand's defence communications network and should be blocked if possible.

Part of the problem, Prof Ball said, was that 'Singapore has a track record of taking advantage of information for commercial and political purposes'.

Singapore had 'listened to and photographed Australian military facilities', which had created diplomatic rifts, he said.

'They have a history of abusing their access to training in other facilities abroad,' he was quoted as saying.

Mindef spokesman Colonel Benedict Lim said in the statement: 'Singapore is grateful to Thailand for the access given to the Singapore Armed Forces to train there. We fully respect and abide by the laws and requirements of the Thai Government in using their training facilities.

'The SAF has communications facilities at Sai Yok camp. These are solely for maintaining communications with SAF troops training in the field.

'The Sai Yok camp and its operations room where the SAF communications equipment is located are open to the Royal Thai Army, Sai Yok camp commander and his staff.

'Singapore and Thailand have an open, friendly and cooperative defence relationship that spans many years. Desmond Ball's claim that Singapore has a history of abusing its access to training facilities in Thailand and in other countries is mischievous and has no basis in fact.'

No comments: