TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent Singapore is finally getting its own pandas from China after the United States, Japan, Australia, Thailand, Spain and Taiwan. The pair of pandas, a one-year-old female and a two-year-old male, are from the Wolong panda reserve in China's south-western Sichuan province. The Chinese government has adopted "panda diplomacy" as a projection of its soft power since 1994. Due to their rarity, only countries which enjoy very good relations with China are able to receive the pandas. Pandas are natural ambassadors of goodwill with their iconic black eye patches, jolly expression and roly-poly gait. As national treasures of China, they are the most tangible sign of close ties between Beijing and the receiving country. Chinese President Hu Jintao, who was in Singapore to attend the APEC summit said the two pandas signified an important milestone in Sino-Singapore relationship. Given Singapore's apparent close relationship with China, it is strange that it is only the fourth Asian country to receive the pandas instead of being the first or second. China obviously regards Singapore's ASEAN neighbor Thailand as a more important strategic partner since it received the pandas much earlier than Singapore. Though Singapore's is predominantly a Chinese society, its leaders are English educated and highly westernized. Singapore's founding father Mr Lee Kuan Yew is a descendant of the Straits Chinese community who arrived in Singapore, Malacca and Penang in the early 19th century. He was educated in Raffles Institution before completing his tertiary studies in Law at Cambridge University. The younger Lee could not even speak proper Mandarin and had to depend on his party colleague Lim Chin Siong to reach out to the Chinese masses. Soon after he assumed power, he clamped down on the Chinese intellectuals on dubious charges of being commmunists. Chinese language papers were also closed down and the only Chinese university in Singapore - Nantah, was forced to merge with the University of Singapore to form the present day NUS in 1980. Lee changed his stance radically following the rise of China in 1980s. From being a prominent sinophobic in the region, he transformed himself overnight to a sinophile as he tried desperately to court China. SAP schools were established to promote the study of Chinese as a first language and to nurture a new generation of Chinese intellectuals. Singapore began to invest heavily in China, the largest scale being that of the now defunct joint Suzhou-Singapore Industrial Park which turned out to be a flop. Bright Chinese college students were given government scholarships to study in Singapore universities. Chinese workers from the inland provinces flock to Singapore in search of work. There is now a sizable Chinese community in Singapore from mainland China. However, due to differences in culture, the local ethnic Chinese are having difficulties adapting to their presence. While Singapore's native Chinese hailed largely from the southern provinces of Fujian and Guangdong and have been brought up learning English as the lingua franca, the newcomers come from the poorer provinces of Hunan, Hubei, Henan, Sichuan, Liaoning and Heilongjiang and speak little English. Even the Chinese themselves are not too pleased with MM Lee. His recent remarks about the need of U.S. to remain in Asia to check on China sparked a furore in Chinese blogosphere with many netizens condemning him as a "Han4 Jian1" or "Traitor of the Chinese race". Singapore should not get too excited over the two pandas for it is merely a symbolic representation of the close ties the two countries have enjoyed for a long time. In fact, Singapore should have received them earlier since it has invested billions of dollars in China. Besides Singapore, China is also actively building closer ties with other ASEAN countries such as Malaysia which has about 6 million ethnic Chinese. President Hu Jintao paid a visit to Kuala Lumpur first before arriving in Singapore for the APEC meetings.  Read More →

By Bhaskaran Kunju Last week, on November 3, Singapore People’s Party chairman Sin Kek Tong announced that the Potong Pasir ward would most likely be contested by ‘someone new’ though no specific names were hinted at. The Potong Pasir ward, a single member constituency, has been held by MP Chiam See Tong since 1984. With 25 consecutive years under his belt as Member of Parliament, Mr Chiam is Singapore’s longest serving opposition MP having outlasted even J.B. Jeyaratnam (JBJ). JBJ being Singapore’s first opposition MP, having won the Anson by-elections just 3 years earlier. Mr Chiam, not unlike JBJ, has also faced a tumult of challenges in his years in politics but has never shown signs of wavering from his seat of power. While JBJ found his political career in tatters, Mr Chiam non-confrontational approach has repeatedly won over the people for 6 consecutive General Elections, a huge feat when taking into account the problems he had faced in his political career as well as the stifling political climate present in Singapore. Mr Chiam initially contested under the Singapore Democratic Party banner, a party that