Malaysia announces plans to replace the Causeway

On 5 July 1996, then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed announced Malaysia’s plans to demolish the Causeway and to replace it with a bridge that would allow ships to navigate the Johor Straits.^[1] Their intent was also to beautify Johor Bahru’s waterfront so as to create a positive impression for first time visitors entering Malaysia via the Causeway.^[2] Singapore responded positively to the news and said that it would consider the proposal when it had been formally received, although then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong also noted that the venture would be costly.^[3]

Though Singapore had yet to receive a formal proposal from Malaysia, the Malaysian media reported in March 1997 that the Malaysian government had approved the construction of a bridge to replace the Causeway.^[4] Further news reports in December 1998 stated that the Malaysian government had begun working with a private consortium to build a 1.5 km bridge as part of the Southern International Gateway that also included a rail tunnel between Singapore and Johor, a new Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) complex and the development of the Johor waterfront.^[5] In January 1999, news emerged that the construction of the new bridge would commence in 2000 and be completed in 2003.^[6] In light of these developments, Singapore reiterated its position that Malaysia had not initiated formal discussions and that the replacement of the Causeway would require the mutual consent of both governments.^[7]

In November 2000, then Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan informed parliament that Singapore was studying a preliminary proposal that they had received from Malaysia in August.^[8] In the same month, Malaysian media reported that the Johor government had given the go-ahead for multi-billion ringgit  projects involving the replacement of the Causeway, construction of the new CIQ complex as well as commercial, recreational and tourism developments. A blueprint of the bridge with a “birdwing” design was also unveiled.^[9]

Further progress was made in September 2001 when then Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew met with Mahathir in Kuala Lumpur to resolve outstanding bilateral issues between the two countries. Through the negotiations, Singapore agreed in principle to build half of the new bridge as part of a package deal that included agreements on water, the “Points of Agreement” on the joint redevelopment of Malaysia’s railway land in Singapore, the relocation of Malaysia’s customs facilities to Kranji and the use of Malaysian airspace.^[10] Lee clarified that while Singapore was open to the construction of a new bridge, it was reluctant to demolish the Causeway. However in keeping with the spirit of reciprocity, Singapore was agreeable to the replacement of the Causeway on the condition that toll charges remained the same as the rates for the Causeway and that the demolition of the Causeway would only take place upon the completion of the railway tunnel between Johor and the proposed Kranji station. Singapore also consented to undertake the reclamation of land until the half-way mark between Singapore and Johor.^[11] However, the deal soon hit a snag when the tunnel project was shelved by Malaysia due to the lack of funds.^[12] Meanwhile, Malaysia continued with the foundation work of the new bridge,^[13] and began plans to build a sloping bridge on its side of the Causeway, even without Singapore’s involvement.^[14]

In September 2002, the foreign ministers of Singapore and Malaysia met for a second round of bilateral talks. With little headway in sight,^[15] Malaysia called off the package approach to bilateral talks and decided to continue with the half-bridge project, dubbed “the crooked bridge”.^[16] In February 2003, Malaysia began work on the bridge abutment area.^[17]

On 30 September 2003, Malaysia’s then Deputy Foreign Minister Leo Toyad was quoted as saying that Singapore’s approval was not needed for the construction of the bridge because it would be built on Malaysia’s side of the border. In response, Singapore sent a diplomatic note to Malaysia on 25 October 2003 to highlight the fact that Malaysia’s unilateral decision to demolish its side of the Causeway contravened international law.^[18]

In January 2004, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and then newly appointed Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi met and agreed to resume talks on the unresolved bilateral issues while work on the bridge continued.^[19] With the resumption of discussions, Malaysia returned to its original intention of building a straight bridge to replace the Causeway.^[20] However, work on the bridge was deferred for a time in light of renewed discussions^[21] and the lack of funds.^[22] From 2005 to 2006, Malaysia and Singapore held several talks on the replacement of the Causeway.^[23] Events took another turn during this period when it was reported in the Malaysian media that Malaysia would be going ahead with the construction of the “scenic bridge” to replace the Causeway on Malaysia’s side despite concerns raised by Singapore. Singapore continued to maintain its position that the undertaking would be a costly affair that would bring little economic benefits. However, Singapore would consider the proposal to replace the Causeway with a straight bridge if there was a “balance of benefits” for both countries, and that works at the Johor Straits  complied with the principles set out in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) Order.^[24]

In 12 April 2006, Badawi abruptly announced that the bridge project would be aborted because Malaysia could not agree with Singapore’s request for concessions on sand purchase and the use of Malaysia’s airspace. The legal implications of proceeding with the half-bridge project without Singapore’s agreement and the complexity of joining the water pipes and railway track to the new bridge were also cited as reasons.^[25]

