SHAH ALAM: Eks Paradise 2021. RMAF has embarked on its third major exercise this year with the launch of Eks Paradise 8/2021 at Kuantan airbase yesterday. The exercise will involved most of RMAF aircraft from fighter jets to helicopters as well as units from RMN and the Army.
RMAF No. 6 and No 12 squadrons had just participated in FPDA’s Exercise Bersama Gold 2021 which culminated in flypast in both Singapore and Malaysia at the Subang airbase on Oct. 21.
In two weeks starting from 7 September, RMAF held another exercise – Eks Ababil – mostly over Sabah which was basically an Eks Paradise as well.
As reported before Eks Paradise 8/21 ( Para Air Drop Defense, Insertion, Strike, Search & Rescue and Extraction exercise) will involved RMAF units from the Subang, Kuantan, Gong Kedak and Butterworth. The main exercise area will be in the central of Peninsula, in areas around Pahang, Kelantan and Terengganu.
TUDM UJI KEUPAYAAN OPERASI PELBAGAI SPEKTRUM DI DALAM EKSESAIS PARADISE SIRI 8/2021
KUANTAN, 22 Oktober 2021 – Eksesais PARADISE Siri 8/2021 (Eks PARADISE) akan menjadi platform terbesar Tentera Udara Diraja Malaysia (TUDM) di dalam menambah baik prosedur dan tahap profesionalisme setiap anggota serta mengoptimumkan penggunaan aset-asetnya.
Panglima Operasi Udara, Lt Jen Dato’ Hj Mohammad Salleh bin Hj Osman TUDM ketika merasmikan pembukaan Eksesais PARADISE Siri 8/2021 berkata, eksesais tersebut juga adalah untuk menentukan tahap kesiapsiagaan aset yang tinggi bagi memastikan pertahanan negara sentiasa terpelihara. Beliau juga mengingatkan agar semua yang terlibat, memberikan penekanan terhadap keselamatan operasi dan pematuhan SOP Covid-19 sepanjang eksesais berlangsung.
Gabungan elemen udara seperti pesawat pejuang dan “Air Mobility” iaitu pesawat angkut dan helikopter serta elemen dukungan daratan akan menyerlahkan potensi dan meningkatkan prestasi tugasan yang melibatkan pelbagai kemahiran, pengalaman serta penilaian apabila digabungkan.
Eksesais pada kali ini menyaksikan Pangkalan Udara Kuantan bertindak sebagai Exercise Controller (EXCON) yang turut melibatkan Pangkalan Udara Subang, Pangkalan Udara Butterworth dan Pangkalan Udara Gong Kedak. Elemen daripada Tentera Darat Malaysia (TDM) dan Tentera Laut DiRaja Malaysia (TLDM) juga terlibat menerusi Eksesais Stallion Pack 2/21 dan Eksesais Gerak Pantas 25/21. Bermula 22 Oktober hingga 2 November 2021, TUDM akan melaksanakan penerbangan rendah pada waktu siang dan malam di beberapa kawasan sekitar ruang udara Semenanjung Malaysia yang telah digazetkan untuk lokasi eksesais.
Apart from firing on ground targets and mock air to air battles conducted by fast jets , RMAF transporters and helicopters will also drop paratroopers and equipment and performed simulated combat and search rescue operations hence the name of the exercise, Paradise.
— Malaysian DefenceIf you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment
So what was UK’s part in BG2021? Moral support?
HMS Diamond, but she suffered an engine problem during the Ex. Still, not as bad as some previous exercises where they only sent observers.
FPDA is not as relevant as some people make it out to be.
The U.K’s partcipation [and the regional deployment of the QE carrier group] in Bersama Gold higlights it commitments to the FPDA and the fact that the Asia Pacific region is an area of great importance for it.
The fact that certain changes were made – largely due to Covid – doesn’t change anything in the larger scheme of things, a fact fully realised by the other FPDA partners. Even if certain U.K. assets were not physically participating, the U.K. was still present and perdonnel and other staff had a hand in the exercise.
They had a Type 45 destroyer taking part in BG2021. As I posted previously, Covid prevented the deployment of the Typhoons and Red Arrows
As I said before if and when the chips are down, the balloon goes up, and the lights go out, don’t expect the Brits to come and save us.