he had founded in 1980 but found himself on the wrong side of party members in 1995 due to the polarising effect of the newly recruited Mr Chee Soon Juan. The incidents resulting from it nearly threatened his political career, but Mr Chiam went on to accept membership and the chairmanship at the Singapore People’s Party and has carried on his good work unhindered. As of 2001 he leads the Singapore Democratic Alliance, a political alliance between Singapore Malay National Organisation and the Singapore People’s Party. The news of Mr Chiam’s decision to not contest as an incumbent came, as a surprise to many political observers but it is not entirely without practical thought. He had suffered a stroke just last year, which led to some initial disruption with his weekly meet-the-people sessions. Mr Chiam however will not be stepping away from politics as he has stated his interest to contest in a Group Representative Constituency (GRC) for the next elections. This will inevitably lead to three questions, ‘Which constituency would Mr Chiam be contesting in?’, ‘Why contest a GRC?’ and ‘Who would succeed Mr Chiam in his Potong Pasir constituency?’ Logically it would be about time for Mr Chiam to pass on the mantle to a younger successor. Mr Chiam turns 75 next March and as mentioned before has shown signs of wavering health. Some political observers have pointed to Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam, the eldest son of JBJ and Secretary-General of the Reform Party, carrying on his legacy at Potong Pasir. However I believe there is likelihood that Mr Chiam’s successor could be someone a lot closer to his lineage. Mr Chiam’s daughter, Camilla 33, has been involved in her father’s political career though she has kept a low profile in the media. However she should be of familiarity to residence of Potong Pasir, having done a lot of legwork in her father’s past campaigns and having most recently filled in for him at the meet-the-people sessions, after his hospitalisation due to a stroke. Familiarity is obviously not the only reason, one should also take into account Mr Chiam’s oft-repeated and well proven statement that his constituents are bought over by their trust in him. Lofty promises of upgrading and charm offences backfired tremendously for the PAP candidate Mr Sitoh Yih Pin. Speaking to reporters right after the 2006 General Elections, Ms Camilla Chiam had this to say about her father’s victory, “We worked hard and managed to beat abalone porridge and that $80-million carrot,” the latter being a reference to the upgrading projects and the former a reference to the abalone porridge nights arranged by Mr Sitoh Yih Pin for Potong Pasir constituents. While the porridges were a success it didn’t necessarily translate into votes. Mr Chiam’s biggest advantage over his PAP rivals has been his decades long familiarity with the residents but with nearly a generation having passed since his initial win, there is a possibility that he could be losing his core supporters. However in the last elections he retained his seat in parliament with a 55.82% majority, which in itself is a small yet significant improvement of nearly 3.5% from the previous elections of 2001. Contrary to popular belief, Mr Chiam’s appeal has not faded and a family member such as his daughter would make a logical successor if she could bank on his well-entrenched reputation among the constituents. Ideally it would be less of a risk than to field in a new candidate, like Mr Jeyaretnam, an unknown to the constituents and a new entrant to the political sphere. There has already been speculation that Mr Chiam may field himself as part of a ‘super group’ in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.  The Bishan GRC is relatively new and has been uncontested since 1997. The highly developed constituency is a PAP strong hold and is one of the toughest GRCs to get a foothold of. However the high level of development could work in favour of the opposition since the PAP’s main tactic in winning over voters has been with promises of upgradings. The assumption in favour of PAP will be voter gratitude for the development and upgrading of the area. The failure to capture the two opposition wards despite the promises of upgrading has had a sobering effect on the PAP, with promises to change their tactic. But the issues of political contentment stretch further than upgrading needs. It will not be impossible for a GRC to be won by an opposition. In the 2006 elections the Aljunied GRC was hotly contested by the Worker’s Party team led by Ms Sylvia Lim and garnered 43.91% of the vote. A significant amount for a GRC and even more so when taking into account it was the best performance by a losing opposition in any constituency in the 2006 elections. Similarly the PM Lee led PAP team for the Ang Mo Kio GRC lost 33.86% of the votes to a very inexperienced and young Worker’s Party team. It wouldn’t be too off the mark to suggest that a GRC would be there for the taking at the next elections with so much of the gap having been closed in the last elections. It must also be noted that earlier this year there were amendments made to the GRC and Single Member