References
1. Wong, D. (1996, July 6). Malaysia ‘may replace Causeway with bridge’. The Straits Times, p. 1. Retrieved March 28, 2014, from NewspaperSG.
2. Plan to put bridge on the world map. (1996, September 15). The Straits Times, p. 2. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
3. Taneja, S. (1996, July 9). Bridge fine with S’pore if it adds value: Goh. The Business Times, p. 5; It’s interesting, Singapore will study it, says BG Lee. (1996, July 7). The Sunday Times, p. 1. Retrieved March 28, 2014, from NewspaperSG.
4. KL gives nod for bridge to replace Causeway. (1997, March 24). The Straits Times, p. 1; Fernandez, W. (1997, March 26). PM: Three projects that can boost ties with KL. The Straits Times, p. 1; No proposal yet from KL on new Causeway bridge. (1998, December 19). The Straits Times, p. 57. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
5. Malaysian firms join hands to replace Causeway. (1998, December 17). The Straits Times, p. 29; Unit to decide on bridge to replace Causeway. (1998, December 29). The Straits Times, p. 18. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
6. Causeway bridge to cost $880m. (1999, January 18). The Straits Times, p. 17.  Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
7. Fernandez, W. (1999, January 22). Bridge: ‘Govt to govt accord needed’. The Straits Times, p. 3; Toh, E. (1999, August 21). No official word from KL on bridge: S’pore. The Business Times, p. 4. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
8. Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary Debates: Official Report. (2000, November 14). Oral answers to questions: Causeway (Replacement with bridge). (Vol. 72, col. 1125). Retrieved March 28, 2014, from Parliament of Singapore website: http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00069870-ZZ
9. Johor govt gives green light for new Causeway. (2000, November 2). The Straits Times, p. 29; M'sia unveils blueprint of futuristic bridge to S'pore. (2000, November 3). The Business Times, p. 13.  Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
10. Toh, E. (2001, September 5). SM Lee, Dr M strike in-principle accord on bilateral issues. The Business Times, p. 1. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
11. Ng, I. (2001, September 5). Tough talks, then progress on KL pact. The Straits Times, p. 1. Retrieved from NewspaperSG; Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary Debates: Official Report. (2001, September 25). Oral answers to questions: In-principle agreement with Malaysia on outstanding bilateral issues. (Vol. 73, col. 2054–2055). Retrieved March 28, 2014, from the Parliament of Singapore website: http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00069891-ZZ
12. Reme Ahmad. (2001, September 30). Johor-S’pore tunnel may be shelved: Mahathir. The Business Times, p. 4. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
13. Toh, E. (2001, October 18). Groundwork on M’sia-S’pore bridge to continue. The Business Times, p. 10. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
14. Reme Ahmad. (2002, January 22). Sloping bridge planned for JB Causeway. The Straits Times, p. 5; Toh, E. (2002, January 23). M’sian bridge to be built even if S’pore stays out. The Business Times, p. 2. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
15. Chuang, P. M. (2002, September 4). No progress made in latest Malaysia-S’pore talks. The Business Times, p. 2. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
16. Toh, E. (2002, September 5). M’sian half-bridge project revived. The Business Times, p. 10; Dr M’s unusual bridge. (2003, August 2). Today, p. 12. Retrieved from NewspaperSG; A concrete question mark. (2003, August 17). The Straits Times, p. 32. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
17. Reme Ahmad. (2003, April 26). JB’s Causeway bridge project ‘on schedule’. The Straits Times, p. A9. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
18. Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary Debates: Official Report. (2004, January 5). Oral answers to questions: Bridge connecting Johore to Singapore. (Vol. 77, cols. 11–17). Retrieved March 28, 2014, from Parliament of Singapore website: http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00004650-WA
19. Toh, E. (2004, January 14). Crooked bridge project in full swing. The Business Times, p. 13. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
20. KL proposes a straight bridge now. (2004, February 2). The Straits Times, p. 4; Back to old design for new Causeway. (2004, February 4). Today, p. 4. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
21. Pereira, B. (2004, February 4). Construction on ‘half-bridge’ halted. The Straits Times, p. 5. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
22. Lau, L. (2004, September 21). KL govt defers half-bridge project to rein in deficit. The Straits Times, p. A7. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
23. Peh, S. H. (2006, February 18). KL, S’pore set for 4th round of bridge talks. The Straits Times, p. H8. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.
24. Reme Ahmad. (2006, January 27). KL to go ahead with plans to build its half of bridge. The Straits Times, p. 3; Jayasankaran. S. (2006, January 27). S’pore ‘puzzled’ by KL’s scenic bridge plan. The Business Times, p. 10; Reme Ahmad. (2006, January 28). Move to build half-bridge will not hurt bilateral ties: Najib. The Straits Times, p. 9; Shankari, U. (2006, January 31). S’pore seeks KL’s clarification on bridge reports. The Business Times, p. 5; ‘Scenic bridge’ project on track. (2006, March 10). The Straits Times, p. 10; S’pore ‘surprised’ by KL’s talk of launching bridge construction. (2006, March 11). The Straits Times, p. 37; Singh, K. (2006, March 18). KL pushes on with bridge works. (2006, March 18). The Straits Times, p. 6. Retrieved from NewspaperSG; Singapore. Parliament. Parliamentary Debates: Official Report. (2006, April 3). Oral answers to questions: Proposed bridge across Causeway (Update). (Vol. 81, cols. 1678–1682). Retrieved March 28, 2014, from Parliament of Singapore website: http://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/report.jsp?currentPubID=00004831-WA
25. Reme Ahmad. (2006, April 13). KL axes plan to replace Causeway. The Straits Times, p. 1. Retrieved from NewspaperSG.