|
|
Chee Siok Chin
"The
Peoples' Action Party (PAP) has been so successful in propagating
its non-welfarism policy that Singaporeans think it is perfectly
all right when see elderly women and men cleaning public toilets,
collecting empty cans and cardboard boxes to sell, and going from
table to table hawking packets of tissue at food centres."
"There is
no doubt that Singapore is often seen as a model of economic
success. The dangerous truth is that its governance presents a
threat to democracy all over the world."
|
Vantage
The giant and the tiny red dot
Chee
Siok Chin
11 Jun 07
Singapore is a tiny country less
than 700 square kilometres and where just over four million
people reside. Compare this with China's 1.3 billion people and a
land area of over nine million square kilometers, and the
question of what the island-nation can teach the world's most
populated country comes to mind.
Yet, there has been no
shortage of such advocates. Listen to what economist and
strategist, Mr. Arjuna Mahendran, says about the
matter:
"Singapore is a small country of 4.3 million
people, and is very efficiently run by a government of competent
technocrats. It is considered a role model for other Asian
countries in the field of urban planning. China’s leaders
starting with the late Deng Xiao Ping used Singapore as a model
to fashion the development of Shanghai and other urban
centers."
India is also jumping in. Mahendran points
out that "India is using Singapore’s expertise to
re-develop her major cities" as well as those in Indonesia,
Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and even the Middle
East.
There is no doubt that Singapore is an
extraordinarily influential city-state. It is often seen as a
model of economic success by not only its neighbours, but also
beyond.
Rich government, poor people
The
economic success that Singapore often boasts of, however, is
overstated. The real wealth lies with the ministers who have
recently increased their salaries to between 1.5 million to 2
million US dollars year. Before this increase, ministers in
Singapore were already the highest paid public servants in the
world.
Whilst the island's leaders increased their
already inflated salaries, however, the General Household Survey
showed that the average household monthly income for the 30
percentile of lowest wage earners dropped by an average of 12 per
cent.
At the same time, the top 10 percentile of
households saw an increase of almost 15 per cent in their
incomes.
The Gini Coefficient had increased from 0.49 to
0.522 from the year 200 to 2005, making income disparity in the
country one of the highest in the world.
The question of
whom all this economic success benefits necessarily arises. In
truth its economic policies serve only to benefit the rich whilst
those living in need are told that welfare should be treated like
a dirty word.
The elderly are told to work beyond their
retirement age and for less pay if they do not have enough money
to see them through their remaining years.
The Peoples'
Action Party (PAP) has been so successful in propagating its
non-welfarism policy that Singaporeans think it is perfectly all
right when see elderly women and men cleaning public toilets,
collecting empty cans and cardboard boxes to sell, and going from
table to table hawking packets of tissue at food
centres.
Dependent thinking
This lack of
compassion and conscience arise due to the fact that the local
media have been hijacked by the ruling party. Newspapers,
magazines, television and radio networks are controlled by the
government.
This is the reality. The "success"
the Singapore Government boasts about is attained at the cost of
the freedoms, rights and dignity of its people.
The legal
system is used to silence dissent; countless civil lawsuits and
criminal prosecution have been successfully brought against
opposition members.
Draconian laws have been enacted to
ensure that power of the ruling party is deeply entrenched and
prevails. Laws that prohibit public gatherings, protests,
speaking to public audiences, producing political films and the
use of summary judgments in defamation suits are just some of the
regulations that serve to punish those who are deemed as hazards
to the PAP's hold on authority.
Even the police force have
been brainwashed to believe that they are personal protectors of
members of the PAP.
Less authoritarian?
When
compared to countries is Asia such as Burma, Cambodia, China,
Vietnam and Laos, Singapore appears to be less authoritarian and
less audacious in the way it deals with freedom fighters.
But
the PAP's tactics are no less effective in curbing human rights
and quelling any perceived threats to its power.
The
situation that we face in Singapore is no less difficult.
Politicians and democracy advocates have been sued, bankrupted,
run out of the country and jailed in our struggle for democracy,
social justice and human rights.
Teacher of the unfree
world
But what has this Singapore-style government got
to do with the world's Goliath?
It has been reported that
China's former leader, Deng Xiaoping had openly expressed
particular admiration for Singapore’s approach to "social
order" as the best blueprint for the rapid development of
China’s own cities. By the 1980s the Chinese Communist
leaders, tired of the Western notion of urbanism, were also
beginning to embrace the Singapore model.
Former
president, Jiang Zemin is also an admirer of Singapore's Lee Kuan
Yew. According to Hong Kong's Ming Pao newspaper, Jiang told Lee
during their meeting that he admired him for his role as
Singapore's elder statesman.
The economic blueprint for
any country cannot be designed in isolation of political and
social development. The Singapore model has shown that economic
success cannot be achieved without the suppression of rights and
basic freedoms.
China's human rights record is drawing
much criticism and attention from democratic societies.
Sanctions, resolutions and outcry by governments and NGOs affects
the Chinese Government more than it cares to recognise or admit.
The Singapore model on the other hand draws little
criticism much less affirmative action from these similar bodies.
One reason is because it endears itself to Western multinational
corporations by creating an environment highly beneficial to such
foreign businesses but, as I have pointed out, with devastating
results on the locals.
It also placates the West by making
soothing noises of being committed to transparency and the rule
of law, but in reality practicing the opposite. This creates the
illusion of legitimacy for the government.
Unfortunately,
this falsehood has either been overlooked or accepted as fact by
the international community.
Worryingly, countries like
Taiwan and Russia are picking up a thing or two about how to
undermine democracy while appearing to supporting it.
Taiwan's
presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou from the Kuomintang Party had
cited Singapore as a model for Taiwan. He said "Singapore is
different from us (Taiwan) as its emphasis is not on
democratisation. Nevertheless, it is professional,
corruption-free and efficient, which is worth our learning."
A country cannot stifle democracy without seriously
violating basic human freedoms. Yet, Ma looks to this city-state
as an example for one of Asia's most established democracies.
Russia's current strongman Vladimir Putin is said to be
looking at Lee's model of promoting economic development in
isolation of the democratisation process.
Ousted former
prime minister of Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra, ran the country
using the Singapore model. Analyst Shawn Crispin wrote that in
Thaksin's public speeches and weekly radio addresses, the former
Thai leader had frequently invoked Singapore's style of
governance. It proved unpopular with Thailand's democracy and
freedom activists, which eventually led to his downfall.
The
dangerous truth
Since it opened its doors to foreign
trade and investments, the role that China plays in the world's
economy has hugely increased. If it does a Singapore-type
expansion, there will be a heavy price to pay for all involved,
both politically as well as economically.
There is no
doubt that Singapore is often seen as a model of economic
success. The dangerous truth is that its governance presents a
threat to democracy all over the world.
If a few
countries begin to import, even in part, Lee Kuan Yew's style of
governance, the struggle against tyranny is in for a rough and
prolonged ride.
Chee Siok Chin is a member of the
SDP's Central Executive Committee.
|
|
