SGPV: A STRATEGIC SPEAR

The recent spate concerning the awarding of contract to Boustead Shipyard to built 6 x Second Generation Patrol Vessel – Littoral Combat Ship (SGPV-LCS) with Defense Minister and Opposition MP trading garbs at each other became front page new all over the country.

The crux of the contention has been the cost of building the sanctioned 6 x SGPV-LCS reportedly at RM 6 billion in total. While the Defense Minister defended the cost of purchase, opposition MP Tony Pua pointed out that the actual cost should be much lower by citing examples from other navies patrol vessel.

The defense of the realm is of paramount importance whereby strategic, operational and tactical plans are of utmost secrecy. However the same cannot be said of defense purchases of systems/platforms, since the citizens are the stakeholders of the system/platforms purchased under the ambit of national defense or security concern.

This is clear when the Defense Minister announced the contract amount awarded to Boustead Shipyard in the tune of RM 6 billion for the 6 ships. It must be noted at this juncture that any government throughout the world is at liberty not to reveal the detail specification of the systems/platforms, in order to keep the element surprise intact. Military planners prior to acquisition of a system/platform will conduct a “threat analysis and “threat scenario”. This exercise is designed to update the security apparatus with the current regional scenario, military equabilirium, strike potential of possible opposing forces and our own counter measures. Based on this analysis, there exist clear threats then this can be only countered by employing, purchasing or acquisitions of certain systems/platforms. The threats can be actual or perceived based on future defence planning and acquisition of potential opposing forces.

In this case the Royal Malaysian Navy have done its due diligence by conducting this analysis and recommended to the Defence Ministry the urgent need to for SGPV-LCS.

SGPV as the name denotes should not be confused with patrol craft or fast attack craft. SGPV is continuation of the NGPV (Next Generation Patrol Vessel) or Kedah Class Offshore Patrol Vessel in the RMN. In essence the size is similar to a light frigate or more aptly corvette classification of naval vessel. The term SGPV is actually a euphemism used to refer to a highly sophisticated state of the art corvette. Cordial neighbours do not wish to inadvertently start an arms race by announcing the purchase of a highly offensive system/platform, but rather beef up their capabilities in more subtle way. Thus, the naming of what would otherwise be a guided corvette as a patrol vessel. Euphemism is usually a norm in military through out the world in order to mask the actual mission or the mission orientation of a particular system/platform. During the period of British Army operation in Northern Ireland, “to be converted into her majesty’s permanent custody” means assassination of known Irish Republican Army (IRA) targets. United States effort to counter the superior Soviet technology in Multiple Independent Re-Entry Vehicle (MIRV) led to the development Anti Ballistics Missile Shield, which was euphemistically known as Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). There are numerous other examples in military parlance where euphemism is applied countless times.

Let us see some of the specs that SGPV-LCS will posses, it would be 99.5m in length and 2200 ton in displacement. The tonnage itself reveals that the SGPV is more of frigate and comparable to the Gawron Class Corvettes of Polish Navy or Korvette 130 of German Navy. The SGPV is reported to pack a deadly punch in the form of VLS (Vertical Launch System) which can be used to launch surface to air missile and surface or surface to surface missile to destroy target. Wide array of sensors, Combat Information Centre (CIC), Electronic Weapons Suite (EWS), Close In Weapon System (CIWS) and main guns in the form of either 76mm Otobreda or French 100mm Naval Gun clearly reveals this SGPV-LCS is no ordinary patrol craft.

Tony Pua’s argument that the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) purchased a similar vessel at cost of RM 210 million is perplexing. What type or class of the RNZN vessel is being compared against RMN SGPV-LCS. Based on the length and displacement closest comparison to SGPV are the Protector Class OPV of RNZN both HMNZs Otago and Wellington. However one must note that this ship was contracted in 2004 to Tenix Defense of Australia. We need to take into account cost escalation till date, which is almost 6 years more importantly what capability this OPV possess. New Zealand defence posture is very much different from us, whereby New Zealand has defence treaty with both Australia and US in times of war. It is also a member of ABCA (America, Britain, Canada & Australia) Armies basically countries which share the same mother tongue and origin. No one dare to attack New Zeland without facing the wrath of US and Australia. Further the HMNZS Otago and Wellington are poorly armed devoid of any sensors, EWS Suite but equipped only with optical fire control. Its main gun is Bushmaster 242 25mm cannon, no CIWS and surprisingly has 3 x 20foot container usually found in container vessel and has quarters and provision for 30 passengers and an aft crane. It looks like Protector Class is built with disaster relief and logistics support as its primary mission rather than as an interdiction vessel. Now compare it with our Kedah Class the earlier NGPV, it has 76mm main oto Melara Gun, 1 x 30mm gun, EWS Suite, Thermal Imaging, Nav Radar and Sonar. The cost of systems and armaments for a vessel can be higher than the cost of building the ship, more so in the current face evolving electronic warfare spectrum. The Protector class does not augur well to be compared with our Kedah class let alone to be compared with the latest SGPV. The SGPV will also incorporate the VLS technology which might take up a major portion of the cost. Earlier attempts were made to compare our SGPV with Pohang Class Patrol Craft that was supplied to Timor Navy.

The rightful comparison should be with the Singapore Formidable Class which is the Lafeyette Class of France. Even though the SGPV is smaller, the sensors aboard will replicate the latest LCS similar to Freedom and Independence class of US Navy. SGPV will be much more sophisticated, modern and costly due to incorporation of latest technology. Further the cost of amortization of local shipyard with transfer of technology has to be taken into account. Military acquisition are very much public fund initiative, whereby main contributors are the government and its grant. A glaring example will be the United States with the development of LCS being fully funded by US government, whereby both Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics participated in designing, building and commissioning of the vessel into US Navy and greatly benefited from the government grants in terms of R&D.

While I respect the concern of Tony Pua in raising issues related to public spending and national security, his argument has to be more specific and precise. With the current volatile security environment throughout the world, the nature of military operation maybe more of MOOTW (military operation other than war) like fighting pirates of the coast of Somali or called upon by international community to protect innocent civilians from tyrant. Given inherent the capabilities of the SGPV it is able to conduct any of these multitude mission on a broad variety of spectrum.

SGPV will be a vital tool for both Malaysian foreign and defence policy and shall be the tip of our strategic spear. I commend the Navy especially its Chief Admiral Tan Sri Abdul Aziz in remaining firm in its acquisition despite calls from arm chair military analysts and those with ulterior political motives.

Jeyaganesh Gopalsamy