Contracts At DSA 2022 Part 3

RMAF M46-02 VVIP Blackhawk. Although crewed by RMAF personnel, their tasking come under the PMO. Malaysian Defence

SHAH ALAM: In the earlier post, I wrote about the Deftech deal for the three-tonne GS cargo truck. It was the only thing that was publicly announced that Deftech was getting although it also got the one-tonne GS Cargo and passenger buses for the Army which were awarded to it almost at the same time.

Two companies, Zetro Services Sdn Bhd and Airod (including its subsidiary ATSC and Airod Techno Power) received multiple contracts, LOIs and LOAs at the ceremony. Zetro – which is the designated electronics repair shop for the Armed Forces – were awarded the contracts for maintenance of air defense radars and electronics for RMAF (RM412 million); maintenance aircraft radar and avionics for RMAF (RM164 million) and the performance based maintenance of RMAF air traffic control radars (RM81 million). It is likely this contracts will be for a three year period as it is the standard practice.

Thales Raytheon GM 403 radar in service with RMAF. TUDM

As for Airod, it got the maintenance contract for the government V/VIP aircraft owned by RMAF (Global Express, Falcon 900 and the Black Hawk S70A helicopter) for RM139 million. Its subsidiary, Airod Techno Power Sdn Bhd got the maintenance contract for the C130 Hercules T56 engines for RM137 million. ATSC in the meantime got the Sukhoi Su-30MKM 10th Year SLEP (RM160 million) and the industrial collaboration for the supply of articles, performance of services and provision of technical assistance for the same aircraft (RM560 million). Again it is likely all the contracts are for a three year period.
RMAF Hercules M30-08 landing at Labuan in late November, 2017

And if you ask why Airod and its subsidiaries then? Who else has the facilities and personnel to do it?

— Malaysian Defence

If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment

Share
About Marhalim Abas 1607 Articles
Shah Alam

28 Comments

  1. The mind sets are so different:
    Here in Australia, the government is increasing defence spending in an election year. Being strong on sovereignty and protecting our democracy is seen as a vote winner.

    Contrast with Malaysia, being indecisive and weak in our defence outlook seems to get votes in the elections. This perception of a weak country is dangerous to us.

  2. @Tom Tom
    Ask the First Nation people if they share your viewpoint.

    I can’t speak for the Aussies but in ASEAN we tend to have a more pacifist nature. Power projection is not something we seek to outdo each other and the armed forces are more geared towards self defence doctrine. Being Third World and poorer than Aus, our priorities are more insular and rakyat oriented, hence why social programs rather than defence programs wins votes. This is in line with Maslow’s Hierarchy, where physiological needs ie food, clothing, shelter… comes ahead of security needs ie defence & safety.

    And don’t forget, we are nonaligned in policy hence why your AUSKUS raised such a big stink in ASEAN plus the prevalence of nuclear subs in this region now.

  3. Joe, defence is not a problem for Indigenous Australians. Many of them work for the ADF. The issues that affect them are land rights, unequal access to services and opportunities and discrimination. They are alway very supportive of the ADF. Has never been an issue in the 38 years I have lived here.

  4. Ha ha ha. It’s a joke lah. Raised by Dr. Wee. The transport minister??? Seriously do any body even listen to him in Malaysia? Let alone in Australia😂.

  5. Tom tom – Contrast with Malaysia, being indecisive and weak in our defence outlook seems to get votes in the elections.

    Because Malaysian society are more divisive then Aussie

    As our next door neighbor ex ambassador at large Bilahari once point out, the Chinese embassy are openly campaigning for MCA each elections and as we see, MCA openly become CCP mouthpiece, speaking against AUKUS as well as contract givers as most of MOT project all goes to Chinese contractors.

    Then there’s are group who are influence by Muslim brotherhood who really dislikes the west

    And thus unlike in Australia. Going around buying big ticket American made weapon aren’t really a vote getters. So what they do is just list out thing they going to buy if they won the election and just let the above two groups shiok sendiri imagine that Malaysia going to buy weapon from China or Russia.

  6. @Tom Tom
    He raised it in his capacity as a Cabinet minister to their High Comm in OFFICIALLY. You might think its a joke but just meant you don’t understand how ASEAN diplomacy works, the subtleness of official levels of communicae with dignitaries. That is just on the diplomatic level, various regional mass medias has negatively voice concerns on AUSKUS from Thailand to Indonesia
    https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/malaysia-warns-aukus-pact-will-spark-nuclear-arms-race-in-indo-pacific-20210918-p58stm.html
    https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-southeastasia-09172021164007.html
    https://www.thaienquirer.com/35738/auskus-treaty-has-backfired-so-far/

    In the first place, It only helps to further US & UK hegemony, it doesn’t help Aussie defend themselves since to whom is Auskus meant to counter? Indonesia? East Timor?

  7. First, if the MCA is receiving $$ from the CCP, then it has to stop. Foreign political interference is also a major problem worldwide too. A particular problem here with the ALP, left leaning Labour Party receiving $ from Chinese businessmen who are only agents for the CCP.