Indeed. After all, what have WE done for them?
FPDA is a relic of when we had aligned interests. The operative word being “had”.
FPDA were relevant to the Brits up to the 90s when before that they had significant stake in Malaysia but ever since Mahathir had nationalised or bought out those UK owned entities, their military participation is more obligatory rather than a necessity and their commitments to Asia is just a mere facade otherwise why would they deploy their only operational carrier halfway around the world just to have it run back home as soon as possible?
Actually no. The FPDA still has relevence which is why it still exists. The fact that the Brits scaled down certain things because of Covid does not indicate anything,simplistic and inaccurate to suggest otherwise . The FPDA serves as a useful platform as a means of engagement, to serve the long term interests of its members, which is why they still commit to it. The Brits may be focused on Europe but the Asia Pacific region is of great importance to them.
Whether the Brits will help us if the “chips are down” really depends on the context …….
If not helping us affects their national interests,including detrimental consequences from a geo poltical angle, then they will assit. Also … any help from them will not be unilateral but with other countries.
There is a lot of flawed assumptions on the FPDA, to really understand it one has to look at the geo poltical dynamics and reasons which led to its creation and also to see how it has elvolved over the past few decades to cope with various changes, we well as the reasons why all its members are still commited to it.
“deploy their only operational carrier halfway around the world just to have it run back home as soon as possible”
Simple if one puts some thought into it ..
Britain is focused on Europe, doesn’t have the same level of resources as the U.S. and is not a regional player to the extent the U.S.and Australia are.
Nobody expects Britain to permanently deploy a carrier here [whose deployment was significant from a poltical and operational perspective] and the carrier had to return because it was a on a temporary deployment and was needed in home waters … Apart from various advantages gained,including reassuring allies and friends and showing the region is important, Britain gained a lot of experience from the deployment.
The geo political dynamics & reasons that led to the creation of FDPA has changed and no longer applies in today. Hence the logic & viability of FPDA deal or rather the Powers to commit to the deal is now questionable.
Deploying their one and only operational carrier halfway around the world to show flag and hurrying back as soon as the flag is raised… laughable. Who are they kidding, China would not take their touch-n-go visits seriously, the Asian nations are well aware UK’s commitment is back home rather than their ex-colonies and the only reason UK did this visit was to shiok sendiri thinking Britannia are still a heavyweight on the waves. The only UK’s real commitment East of Suez is Diego Garcia.
– The geo poltical environment has indeed changed and as pointed out before the FPDA has evolved,is still relevent and has value that is widely recognised. If it hsdn’t it would have stood down long ago ..
– FPDA members can cobtribute in various ways,not just militarily, which is why all nembers still commit to it. As mentioned before it also serves as a platform for exchanges, diplomacy, cooeration, dialogue, etc.
– It isn’t a case of “shiok sendiri” as you mistakenly/easily assume.The deloyment is a highly significant political message, reassuring allies, partners and friends that Britain can and will deloy if needed. Why do you think China made such a fuss? Also,in times of conflict the RN will not be operating alone [thus the fact it can only deploy a single carrier is of no relevence].Not only that but from an operational perpsective the deploynent provided invaluable experience.
– The Asia Pacific region is an area of great importance to the U.K.-it has major investments in the region,it relies on the SCS for the flow of trade,it has treaty obligations with the
U S, Australia and Brunei [also a jungle school],it has partners in the form of FPDA partners,it is worried about China and is adament that the rules based order must be maintained,etc. As a special partner with the U.S.the U.K.would also be expected to support the U.S.in the event of troubles over Taiwan and North Korea. Various White Papers and official statements made have also reaffirmed the fact in clear easy to unimbigious language which leaves no room for any doubt that the Asia Pacific is of great importance to the U.K. [it’s not a “facade”..].
– The RN may not be a “heavyweight”anymore but it’s still recognised as of the world’s premiere navies. It has carriers,SSBs,SSBNs,a fleet train,is the leading ASW player and has various tertiary capabilities.
“If it hsdn’t it would have stood down long ago”
They might have, if it had an expiration date. But since its nonobligatory on their part, it would look bad onto them if they dropped it for any other reasons so better to keep it going and provide some involvement to put on a show that they’re still interested.
