- Much has changed since Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore formed the pact, primarily to protect the two Southeast Asian countries
- While leaders insist it still has value and there are mutual advantages, questions have emerged about its relevance in the face of new groupings like Aukus Come Monday, the world’s second-oldest military pact will turn 50.
The Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) was formed in 1971 after the British withdrawal east of the Suez Canal, with the primary aim of protecting former colonies Malaysia and Singapore in a region that was fraught with conflict.
The two Southeast Asian countries are grouped with Britain, Australia and New Zealand, and members are obliged to consult one another in the event of an armed attack.
Much has changed since then. Tensions in the region have cooled, Malaysia and Singapore’s military capabilities have grown significantly, and the chances of such threats are slim.
In this new climate, fresh questions over the pact have emerged. What role will it now play and how can it stay relevant amid the formation of headline groupings such as the Aukus agreement between Britain, Australia and the United States?
For one, leaders are bullish that the FPDA still has its value. New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said in a celebratory video marking the golden jubilee that the pact has come far, expanding from traditional security needs to including more contemporary ones. This adaptability, she said, is key to taking on future threats.
In the same video, Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the FPDA has provided a valuable security umbrella to Malaysia and Singapore, touting it as an “established and accepted way” for partners to contribute to the region. “Fifty years on, the world and our region have vastly changed. Yet, the FPDA retains its relevance and value,” he added. “I am confident that the Arrangements will remain relevant and effective for many years to come.”
Likewise, observers spoke of the FPDA as a quiet but steely grouping. Military exercises have evolved through the decades, they noted, and this momentum will only grow in strength as the five nations look to further the scope of collaboration while possibly involving more countries in the post-Aukus era.
Born out of instability
Sarah Teo, an assistant professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, said the FPDA was formed at a rocky time for Southeast Asia. It came in the wake of the Confrontation, better known as Konfrontasi, a three-year period starting in 1963 when Indonesia waged war to oppose the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.
There was also the ongoing Vietnam war and communist insurgency in Malaysia, she said. The agreement was thus formed to support the defence of newly-independent Malaysia and Singapore.
“At that time, there was still some nervousness about what Indonesia might do. The FPDA sought to provide some assurance to Malaysia and Singapore,” added John Blaxland, professor of international security and intelligence studies at the Australian National University.
Over the years, even as the defences of Malaysia and Singapore become more sophisticated, the pact has proved to be “remarkably resilient”, he said.
The Asian-Anglosphere grouping has persistently kept up its cooperation through evolving regional dynamics even though it may not be as high profile as other arrangements, added Teo.
It continues to serve as a forum through which countries exchange views on pertinent regional security issues while strengthening relations. On the agenda now are things like counterterrorism, counter-piracy and humanitarian and disaster relief efforts. “The FPDA still matters today,” she stated.
Earlier this month, Britain’s armed forces minister James Heappey pointed out that the agreement was founded on “really close friendships” which was why it could survive for five decades.
“I can’t see a world in which close friendships go out of fashion and ever become irrelevant,” he said. “In fact, I think the geopolitical shifts in the world tell us that friendships of this sort become ever more relevant.”
Mutual advantages
Since the 1970s, the five member countries have held multilateral exercises that have expanded in scope and complexity, incorporating air, sea and land components. Among these is Exercise Bersama Lima, which translates to “Five Together” in Malay. This year’s edition of the two-week drill – renamed to “Bersama Gold 2021” to mark the pact’s 50th anniversary – involved some 2,600 personnel, ships and fighter jets that performed anti-air and anti-submarine exercises.
Meanwhile, Australia still stations personnel and assets in Malaysia, including a rifle company. Earlier official documents note that the initial focus was for the protection of Malaysia’s Butterworth airbase, but the emphasis has since shifted to training and bilateral exercises.
Blaxland, the ANU professor, said the multilateral exercises allow Malaysia and Singapore to benchmark how well their militaries compare to the others. “Basically, they can test and adjust their procedures and capabilities. It’s a honing activity,” he said.
For Britain, Australia and New Zealand, these drills allow them to contribute to regional security and remain highly engaged with Southeast Asia, which is in line with their national interests.
Anisa Heritage, senior lecturer at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, added that the FPDA played well into Britain’s “tilt” towards the Indo-Pacific.
She pointed to how the recent seven-month deployment of a British carrier strike group to the region demonstrated its commitment to work with regional partners including Malaysia and Singapore. The group, led by Britain’s new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, had made a stop in the city state earlier this month.
Britain, she said, plans to follow that up with a deployment of a littoral response group, comprising dedicated ships and helicopters, to the Indo-Pacific from 2023.