    Second, the RAN, Australia’s Navy has many years talked about getting nuclear subs. It is not a new issues. What has prompted us to finally get them is of course China. Not mentioning name but everyone knows it’s China.

    As for US-UK hegemony, of course it’s to protect the dominance of the post WW2 Anglo-dominance. The 5 Anglospheres are literally blood brothers, they don’t need AUKUS or ANZUS. They want to preserve this post WW2 order, the longest period of relative peace (until now) we have had. I would accept the UK-US so called hegemony anyway, rather than a Russia-China one. And by the way, if it wasn’t for the Anglos we’d be writing this is German or Japanese.

  8. tom tom,

    “if it wasn’t for the Anglos we’d be writing this is German or Japanese”

    True, something most people does not understand, when they preach about diplomatic freedom and non alignment. We got all this freedom (even independence) right now because the Anglos won the biggest war in human history so far. That high cost of war got us our independence, but the continued world domination by the anglos shaped the current relatively stable world order based on international laws.

  9. Not only that, we are by default, like it or not, part of the Anglosphere. Yes. That is correct. Due to our history which cannot be changed. Australian considers Malaysia as its family because of the sacrifice of thousand of Diggers who fought and died here during WW2, Confrontation and the Emergency. My wife’s grandfather was a sapper in Borneo fighting the Jap. Never wanted to talk about it even years after the war. There has never been, ever, talk of the RAAF leaving Butterworth to safe cost. Aust will be there in a heartbeat if anything were to happen to Malaysia, but we also need to do our part. Malaysia spending a reasonable amount of money on its own defence (eg LCA) and not on any strike capability, should not be such a political issue. Malaysian politicians need to grow up. It’s not as if we are acquiring the Hwasong 17

  10. Tom Tom – Malaysian politicians need to grow up”

    It fits much deeper than that. Political mindset with regards to defence is a reflection of how society views it. Everything; from how serious we take defence, to the pathetic amounts we allocate for procurement, to our disastrous politically driven policy and the role the local industry plays is in need of deep fundamental and institutionalised changed and soul searching.

    Tom Tom – “the RAAF leaving Butterworth to safe cost”

    RAAF Butterworth benefits both nations that’s why it’s still there. The base provides Australia with a permanent footing the region; supports deployments to the Middle East and other parts of Asia and enables cooperation with Malaysia and Singapore.

    As for being part of the “Anglosphere” this is no offence, nonsense. We are a officially a non aligned country which because of history, economics and other things have always been closer to certain Western countries but we are not part of the “Anglosphere” per see.
    Compared to previous decades; on a personal level; many Malaysians also have a much lesser sense of affinity with the “West” so to speak. As it stands the countries we have the most extensive defence ties with are the U.S. and Australia but this is driven by realpolitik and geo strategic factors.

  11. Joe – it doesn’t help Aussie defend themselves since to whom is Auskus meant to counter?

    Australia is fighting for Australian. They are a maritime nation dependents on the sea trade and would by cold calculated logical reasoning (rather than sense of brotherhood or anything nice like freedom) would allied themselves to whoever rules the high sea. they have no problem changing their allegiance from Britain to US once it becomes clear Britain no longer rules the high sea some time ago.

    If the Chinese rules the high sea & wrote to rules of trade then people would submitted to Chinese supremacy. But unfortunately china is a prisoner of geography, trapped behind the 1st island chain then further trap by the Malacca, sunda & Lombok straits. Which put them in direct collision with Indonesia & India, the future 3rd & 4rd largest economies.

    China grand dream is for the foreseeable future, most likely just a tool to strokes nationalism to ensure the party survival as growths rates slow down. Which put china as Malaysia main security concerns as they like nothing more than to occupied those sweet sweet reef of ours, reclaimed it, put a military base on it and sell it as great glory for the nation who manages to get back “their ancient land” and use it as staging ground for a further push to Malacca/sunda straits.

    So outside the wumao crowd like wee wee. Who else would find AUKUS unacceptable? In fact such commitment is highly welcome

  12. 5Zaft – ”Which put china as Malaysia main security concerns as they like nothing more than to occupied those sweet sweet reef of ours, reclaimed it”

    No…. China [in addition to the natural resources there] wants the Spratlys because it strengthens its ability to project power in the area and to break out of the First Island Chain. Also China doesn’t necessarily have to physically occupy the reefs but merely to control the seas around it.

  13. By the way,

    No mention of the Unifil MRAP contract, won by Ejder Yalcin? The original tender was for 20 units, but the contract is just for 15?

    Rumors that each of them cost 9 million ringgits. Are the UN going to reimburse them for that amount?

    Value for the Guardians is put at 5 million ringgits (but is practically free as it is paid for by barter of expired starburst rounds). The Lipanbara costs 7 million ringgits.

  14. 5Zaft – ”they have no problem changing their allegiance from Britain to US once it becomes clear Britain no longer rules the high sea some time ago.”

    They didn’t change ”their allegiance”… Still a member of the Commonwealth and the Queen is still the head of state. In WW2; having found itself in a very vulnerable position after the loss of Singapore and modern day Indonesia; Australia had no choice but to rely more and more on the U.S. to protect itself. Note that even when Australia was isolated; it kept the bulk of it’s army in the Middle East. Post WW2 Britain kept reducing its presence here culminating in the 1971 East Of Suez withdrawal; Australia naturally drifted closer to the U.S. and we drifted closer to Australia.

