VZCZCXYZ0003
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGP #3669/01 3261017
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 221017Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1936
INFO RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA PRIORITY 1792
RUEHJA/AMEMBASSY JAKARTA PRIORITY 4948
RUEHKL/AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR PRIORITY 4387
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 0399
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY 5530
RUENAAA/CNO WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0050
RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITY
RULSJGA/COMDT COGARD WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SINGAPORE 003669 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/22/2016 
TAGS: AS EWWT ID MY PBTS PHSA PREL SN UNGA MRSEC
SUBJECT: SINGAPORE PLAYS TOUGH ON TORRES STRAIT IN UNGA 
OCEANS RESOLUTION 
 
REF: A. REED - ROACH EMAILS OF NOVEMBER 20 AND 21 
     ¶B. CANBERRA 1765 
     ¶C. STATE 90707 
 
Classified By: Classified by Ambassador Patricia L. Herbold, reasons 1. 
4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Ambassador-at-large Tommy Koh called in Ambassador 
Herbold to the MFA on November 22 to urge the United States 
to continue trying to get Australia to accept tougher 
language on the right of free passage contained in the UNGA 
draft resolution on Oceans and the law of the sea.  Koh 
stressed that Singapore remains deeply concerned that 
Australia's unilateral implementation of compulsory pilotage 
in the Torres Strait would establish a precedent seen to 
allow other coastal states (e.g., Indonesia and Malaysia) to 
encroach on the right of free passage as enshrined in the UN 
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).  Koh urged us to 
work to get Australia to accept a compromise formulation 
based on an earlier U.S. proposal (see paragraph 4) in place 
of operative paragraph (OP) 65 in the current draft.  If that 
effort failed, Koh said the GOS would table an amendment 
adding a new OP (see paragraph 5) that addressed its 
concerns. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Ambassador Herbold recalled that the United States 
shares Singapore's view on the Torres Strait issue and had 
worked in New York to negotiate mutually acceptable language 
with Australia.  However, time had elapsed, and the United 
States now considered the negotiation closed.  She stressed 
that the United States did not support tabling an amendment 
that might put passage of the resolution by consensus at 
risk.  The Ambassador suggested that if Singapore were to 
refrain from tabling an amendment, we would be prepared to 
make a strong explanation of vote on the right of free 
passage after the resolution's adoption by consensus.  She 
hoped that Singapore might then follow with a statement of 
its own. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Koh said that the resolution's Brazilian 
coordinator, Carlos Duarte, had informed Singapore by email 
that he would accept changes to the draft until 2 p.m. 
November 22, New York time.  Koh allowed that Singapore was 
still considering options, and he did not rule out that it 
might eventually support the U.S. approach.  But he said 
Singapore did not want to give up yet, and reasserted that it 
would table an amendment if an acceptable formulation for OP 
65 were not found.  He again urged us to use the available 
time to convince Australia to accept the language in 
paragraph 4. 
 
¶4.  (U)  Proposed compromise language in place of OP65: 
Calls upon coastal states, archipelagic states, and states 
bordering straits used for international navigation to comply 
with their duties as set forth in the convention, calls upon 
foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage and 
foreign ships and aircraft exercising the right of 
archipelagic sea lanes passage and transit passage to comply 
with their duties as set forth in the convention, (and calls 
upon all states to refrain from taking any unilateral action 
which is inconsistent with the convention.)  (Note: 
Singapore's addition to earlier U.S. proposal enclosed in 
brackets.) 
 
¶5. (SBU)  Amendment GOS intends to propose if paragraph 4 
language is not accepted:  Reaffirms that States bordering 
straits used for international navigation may adopt, as 
provided in the Convention, laws and regulations relating to 
transit passage through straits; such laws and regulations 
shall not discriminate in form or in fact among foreign ships 
or in their application have the practical effect of denying, 
hampering or impairing the right of transit passage, and 
foreign ships exercising the right of transit passage shall 
comply with such laws and regulations; 
 
¶6. (C)  COMMENT:  Singapore is well aware that the United 
States has been its closest ally on the Torres Strait issue. 
At the end of the day, we suspect it will think hard before 
putting at risk the consensus that both we and Singapore seek 
on this resolution.  Nevertheless, its threatening to 
maintain a hard line, even when it knew of our strong view on 
 
preserving consensus going into this meeting, is unusual for 
Singapore and is a measure of how strongly it feels about 
preserving the current balance between rights and 
responsibilities of coastal and user states under UNCLOS, 
especially in its own complicated maritime neighborhood. 
HERBOLD