“platform for exchanges, diplomacy, cooeration, dialogue”
There are many other more relevant diplomatic channels than a defensive pact one.
“China made such a fuss?”
China makes such a big fuss about anything and sometimes with unknown reasons like the intrusion into Sarawakian air recently. Are the Sarawakian MMEA so formidable that China would fuss over them?
“it has treaty obligations with theU S, Australia and Brunei”
But not to us and not to the rest of Asia. FPDA is not a treaty nor a binding obligation for them. The SCS trade routes are as important to China(for now) as it is to UK & Australia hence why they are asserting own interest in that area. They too are worried of being cut out as much as the Western Powers are wary of the same by China.
“it’s still recognised as of the world’s premiere navies”
It is recognised as being the perennial sidekick to the US Forces. And they need a bigger brother, operating on their own somewhere far plus NATO obligations, would put their home defence rather bare.
With your permission I’d like to pose these excerpts on the FPDA which unfortunately still rarely understood in it’s proper context; leading to flawed and simplistic assumptions.
”The threats have transformed over time, just as threat perceptions among its members have diverged. But the FPDA is still valued in all five capitals, for now. This was borne out in an unusual joint statement, recently issued by the FPDA defence ministers. As well as signalling their continuing political commitment, the statement noted that ‘a core focus on conventional warfare … has enabled FPDA to retain its relevance in an increasingly complex contemporary security environment.’ That may seem deliberately agnostic on the sources of potential threat, but was nevertheless an attempt to throw forward the FPDA’s relevance in the context of intensifying major-power competition in the region.”
”The first of these concerns public awareness. The FPDA is the Cinderella of Southeast Asian defence engagements. Often overlooked as an anachronism, including in member countries, the FPDA’s understated value is well understood by officials and military professionals on the inside. The limited visibility of the FPDA within member countries is not a problem for as long as the political will exists to maintain it.”
”“The FPDA has been the region’s quiet achiever, proving to be remarkably resilient, outlasting the end of the Cold War by more than three decades. What’s more, despite being an apparent hangover from a different era, the member states still see it having ongoing utility.” He added that “utility appears to have enduring features, contributing quietly but significantly to regional security and stability: the key ingredients for prosperity. At any rate, the future for the FPDA is secure. Even Indonesia now sees it as a relatively good thing, contributing observers to its many activities. At this rate, and in due course, our children may well end up celebrating its centenary.”
”In the last decade, FPDA has evolved marching further into the security realm so that it stays relevance. During the 10th FDMM, responding to the ever growing terrorism threat, FPDA has been directed to enhance its capacity in counter terrorism. Following that, FPDA have also been tasked to explore non-conventional threat such as cybersecurity. This last
decade has clearly shown the evolution of FPDA in keeping up with various new non-conventional threats while at the same time continuously focussing on its high-end conventional warfighting. While expanding its focus into non-conventional threat, FPDA in this decade also focuses on modernising its military assets, equipment and services. Apart from providing education, exercises and training, the existence of FPDA has
also provided a much more important benefit to Malaysia and Singapore that is
psychological deterrence. The existence of a FPDA makes an aggressor think twice on whether their attack to a member would result in the involvement of the other four member of the pentagon. Furthermore, United Kingdom and Australia being an ally of United States has also gave potential aggressor a pause on whether there is a potential involvement
of US. Over time the exercises conducted by the member of FPDA has enhanced their interoperability hence, contributing to the psychological deterrence. In addition to security achievement, the existence of FPDA has greatly contributed towards warmer bilateral ties among members that have spilled over into political and economic benefits. Not to be left out the existence of FPDA has also become a channel for confidence building between Malaysia and Singapore throughout its awkward moments in history. The FPDA has also provided a foundation between members in responding to natural disasters as well as in the United Nation Peacekeeping Operation such as in Timor Leste, and Afghanistan in 2010. The close ties between all pentagon members can also be seen by the support provided during the search for the missing Malaysian Airlines MH370.5 It
is without a doubt FPDA has achieved many milestones of the years and the Golden Jubilee celebration is a proof of its importance and relevant existence.”