Constituency (SMC) criteria. In the same parliamentary sitting when PM Lee announced changes in the NMP and NCMP seats he also stated that the number of SMCs would be increased from 8 to 12 and the average number of members in a GRC would be reduced to no more than an average of 5. Meaning, there will be fewer 6 member GRCs and more smaller GRCs. In addition to that, he also stated that with this changes there would be inevitable adjustments made to electoral boundaries. Hence, in his own words, “the new configurations should be made known and justified many months in advance of the elections.” Given such a scenario, it would be easy to see why opposition candidates may seem the time might be right for the capture of a GRC. With Mr Chiam having taken his Potong Pasir Constituency as far as he possibly could, it could make sense that he needs to take up a new challenge. It is very likely that Mr Chiam may contest in a GRC with Mr Jeyaretnam as part of a opposition ‘super group’ to maximise their appeal to the voters. But unlike talks of a Bishan-Toa Payoh contest, I think it would be more likely that he could contest the Jalan Besar GRC which was previously contested by his SDA party and lost despite garnering 31.30% of the votes. Jalan Besar GRC also comprises a relatively older enclave of Singaporeans who might be able to identify with the political stature of Mr Chiam and the legacy of the Jeyaretnams. However with election dates still a year away and election boundaries likely to be altered it is unlikely that Mr Chiam or his party would make an announcement as yet. But I would like to stress that the elections would most likely be held next year before 2011. For some reason the press keeps speculating on the actual year, with some claiming it could be held as early as end of the year. Anyone paying attention to Parliamentary sessions this year would have picked up on PM Lee referring to the elections as the ‘2010 General Elections’. It is possible that he could be using a generic term, but it is highly unlikely for the PM to be throwing around generic terms in Parliament without much basis to it. Related articles: >> Chiam See Tong rapped for taking Potong Pasir residents for granted >> SPP rebukes PM Lee >> Chiam See Tong leaving Potong Pasir: a political suicide? >> PM Lee: PAP will not be taken advantage of again in Potong Pasir EDITORS’ NOTE: If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account ([email protected]). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you! Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview About the Author: Bhaskaran Kunju is a Political Science and Communications and New Media undergraduate at the National University of Singapore. He is a regular contributor to the Straits Times Forum and TODAY Voices. He also writes for NLB and FAS and hopes to be a full-time journalist upon graduation.  Read More →

I refer to the report dated 29 Oct 2009.   Mr Shanmugam starts by saying that women and children feel safe to travel any time, anywhere in Singapore which he then attributes to our strict laws and law enforcement.  However, there are many first world cities and countries like Hong Kong and Japan where women too can walk safely at night.  Yet these places do not have laws as strict as ours.  These places show that it is not necessarily strict laws that explain why our country is so safe.   Mr Shnmugam's statement that 90% of our population owns homes may not necessarily be true either.  Of the more than 900,000 HDB homes in existence, more than 400,000 have yet to repay their loans.  For these 400,000 homes, the title deed is kept by the HDB so technically, the HDB owns these homes.  So the real home ownership rate in Singapore is probably closer to 50%.   The speech given by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong has also served to confuse participants like Mr Jeffrey Tanenbaum who concedes, based on his observation of the commercial realm, that the law here merely reflects our culture rather than executive interference.  But why would the executive interfere with commercial affairs when it is highly dependent on multinationals for our continued economic prosperity?  Executive interference only makes sense in the political realm where the battering of political opponents and the control of the media can only bring good and nothing but the good for the executive.  So making reference to the wrong field has led Mr Tanenbaum to make the wrong conclusions.   To continue with Mr Shanmugam's metaphor, the pig has no need for lip stick because he rules over the animal farm.   If there is such a thing as the Singapore exceptionalism, it is no more exceptional than those of the other East Asian dragons of Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea.  With the rapid rise of China, the whole of East Asia, will collectively be exceptional.  So what is really so exceptional when each of the democracies of Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea achieves as much as authoritarian Singapore?   So perhaps, the exceptionalism lies not with Singapore per say but with the fact that Singapore is East Asian.       Thank you   Ng Kok Lim  Read More →