    5Zaft – ”But unfortunately china is a prisoner of geography, trapped behind the 1st island chain”

    Trapped behind several Island Chains really but it’s land borders are the most secure they have been for centuries.

  15. @joe,
    just add these Malaysian ministers/politicians have to officially mouth off in the press to voice their “concerns” to be politically correct due to our non-aligned status and also to somewhat “appease’ our Chinese friends as they are one of our biggest trading partners and FDI providers not to mention the mega projects they finance. Not sure if they really dare to directly interfere in our internal politics given the backlash that could happen and past history when there was so much animosity towards them due to them supporting CPM.
    In private though, I understand and also believe that all the ASEAN countries may not be too miffed by the idea of AUKUS. Given that almost all ASEAN signatories with the exception of Thailand, Myanmar and Cambodia having issues with big brother in SCS and their all mighty concept of 9 dash line most may see it as a counterbalance.
    Why talk about of Zone of peace and neutrality (ZOPFAN) when islands within the so called 9 dash line are being occupied at almost their whim and fortified/militarised. As small littoral states, we need proper and just world oder based on international law and not be bullied by big boys in the yard with the biggest sticks in their hand. As much as there is talk about western hegemony , at least there is a better prospect of using establish law and rules to settle disputes on national boundaries and SEZs . ju

  16. Marhalim,

    So it is actually 9.5 million ringgit each?

    Until when we are going to pay 200-300% markups on all of our equipments?

  17. gonggok – ”Until when we are going to pay 200-300% markups on all of our equipments?”

    Well; this is something that’s been harped on here for years. As long as priority is placed on the local industry [as part of our highly flawed and self defeating policy] rather than the end user and the taxpayer; we’ll continue to be in the rut we are and we’ll have no nobody but ourselves to blame. Hence the need for deep rooted institutionalised changes but must as well ask for high snowfall in Djibouti.

  18. Aslan, we are writing this in English, are we not? Malaysia is at least an extended, de facto part of the Angloshere.

    That is our history, can’t change that, despite our trying to be neutral.

    Of course, we can agree to disagree…

  19. Tom Tom – Aslan, we are writing this in English, are we not? Malaysia is at least an extended, de facto part of the Angloshere”

    If I was in Latvia and you in the Caroline Islands we would still be writing this in English; doesn’t mean both places are part of the Angloshere”.. Since the 1980’s due to evolving economic and political factors we have become less and less part of the “Angloshere”‘

    Tom Tom – That is our history, can’t change that”

    Our history is as a former British colony which has maintained ties with the Commonwealth and whose population had a close sense of personal affinity but things have changed. We still ha e good ties and are part of the FPDA but doesn’t mean we are still an an extended, de facto part of the Angloshere” as you would have it. It’s not about changing history but looking at the facts as they stand as of 2022.

  20. @5zaft
    Nobody will shiok sendiri if we buying Chinese or Russian gear. The Russian MKMs have less uptime than even the legacy Hornets and the Keris class are replacing Chinese made or installing new electronics.

    It is difficult to speculate what is China’s goals. They occupied part of Spratly’s but they haven’t been aggressive at conquering the rest. They intruded on various ASEAN nation’s EEZ & airspace but they don’t stay or ratchet the tension. To what their intentions, many, like you, have speculated but may not be accurate. As I said before, nobody really knows China real intentions but what’s certain is China are playing the long game. MCA aren’t the only ones courting China, do recall DAP had engaged a Chinese main-con for their infamous undersea tunnel. Everyone’s playing the game.

    “Who else would find AUKUS unacceptable?”
    Indonesia for one. They would not accept foreign power projection into their maritime domain. Moreso using nuke subs.

    @Nat
    “proper and just world oder based on international law”
    That is exactly why we brought up concerns about Auskus to their Embassy & in MSM. Auskus was a unilateral decision by Australia to join with US & UK hegemony without considering the nonintervention, nonaligned, & nonnuke proliferation policy of ASEAN, and which would ratchet up tensions with China. Just like our objection to invasions of Iraq & Afghanistan, just like our abstention from sanctioning Russia, the same as well with Auskus, we have always maintained our stance that geopolitical decisions must be multilateral and under the ambit of UN specifically thru its Security Council.

  21. @joe, Malaysia is not Third World. It’s a fact the term Third World was coined by some Hollywood studios to differentiate the poorer countries round the globe from the West. The correct term is Least Developed Country (LDC), Developing Country and Developed Country. The Aborigines are as patriotic as any Aussie too. And one of the ways to fast track a citizenship application is to serve in the Armed Forces. We in Malaysia don’t have that mindset, ie. for recent migrants to gain citizenship, serve the country wearing green for a while. You gain credit that way. And yes, one particular Aussie trait I see as disturbing is this propensity to paint an issue with the same brush. (Semua isu itu sama, nengok dunia dalam hitam putih je, and particularly judgemental on issue on fairness and parity).
    We’re different as Asians of course.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*