Bridge over troubled waters
JOCELINE TAN 
February 19, 2006
The Star

It has been called the scenic bridge and crooked bridge, but Malaysia has decided to go ahead and build its half of the controversial bridge over the Johor Strait. JOCELINE TAN looks at the arguments behind the decision that caught the Singapore side off-guard. 

DATUK Ghani Othman must have felt that he had come full circle when he learnt that Malaysia was going ahead with the bridge project. 

Ghani had been Johor Mentri Besar for barely a year when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad arrived in Johor Baru to launch a waterfront project. 

That was when the idea of a bridge was mooted, and in quite typical Mahathir style, the former Premier told the media that, yes, it was his hope that one day, the causeway would be replaced by a bridge. 

He had said it rather casually but, as folk on both sides of the causeway know all too well, nothing is ever really casual about Dr Mahathir. 

“I remember being quite excited. Knowing Dr Mahathir, the willpower is always there,” said Ghani. 

That was in July 1996. Now, close to a decade on, Malaysia has decided to go ahead with or without Singapore’s agreement. 

Malaysia intends to build its portion of the bridge and, more significant, Putrajaya recently gave the green light for work to start on the bridge. 

Ghani’s response to the news was plain relief. 

“It's been 10 years of waiting,” he said. 

The structure curves in a soft V-shape from the Johor side to the mid-point of the existing causeway. It has also been called a variety of names –crooked bridge, half bridge and, more recently, scenic bridge. 

Ghani, not exactly famous for a sense of humour, said: “I prefer to call it the bridge.” 

But Dr Mahathir, rather cheekily, asked whether the scenic bridge was spelt as “c-y-n-i-c..” 

Still, the elder statesman was pleased as punch. 

“If you want to wait (till Singapore agreed) you can wait till kingdom come,” he had added 

Said a Johor Umno figure: “I think Putrajaya got fed-up. The talks seemed to be going on forever.”  

Singapore has asked for official clarification on the situation but it is evident the island state was caught off-guard by the Malaysian decision. 

Talks between the two countries were still going on when Malaysia took the unilateral decision. 

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Syed Albar has indicated that talks for a full bridge over the Johor Strait would continue.  

And meanwhile, there was no reason why Malaysia could not build its end of the bridge. It is Malaysia’s right and sovereignty, Syed Hamid said, to carry out work in her own territorial water and land area. 

“The scenic bridge is not a subject of negotiation,” he said referring to Singapore's request for the sale of sand from Malaysia and the use of Malaysian airspace as trade-offs. 

So why does Malaysia want the bridge whereas Singapore does not seem so keen? 

Malaysia’s reasons revolve largely around the fact that the bridge is part of the mega-infrastructure that includes the customs, immigration and quarantine (CIQ) complex that is nearing completion. 

The project would help ease cross-strait traffic congestion as well as that in Johor Baru, boost economic growth, ease pollution in the straits and make it more accessible to sea vessels. 

Singapore’s reluctance is reportedly connected to the cost of financing a project which it finds less than necessary.  

They are not convinced about the argument behind the pollution in the strait. They also claim that they are not worried about greater access to Johor’s Tanjong Pelepas port because efficiency is still the key factor in port growth. 

“It’s not as though it’s the Isthmus of Kra,” one Singapore official had said. 

But it is no secret that both countries are keen rivals in the modern world especially when it comes to foreign investments, commercial growth and tourism. 

The circumstances of the 1965 separation continue to bring a touchy edge to almost everything that happens between the two countries, including discussions on the bridge. 

Malaysians find Singaporeans patronising whereas Singaporeans think Malaysia is trying to play the “big brother.” 

After so many years, both sides are still learning how to live with each other. 

“It’s not a question of one-upmanship. They are still not sure of who we are. We appreciate their need for water but they have to learn to respect what we want,” said Johor Baru MP Datuk Shahrir Samad. 

Shahrir, who had been against the bridge, seems to have come around to the idea. 

“I’m happy to be proven wrong,” he said. 

The outspoken MP was invited to join the annual “golf diplomacy” meet of the two foreign ministries in Singapore earlier this month. 

In between the fun and games, Shahrir told some of his golf partners what he thought of Singapore’s sand and airspace request in exchange for agreeing to a full bridge. 

“It’s like saying, okay, we’ll cooperate to build a garden fence between our homes but you have to let me use your toilet and allow me to park my car in your driveway.” 

Former Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Musa Hitam said it a little more humorously during a talk in Singapore last month. 

“Please believe me, those kampung fellas over there, they have become very clever, they know how to count and strategise. Don’t talk down to them, stop patronising them and, most of all, don’t mistake their politeness for submissiveness,” said Musa. 

There was a moment of stunned silence before the audience burst into applause. 

But perhaps the most encouraging sign that ties are on a new level is the public civility despite the bumps and humps – there were alleged reports of tall poppy behaviour and walk-outs – during talks between the two countries. 

Much of the credit has to go to the top leadership of the two states. 

The impeccable décorum on the part of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has helped to forge the civility.  

He has made a very clear stand on the half-bridge but he has not tried to score political points by fuelling debate on it. 

Government ties aside, the ordinary citizens on both sides have a much more symbiotic relationship than their leaders would care to admit. 

The spending power of Singaporeans is important to the local economy of Johor whereas the islanders benefit from the value-for-money shopping and dining-out in Johor. 

“We can’t run away from it. They eat here, shop here and even buy property here. Local businesses feel it when things are tense between us. You can immediately see fewer Singapore number-plates in JB,” said Ayer Itam MP Dr Wee Ka Siong. 

Both sides watch each other's TV stations so much so that Astro reportedly had difficulty penetrating the Johor market. 

“We used to joke that some Johorians watch Singapore channels so regularly that they can probably sing Majulah Singapura (the Singapore national anthem) as well as our own Negaraku,” said Dr Wee. 

And if Dr Wee seems particularly sensitive to the state of bilateral ties, it is because his constituency produces agricultural goods which are exported to Singapore. 

“Yes, some of the so-called ‘Singapore lychee’ (rambutan) and orchids that Singapore re-exports as its own comes from my constituency,” he said with a laugh. 

The Malaysian side is unfazed by talk that a half bridge will be an awkward testimony to the often testy relations between Malaysia and Singapore. 

“But I still hope it will be a straight bridge otherwise it'll be the Eighth Wonder of the World,” said Dr Wee. 

At the same time, there are many Malaysians who would not mind an Eighth Wonder.  

Source: http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/columnists/2006/2/19/joceline/13419954&sec=Joceline