| Singapore
says it doesn't store US nuclear weapons |
||||
Associated Press Singapore March 7, 2001 SINGAPORE does not store nuclear weapons for any country and a classified pact with the United States is in accordance with Southeast Asia's nuclear-free treaty, a defense official told parliament Mar 7. "There are no nuclear weapons stored in Singapore," said David Lim, minister of state for defense, adding that classified military pacts with the United States were in accordance with the city-state's nuclear-free policy. Lim's comments came in response to questions from opposition politician Joshua "J.B." Jeyaretnam and nominated member of parliament Simon Tay. "Why can't the public know exactly, to see what is the agreement between Singapore and the US government?" Jeyaretnam asked about a Memorandum of Understanding, signed 10 years ago by former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and former US Vice President Dan Quayle. Lee and Quayle signed a pact on Nov 13, 1990 giving the United States greater access to Singapore military facilities. Lim and US embassy officials Mar 7 said the pact was classified and that it doesn't put US forces above the law, another issue Jeyaretnam asked. "Are they subject to our laws?" Lim asked of US forces often seen in Singapore. "Yes. If they break our laws, yes." Singapore and the United States have close military ties. Singapore, despite its small size and peaceful prosperity, plans to spend S$7.82 billion on defense in 2001. US soldiers and sailors are a common sight in the city-state's bars and shopping malls; Singapore is in the process of building a naval base big enough to berth US aircraft carriers. US embassy official Tom Gradisher said the 1990 pact was classified because it contained sensitive information. He declined to comment on whether the pact mentions nuclear weapons or if the United States had ever kept nuclear weapons in Singapore. Britain kept nuclear weapons at bases in Singapore during
the cold war without telling the Singapore government, according to a study
published in the January edition of the Chicago-based Bulletin of Atomic
Scientists. |
||||