They have moved the Terrexes out of the docks now, so its not good news. It will mean the PRC has no intention to quickly return them.
[h=1]Seized SAF vehicles moved to cargo examination compound: HK media[/h]
SINGAPORE — The Hong Kong authorities have moved the seized Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) vehicles away from the port for storage, the territory’s media reported on Friday (Nov 25), raising questions about whether they will be returned expeditiously, as Singapore has requested.
Meanwhile, the incident widened on Friday, when China waded into the fray, saying it had noticed the news reports of the seized Terrex Infantry Carrier Vehicles (ICVs) and was verifying them. However, a Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman sidestepped questions from reporters at a routine press briefing about whether Singapore had contacted Beijing on the issue and what would happen to the nine armoured vehicles next.
Nevertheless, the spokesman, Mr Geng Shuang, said: “All ships that enter Hong Kong should follow the laws of the Special Administrative Region. We oppose countries that have diplomatic relations with us to have any form of official exchanges with Taiwan, including defence cooperation.”
On Friday, Hong Kong’s Oriental Daily News published reports — complete with pictures and a video — of the vehicles being moved in the early hours under police escort to Hong Kong Customs’ cargo examination compound at the River Trade Terminal.
On Friday night, a team from the SAF was expected to reach Hong Kong to “address the security of the equipment”, said Singapore’s Ministry of Defence (Mindef). The Singapore Consulate General in Hong Kong is also assisting in the matter.
In its second public statement on the incident in as many days, the ministry said the SAF contracted APL as the commercial shipping line to transport nine Terrex ICVs and associated equipment to Singapore. APL is a unit of shipping giant CMA CGM Group, which bought over homegrown company Neptune Orient Lines earlier this year.
Mindef said that all commercial shipping lines used by the SAF are required to “comply with stringent requirements for protection against theft and tampering of equipment during the shipment, in addition to applying for all relevant permits”.
“These requirements have worked well and there have been no incidents of losses, theft or tampering over the years,” Mindef said. It added that the SAF will review the circumstances of the incident and determine if added measures are required.
The seizure of the Terrex vehicles — which were shipped from Taiwan — made headlines on Thursday after Hong Kong media, including the South China Morning Post (SCMP), broke the news.
Mindef said that during the transit through Hong Kong, “customs officials raised queries if the necessary permits and declarations by APL were in order and in the process detained the Terrex ICVs”.
It added that APL officials have assured the SAF that they are working with Hong Kong authorities to resolve the issue.
Mindef said that APL was required to adhere to all regulations, including declaring the equipment it transports in the ship’s cargo manifest and obtaining the permits needed to transit through ports. “The nine Terrex ICVs are training platforms with no ammunition or sensitive equipment on board,” the ministry said.
Responding to media queries, an APL spokesperson said the firm was extending its full cooperation to the Hong Kong authorities and working with the various stakeholders. “The matter is pending discussion and we are unable to comment further,” the spokesperson said. Nevertheless, the company is “committed to ensuring cargo security as well as full compliance with all regulatory and trade requirements in its conduct of business”.
EXPERTS WEIGH IN
Meanwhile, an SCMP report on Friday claimed that the incident was at the centre of “diplomatic tension between Singapore and China” over Singapore’s military exchanges with Taiwan. The report quoted unidentified sources as saying that Singapore would need to contact the Chinese Ministry of Foreign *Affairs to secure the return of the vehicles.
Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong was quoted as saying: “Singapore will probably be in big trouble this time because Beijing could use this chance to give the city-state a hard time (in retaliation for) Singapore’s stand on the South China Sea issue.”
However, political and security experts TODAY spoke to played down such a prospect. They also pointed out that military exchanges between Singapore and Taiwan have spanned decades with China’s knowledge.
Associate Professor Li Mingjiang, from the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said Beijing did not need to use the incident to pressure Singapore, when other channels, both formal and informal, are available.
He added: “We’ve not seen really seen any notable signs … that Beijing is very upset about Singapore’s military training activities in Taiwan. I’ve not heard such complaints from Chinese officials or policy elites.”
On Mr Geng’s comments, he noted that Chinese officials were bound to respond to the media in a manner that emphasises the “one China” principle.
Dr Lam Peng Er, a senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute, said that Singapore’s military training in Taiwan was due to space constraints on the island-state, and it was “very clear” to China that it was not intended to provoke.
On the South China Sea issue, Professor James Tang, a political scientist at the Singapore Management University, noted that the temperature has gone down a notch, and “it doesn’t help China’s case to be too harsh on Singapore”.
Referring to Mr Geng’s comments, another SCMP report claimed the seizure could be a “strategic calculation” by Beijing to send “a warning shot” to Singapore.
But Mr Xu Guangyu, a retired major-general in the Chinese military, felt it was a “simple incident” that should not be played up. “It does trigger speculation in such an international atmosphere, but I believe it is an accident, not something done on purpose to create tension,” Mr Xu told the SCMP. “Even if China wants to send Singapore a signal, there are numerous ways and channels. This case as leverage is just too loose and weak.”