TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent In an article titled "That essential journey" published in the July/August edition of the PAP newsletter Petir, Pasir Ris West Branch PAP member Xu Kaixian hailed the recent "reforms" introduced by Prime Minister Lee to increase the number of NMP seats in Parliament. (read original article Xu felt that NMPs, being "independent members of the public with no political affiliations, they are able to contribute more effectively because they are free from political baggage." Quoting the United States as an example, he defended Singapore's authoritarian one-party state: "In fact, with the elimination of the partisan tensions and incentives to milk political mileage, lawmakers should surely have the space for genuine and meaningful debates about the best policies for a country because there is no need for politicking to gain political points." Xu also questioned the relevance of the opposition in a democracy: "Going by a dictionary definition, democracy is a system in which the governing power is vested in the people, who exercise this power directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held elections. As such, democracy need not involve the presence of an opposition." The arguments of Xu bears an uncanny similiarities to that espoused by PAP leaders over the years that a western-styled democracy is unsuitable for Singapore. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in a speech last year that a two-party system is "unsuitable" for Singapore and that it will be better off with one single, dominant party. MM Lee Kuan Yew had this omnious warning to Singaporeans during the 2006 elections: "Please don't assume that you can change governments. Young people don't understand this." On another occasion, he said: "Without the elected President and if there is a freak (election) result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it." It appears that in the minds of PAP members, only their party has the "divine right" to govern Singapore.  Read More →

By John Elliot from Asia Sentinel It's probably the tip of the iceberg of China's ambitions to thwart India's emergence as a significant economic and maybe diplomatic and military power. I'm referring to what might appear to some to be a crazy article on a Chinese strategic issues website, which claims that China could "dismember the so-called ‘Indian Union' with one little move". The writer has argued that India's national unity is weak and that China could exploit this by supporting separatist forces, such as those active in India's north-east state of Assam, and split the country into 20 or 30 sovereign states. "There cannot be two suns in the sky. China and India cannot really deal with each other harmoniously," said the article. That almost certainly reflects Beijing thinking, even though the founder of the website has claimed the anonymous writer has no known government links. The article was posted last Saturday and was publicized in India yesterday, prompting the Indian foreign ministry to say it appeared to be "an expression of individual opinion and does not accord with the officially stated position of China on India-China relations conveyed to us on several occasions". But what else could India say – especially since the article coincided with apparently cordial talks between the two countries on their border that has been disputed since China defeated India in a brief 1962 Himalayan war. It is not unusual for China to fly such extreme kites. Philip Bowring of the Hong Kong-based Asia Sentinel website pointed out that the arrest last week of two Rio Tinto executives in Beijing for alleged theft and corruption followed an internet article written by an official of China's National Administration for the Protection of State Secrets, which accused Rio of commercial "spying" that had cost the nation $100 billion in higher iron ore prices – an accusation says Bowring that "does not stand up to the most casual scrutiny of trade data". Bowring then points out that "although the article is no longer on the website, its claims have not been corrected and its imprint on Chinese minds will not disappear." The imprint of the India internet article will also not disappear because, whatever the two countries may say officially, it sums up what has been happening for years. As James Lamont and Amy Kazmin explained a month ago in an excellent FT round-up of the two countries' tortuous relations, China has been encircling India by developing influence and outposts in Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka, and wants to usurp India's major role in controlling the Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea. Pakistan, which China has armed and helped become a nuclear power, has been destabilizing India first in Punjab (in the 1980s) and then in Kashmir. China has also for years been encouraging separatist forces in India's north-eastern states, including Assam, and will no doubt use its growing clout in Myanmar – and Bangladesh – to increase those activities. In the future it could perhaps use its growing influence in Sri Lanka – where it is developing a naval base and advised the government in the recent defeat of the Tamil Tiger separatists – to cause unrest among linked Tamil communities in southern India. It has also strengthened its border claims – for example by opposing a US$3 billion Asian Development Bank aid project in Arunachal Pradesh, an Indian border state that China claims as "south Tibet". And it tried to block international approval of the recent India-US nuclear deal with the US. This is of course a dangerous game and sometimes India has to respond – recently for example by moving fighter jets to the China border. I have heard a former senior Indian bureaucrat argue privately that China's basic – and permanent – aim is to force India to focus on domestic issues and thus thwart it becoming a future international rival. China, according to this view – which is surely correct – is determined to be the world's sole superpower after America, and does not want that status to be upset by a strong and democratic India backed by the US and Europe. Its tactics have become more insistent in the past two years as it has become irritated by India's growing links with the US, culminating in the nuclear deal. Everything that China does in relation to India therefore has to be seen through that prism. India will not fragment into 20 or 30 pieces – it is far too unified for that – but there is no prospect of permanent peace and co-operation between the two countries because, as the internet writer has said, "there cannot be two suns in the sky." Source: Asia Sentinel  Read More →

By Kelvin Teo from Kent Ridge Common Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew made a rhetorical call to treat new citizens as equals at a National Day dinner at Tanjong Pagar. He added:”Once the new immigrants become citizens, they must be treated as equally as native-born Singaporeans, or our society will be fractured.” Lee made an interesting point about our society getting fractured due to discrimination against new citizens. Much will depend on what we understand by the term “society”. The encroachment of foreigners could lead to unhappiness and dissatisfaction among local Singaporeans towards the former. A possible “us Singaporeans” versus “them foreigners” situation could result. If there is any fracturing, it will not be amongst existing Singaporeans, but rather between Singaporeans and foreigners. Thus, the society of Singaporeans will remain intact, but relations between Singaporeans and foreigners will hit a low. However, if we consider society at the level that includes Singaporeans, Permanent Residents and foreigners, there will undoubtedly be fracturing. There will not be much of a fracturing problem between new Singapore citizens and existing Singaporeans since the former would have been integrated into the Singapore society and share similar ethos and traits with typical Singaporeans upon receiving their citizenship, which allows them to better relate to other Singaporeans. The problem will be more acute between foreigners (those on work visas) and Singaporeans. Read rest of article here  Read More →