”It is recognised as being the perennial sidekick to the US Forces.”
I pointed out it would be extremely silly to assume just because the RN is not what it was that it isn’t a ”heavyweight” – it has carriers, destroyers, SSNs, SSBNS, tertiary capabilities, a fleet train and is recognised as the world’s leading ASW navy … Irrespective of the fact that it plays a supporting role to the U.S and the fact that the RN can only deploy a single carrier is irrelevant as the carrier would not be operating alone.
”perennial sidekick to the US Forces”
One reason why the QE deployment was important in that it shows the RN can and will deploy if needed; plus it enabled valuable experience to be gained.
Note the RN has a support/logistic element based in Singapore and has OPVs on a 5 year deployment; it wouldn’t be doing this if the region wasn’t important to it or if it all was a ”facade” as you claim.
”Are the Sarawakian MMEA so formidable that China would fuss over them?”
Apples to oranges simplistic and inaccurate comparison.
China made a fuss because the deployment [as mentioned before] was a highly significant political message demonstrating intent and resolve. Britain was deploying in China’s backyard; showing it’s commitments to the U.S., Australia and others and because China knows that in the event of troubles Britain would be in the region and that would be contrary to China’s interests; that’s why China made a fuss….
Working partnerships does not need a load of drivel to justify its existence, NATO is shown to be working and it just works. FPDA? Not so much.
The proof of the pudding is action. Whether it works or not, so far it has failed to keep China’s growing presence in check.
This “the carrier would not be operating alone” is incongruous with this “QE deployment was important in that it shows the RN can and will deploy if needed”. AFAIK when QE CGB was deployed alone a major portion of surface firepower was far away from Home waters.
NATO is shown to be working and it just works. FPDA? Not so much.”
Yet you mentioned ”drivel”.Another simplistic and flawed apples to oranges to suit your narrative without considering key facts.
Is NATO really ”working’? First of all it’s a binding pact which has been around much longer and it faces an actual threat. It also has resources actually assigned to it and other things. Secondly, whether it’s really ”working” is debatable. Did it deter Russia from invading the Crimea and from waging war in the eastern Ukraine? Did it deter Russia from coming close to hostilities with Turkey [a NATO member] over Syria? Did it deter Russian jets from buzzing a RN ship in the Black Sea? I won’t even go into the deep political issues NATO has; like issues with Turkey; the frustration the Europeans have over certain things the U.S. does, plans the EU have for something to complement NATO; deep divisions that affected ops in Kosovo, etc.
No pact or arrangement is perfect but since 1971; eventhough it has escaped you; the FPDA has been an invaluable platform for defence cooperation amongst members and as it clear to anyone who looks at things objectively and without letting simplistic assumptions cloud their judgements; the FPDA has offered members a long list of benefits; which incidently is why they all are still committed d to it.
‘far it has failed to keep China’s growing presence in check.”
Reality check .. The FPDA is not intended to ”keep China in check”… We’ve expended thousands of words on the subject and you come up with something like this?
‘This “the carrier would not be operating alone” is incongruous with this “QE deployment was important in that it shows the RN can and will deploy if needed”.”
In simple English which really leaves no room for misinterpretation : in the event of a conflict or periods of tension; the QE carrier group would not operate alone but alongside the assets of Britain’s allies [whether the U.S., Australia or other countries] – all those assets would supplement each other. The same applies to any theater Britain finds itself engaged in; it is not intended to go it alone in any high intensity state on state threat….
‘There are many other more relevant diplomatic channels than a defensive pact one.”
First of all; it isn’t a ”defensive pact” per see …
Secondly; in reality there is no other platform or mechanism which enables all 5 partners a means of joint training; diplomacy, dialogue, intel sharing and other things. There is none. How would Malaysia share/receive intel from Britain and Australia? What other opportunities would there be for the RMN to train with the RSN, RSN, RNZN and RN in a combined exercise with all the advantages which are gained? With which other partners would the the army have top practice and refine HADR, urban warfare, anti-terrorism skillsets with other countries [2 of which have actual combat experience] on a regular basis? Which other formal platform do we have in which partners can assist us diplomatically [one partner is a UN permanent Security Council member] and other means in case of trouble?