ASK YOURSELF IS TONY PUA PROVIDING PRECIOUS INFORMATION OR VICIOUS MANIPULATION?

I have learned that some misconceptions exist about Tony Pua’s views on Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), which I will attempt to correct here. Relying on a half of dozen research and development reports into Naval shipbuilding projects and other evidence from variety of defence scholars and industry expert sources, I adopt a prosecutorial stance to put Tony Pua on trial. ASK YOURSELF IS TONY PUA PROVIDING PRECIOUS INFORMATION OR VISCIOUS MANIPULATION? Using Economics of Complex Weapon Procurements and evidences provided by experts in the field, I bring charges against Tony Pua and let the reader, as juror; decide if the evidence supports the finding of guilty as charged for the accused of the latter.

It is undeniable that the Malaysian Navy is acquiring Gowind which is a TYPE of monohull corvette develop since 2006 by DCNS. It is specifically designed to operate in littoral zone with capability for emerging missions such as anti-piracy, sea control and denial, combat, counter-terrorism, drug interdiction and anti-smuggling operations, oil and gas platform protection, search and rescue, fisheries protection, environmental protection and humanitarian support. The Gowind is designed for simplicity and for easy customizing to the client navy's requirements including local in-country shipbuilding under technology transfer agreements. The Malaysian Navy will equip the Gowind with improved command and control systems, advanced electronic warfare capabilities, three-dimensional radar, surface and air warfare missiles, and a torpedo defense system. AS A RESULT OF THIS ADDED CAPABILITY, THE SHIPS WILL BE CLASSED AS LITTORAL COMBAT SHIPS RATHER THAN OFFSHORE PATROL VESSELS (OPV). Even the leading defence intelligence magazine FORECAST INTERNATIONAL had classed the new Malaysian ships as Littoral Combat Ships when it ran an article entitled “Increased Capability For New Malaysian Frigates” which was published in February 2011. What is Tony Pua trying to proof when he said “We would now like to call upon MINDEF to ‘call a spade a spade’ and stop the attempt to disguise our acquisition with fancy names to justify their substantial cost.” There are much type of playing cards and just as many spades. The German uses blade, the Italian uses sword and the French uses the standard symbol to resemble a spade. Which one are you referring to Tony? Obviously MINDEF isn’t playing from the same deck of cards as yours.

The decision to split the cost of the ships between two Malaysia Plans (RMK) was announced by the government on Feb 2011. The declaration was made in response to Tony’s blind accusation that Malaysia will be paying 870 percent more for the ship than other countries. Malaysian Navy Chief had explained in great length the intricacies of shipbuilding and professionally justified the cost of the ships. Readers interested for more details of his statements should visit http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/155616. FORECAST INTERNATIONAL also published an article “Increased Capability For New Malaysian Frigates” in February 2011. The article also mentioned the fallacy of Tony’s calculation on the cost of the ship and stated that the budget will be spread between two (RMK). The article asserted:

“News of the added capabilities was released in response to accusations by Malaysian Member of Parliament Tony Pua that the six ships would cost 870 percent more than equivalents purchased by other countries. He arrived at that figure by comparing the MYR6 billion ($1,975 million) cost of the six new ships with the MYR211 million ($69.5 million) paid by New Zealand for its OPVs. HOWEVER, HIS FIGURES DO NOT ADD UP. The Malaysian Navy will be paying roughly $330 million per ship for its new acquisitions. While this is a bit less than five times the cost paid by New Zealand, the ships are dramatically different in power and capability.”

Tony Pua is not “scholarship material” for defence capability planning and military science. To estimate the real cost of the ship with certainty is like trying to nail jelly to the wall. It is hidden behind the veil of complex weapon system, bonded by its own set of rules and regulations where technological changes will be transient and fixed cost illusory. Tony Pua’s attempt to decode complex weapon system procurement has not been backed by any concrete evidence other than parroting baseless comparison, which does not make sense. Information without evidence is like the cortical cataract that clouds one’s thinking and fosters the perception of negativity towards defence establishment.

