NASA’s Terra satellite captures a true-color image of the Strait of Hormuz, December 2, 2020. (MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA GSFC via Wikimedia)
On April 7, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs (MFA), stated that Singapore would not negotiate with Iran concerning the shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz. This announcement was stated by the minister during an oral reply to a supplementary question session, following the query from member of parliament (MP) Muhammad Fadli bin Mohammed Fawzi.
Balakrishnan emphasised Singapore’s firm and consistent position that the Strait of Hormuz, like the Strait of Malacca, is used for international navigation, “There is a right of transit passage. It is not a privilege to be granted by the bordering state, it is not a licence to be supplicated for, it is not a toll be paid. It is a right of ships to traverse,” the Minister said.
The minister also underlined the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in which Singapore is a party. Its refusal to negotiate ship routes would further erode the legal right of transit passage.
However, this stance drew sharp criticism from Malaysia. Nurul Izzah Anwar, the deputy head of Malaysia’s People’s Justice Party, said that Dr Vivian’s statement was ‘revealing and regrettable’. She argued that Singapore’s MFA position opposed the principle of neutrality and rather showing more tendency to align with other external powers, risking violating ASEAN’s enshrined stance of neutrality.
Both Singapore and Malaysia diverge in their approaches to the US-Israeli war on Iran. Malaysia currently pushes necessary diplomatic mechanisms to de-escalate tension, while strongly condemning the attack of the US and Israeli actions against Iran.
Meanwhile, Singapore adopts a more cautious and pragmatic stance. While urging conflicting parties to resort to dialogue, it strictly adheres to United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions.
About The Author
