Serious The only viable Foreign Policy for S’pore and why the PAP will not implement

[Sammyboy RSS Feed]

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

Singaporeans must be feeling as though they have been caught between a rock and hard place recently or like the proverbial grape in a wine press. I refer to the less then stellar relations with the US and China and how Singapore is caught between the 2 of them. Lee Hsien Loong has mentioned in a recent BBC interviewed that Singapore’s loyalties to the US and China may one day be tested. The PAP feels betrayed by the US due to the sudden cancellation of the TPP, and also by China over the confiscation of the Terrexes in Hong Kong. We have been walking a fine balancing act between the 2 countries, and like the girlfriend who is two timing with 2 boyfriends, everything is breaking down now. China does not want us this close to the US orbit and influence, while the US wants us to help them be a bulwark in the South China Seas against the Chinese. When we appease the US by criticizing China for not respecting the Hague ruling on the South China Sea, we get roundly scolded by the Chinese. At the same time, the US is very far away and has other commitments in Asia and therefore, we cannot rely on them to there with us even when we have been there for them in the past.


Our foreign policy regarding these 2 countries was born out of the Cold War and formulated by the minds of Lee Kuan Yew, S Rajaratnam, and Goh Keng Swee. The policy was straightforward back then. It was to make friends with the biggest baddest kid on the block in the hopes that he will look out for you. So when there was a very real Communist threat in SE Asia, we were friends of the US, offering our port for resupply and R & R during the Vietnam War. We had hope that the US will stay around this region to prevent a Communist Domino Theory from sweeping all of South East Asia. So far so good, it was a simple policy based on befriending the one Superpower that was in the Region. Russia at that time was more focused on Europe.


Things changed when China opened up under Deng Xiao Peng. When Lee Kuan Yew took the initiative to start a dialog with China, they were appreciative as they were the relative new comers to the market economy. But no one realized how fast China would grow and become an economic Superpower and on its way to being a military one too. Gone are the appreciative Chinese officials at the first contact, they are replaced by western trained, well educated, well connected Chinese officials not afraid to use their new found country wealth and economic clout. The PAP has failed to find any sense of rapport with this new generation of leaders and we are now paying the price for it. Whether it was arrogance from the PAP’s second and third generation leadership, or whether it was through sheer incompetence, we will likely not know. But one telling fact is that since S Rajaratnam and his 15 years as Minister for Foreign Affairs, the last 2 Minister (Shamnugam and Vivian Balakrishnan) have had a grand total of 6 years as Foreign Minister between them. Although Rajaratnam did not have a foreign affairs or a diplomat background, he was a reporter and cognizant of international politics going on in the region. In addition, his long tenure allowed him to set up the Singapore diplomatic corp as well as be well versed in foreign policy. By Contrast, the last 2 aforementioned Ministers were a lawyer (Shanmugam) and an eye surgeon (Balakrishnan). Prior to this 2 Ministers, we had a RSAF scholar Brigadier General (George Yeo), and another lawyer who had bounced around several portfolios before becoming Foreign Minister (Jayakumar). Needless to say, you cannot formulate a sound and progressive foreign policy with such people who are not trained in it, nor have a passion for it.


Hence, we have such simple gaffes in our foreign eg. Provocatively sailing 9 Terrexes from Taiwan into 2 Chinese controlled ports. And speaking about the South China Seas issue when we have no stake in it.


The PAP’s policy of not choosing sides only works when you have a smart and wise person like Lee Kuan Yew to play one side against the other. That does not seem to be the case now. The current crop of leadership does not know how to do this. Let’s just consider the entire Terrex fiasco. Would it have happened if Lee Kuan Yew was still around? And if he did, would they not be released if Lee picked the phone up and called the Chinese leader? If the answer is no and yes to these 2 questions, then it speaks volumes about how far off our leaders are.


In my opinion, the only viable foreign policy we should follow is one of self imposed permanent neutrality, based on the Swiss and the Swedish example. We must not align ourselves with any of these superpowers, and we have to state unequivocally that we will stay out of their orbit of influence and we will take no sides. A neutral country can still be very economically viable and prosperous, while avoiding conflict. In fact, the PAP used to always bring up Swiss standard of living as a gauge, but if we want to copy something from them, why not copy their neutrality instead of just their economic success. We already have many of the hallmarks of what successful neutral countries have:


1) 1)A small and independent citizen army. We have this through National Service already. So does Switzerland.


2) 2)An independent home grown arms supplier to cut down reliance on overseas supplies, supplemented by imported weapons. Switzerland has home grown weapons manufacturers like Oerlikon (now Rheinmetall), SIG Sauer and Pilatus. We have ST Aerospace, ST Kinetics and ST Engineering, whose products are supplemented with such US weapons like the F-16 and F-15. Switzerland has F-18s and F-5s in its air force.


3) 3)A strong banking system, which all combatants trust. Knowing that a neutral country will not likely freeze its assets due to political considerations, it makes the bigger powers more accepting of a country’s neutrality and more likely to want to keep it neutral if that is a place they can trust will keep their money and bullion safe.

4)
4)We have no natural sworn enemies, just like the Swiss. Countries like Israel cannot be neutral, because other countries are sworn to destroy them. We do not have such animosity towards us.



A neutral country will save a lot of money on its defense budget. We don’t need all that fancy offensive toys we have now. The entire Swiss defence budget is under USD $5 billion, while ours is over $14 billion. We can just concentrate on defending our own turf, become masters of urban close combat battle, and make sure that any potential attacker will pay a very heavy price. A neutral country will earn the trust of China and the US. They may not like it, but they will respect it. This will mean that we have to kick out all the foreign military bases and organizations in Singapore. Kick the Israelis and their military mission out. Ban the US fleet from using Singapore and the same for the USAF. Stop our overseas training in Taiwan, US, etc. Sever all military ties with China and the US, other then for weapons purchase. But, we should still keep our training facilities in more non align countries like Australia and Germany.

Will the PAP carry out such a bold move? Not likely. It requires guts and audacity on their side, and I don’t think the PAP has it. And someone is making a lot of money from a $14 billion a year defence budget. That is really hard to give up.


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.