Euan Graham, senior fellow for Asia Pacific security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, suggested that Malaysia is likely to have benefited the most from the grouping. It gains an external defence quasi-guarantee from the FPDA despite spending “very little” on improving its own defence capabilities unlike Singapore, which has developed Southeast Asia’s most capable armed forces, he said.
Still, he noted that there are mutual advantages for all five member nations, otherwise the pact would not have endured for 50 years. “In today’s context, I think the FPDA is enjoying a resurgence, as its core focus on conventional war-fighting appears more relevant for a regional security situation where armed conflict between major powers remains a risk,” he said.
“The big and positive change from 1971, however, is that Indonesia is no longer perceived to be the primary threat factor for the security of Malaysia and Singapore. Things have come a long way since Konfrontasi in the 1960s.”
At the 11th FPDA Defence Ministers’ Meeting this month, the participants stressed that the grouping was not targeted at any particular country. “There is no singular threat we face,” said Hishammuddin Hussein, Malaysia’s senior defence minister.
But the region grapples with potential flashpoints, including terrorism, transnational crime and unintended incidents in the high seas, he said. One key priority moving forward would be cybersecurity collaboration.
Yet, even as the grouping evolves, defence ministers emphasised that the remit and mandate of the FPDA remained the same – for the external defence of Malaysia and Singapore.
Malaysian Defence Minister Hishammuddin Hussein speaks during the opening of the Five Power Defence Arrangements meeting in Kuala Lumpur on October 21. Photo: AP
Old agreement, new challenges
With the 50th anniversary of the FPDA coming just weeks after the unveiling of the Aukus pact – which two of its members are part of – some have questioned how the decades-old agreement would be affected.
Defence analysts said members of the FPDA could stand to gain. While some reports have described Aukus as escalatory, Blaxland highlighted that it was in fact a “technical agreement and not an alliance”, noting that Australia was already a US ally. That way, the FPDA and Aukus can be viewed as complementary, he said.
“It is not an either-or, it is not a zero-sum arrangement,” Blaxland added. Arguably, by bolstering Australia’s capabilities, Aukus would benefit Malaysia and Singapore as the two Southeast Asian countries conduct drills and training with Australian assets.
Similarly, Graham said Aukus has “some positives” for the FPDA since it bolsters the commitment of Britain and Australia to regional security and to maintaining a high level of military capability. But it was incumbent on the two countries to persuade their Southeast Asian partners that Aukus is not an alternative to the FPDA and that it does not pose a threat of nuclear proliferation, he pointed out.
Some Southeast Asian countries, including Malaysia, have aired concerns that the trilateral agreement could spark a nuclear arms race. Under the Aukus deal, Britain and the US will share nuclear submarine technology with Australia.
Heritage also felt that both the FPDA and Aukus are relevant and not a “binary choice”. The two arrangements are indicative of Britain’s efforts to sustain a “package of complementary and overlapping arrangements” in the wider Indo-Pacific region, be it bilateral, trilateral or multilateral ones, she said.
A combined formation of fighter jets perform a flypast to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA). Photo: Reuters
Remaining intact
After clocking five decades, what lies ahead for the FPDA? Graham said the greatest challenge it faces is how to maintain its internal coherence. The grouping struggles with political commitment.
To a large extent, its effectiveness depends on Malaysia’s resolve because it has been the primary host for exercises. “At the political level, Malaysia’s commitment is more patchy as Kuala Lumpur treads carefully on military matters and is especially sensitive to China’s reactions, or anticipated reactions,” added Graham.
Another potential challenge would be how to accommodate the interests of countries like Indonesia, against which the FPDA was originally constructed, said Blaxland.
Indonesia has sent liaison officers to observe the grouping’s activities but Blaxland suggested more could be done. This could be in the form of creating a second-tier arrangement where Indonesia could play a more substantial role. After all, Indonesia shares similar interests, geography and regional maritime challenges as Malaysia and Singapore, he said.
These points were also raised by Malaysia’s Hishammuddin. He felt that the biggest challenge was how to “keep us intact”, and how the organisation could expand its influence outside the FPDA.
Ultimately, Blaxland said it was important to note that even as the FPDA has been successful, it is “not like a Swiss-army knife which you can use for everything”.
“It has limited utility. It’s never going to form an alliance for war but it’s a useful platform for countries to cooperate,” he said. “It is not too much, not too hot, not too strong – just enough to keep everybody happy and engaged for another 50 years, who knows?”
By Dewey Sim / South China Morning Post
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of AsiaWEReview.