Tony had also made comments, which was covered in THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER - CALL NAVAL PATROL SHIPS BY ACTUAL TERM PUA TELLS PUTRAJAYA that the LCS is a specific type of ship built to a specific length, speed and design by the US Navy. At 115-127 meters in length and 2,800 – 3,100 tons of displacement, US LCS ship designs are almost the size of a Britain Type 23 Frigates (which he purposely omitted in his recent comment). If it was to be classified base on its design they might well be classified as frigates however it is classified as LCS for it is designed to operate and employed in shallow water. Therefore the issues are not that of specific length, speed or design but the role of the ship. I could never fathom why Malaysian had swallowed whole Tony Pua’s accusations regarding defence procurement when he does not have the military training needed to qualify him to serve as a private soldier in the Malaysian Armed Forces. I am forced to worry that Malaysian politics is suffering from shortages of thinking citizens.

He had also mentioned that the Malaysian ship was shorter when compared to LCS version of US Navy. Consideration of homeport becomes fundamental in determining the ships size as homeport is the port best suited to provide maintenance and restock weaponry particular to ships of that class and build. On conclusion of a tour of duty, a combat vessel returning to port will usually return to its homeport. Should the size of the ships be bigger, than the homeport would have to be build to meet the Naval ship requirement. This could proof to be very costly and will drive the price of the ship higher. Besides the size “the Petaling Jaya Utara MP noted MINDEF officials said the top speed for Malaysia’s patrol ships could only reach 28 knots, which was lower than the 40 to 45 knots of the standard LCS”.

Speed has its advantage however it holds more threat than promise. The disadvantage is that speed requires great power. By choosing high speed the Navy has consciously chosen to accept lower carrying capacity and endurance. The impact on endurance is illustrated by the fact LCS’s cruising range of around 4,000 nautical miles (nm) at 20 knots reduces to 1,500 nm at 45 knots. Recent survey conducted by Congressional Budget Office discovered that US Navy operates LCS at relatively low speed - 10 knots or less 90 percent of the time it is under way and 30 knots or more only about 3 percent of the time.

Consequently, any mission that requires extensive use of speed will significantly limit the ship’s unrefueled time on station. Restrictions on payload and fuel capacity (including aviation fuel) mean that the LCS will require considerable logistical support for the provisioning of fuel, ammunition, perishable foods and other consumables. The Navy will almost certainly need to give greater thought to how the ships can be supported when operating at distance from base areas, including the provision of “mother ships” to support squadron operations. The support of high-speed ships requirements is just too costly for Malaysia to bear. In tactical sense, The more frequent the refueling, the more often the ship has to retire to a safe area for replenishment and the more effort should go into protecting the chain of tankers which ultimately provides the fuel. Refueling itself is always a time of increased vulnerability, for instance to submarine attack.

What Tony Pua and other opposition politician is doing reminds me of the ultimate transformation of good into evil, the metamorphosis of Lucifer into Satan. From the light bearer to a liar, an empty imposter who uses boasts, spears, trumpets, and banner, an exact description of opposition party leaders and their followers. They were the people’s light bearer overtaken to make self his only good by turning away from speaking the truth, evidenced through Satan success in tempting Adam and Eve to disobey God and be led into evil. They fear evil, but are fascinated by it. They create myths of evil conspiracies and come to believe them enough to mobilize forces against them. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Half truth is often a great lie.” They reject the “other’ as different, deceitful and dangerous because it is unknown, yet they are thrilled by contemplating sexual access and violations of moral codes. In short, Irving Sarnoff aphorism, “Evil is knowing better but doing worse”, fits best to summarized the description provided about opposition parties leaders and their followers.

The good news about human nature is about what we as individuals can do to challenge the manipulation of information that was spitted like venom to you. Every man and women is capable of resisting it and not yield to temptation. The only way to bottle that magic is by understanding, however intuitive the layers of mental organization that must be exploded to make sense of the issue. Despite having the capacity to resist most give in and only few rebel, however once you become aware of the congruence between right and wrong, you cannot see only one and not the other. “Am I capable of resisting the manipulation?” is the question that you must consider over and over again as we journey together to alien universe of defence procurement.