As Singapore prepares to celebrate its 45th National Day,
public resentment continues to rise against the newcomers,
threatening to rupture the social fabric of this multi-racial,
overcrowded island.
IS SINGAPORE a country or just a global city? Non-legally speaking,
of course!
As its five million residents prepare to mark the republic’s 45th
National Day on Monday, the question remains very much alive in the
wake of the huge influx of foreigners.
During the past 10 years, one million foreigners have arrived,
which has helped to create a stronger economy, but also diluted the
proportion of local-born Singaporeans.
This was on top of another one million arrivals in the previous
decade, most of them temporarily.
Except for some 20,000 a year who became citizens, the two million
arrivals since 1990 have formed a big shifting, transient
population that comes and goes – not an ideal ingredient for
nation-building.
On Monday, many non-Singaporeans will join the locals to watch the
parade and fireworks.
A few representatives from each major country will take part in the
march-past.
The country or city question has been popping up more often with
the increase in the foreign presence.
The total foreign element of the population is 36% (and still
counting) and locals are becoming increasingly worried about its
potential impact on national identity.
A recent think tank survey found that the majority of Singaporeans,
while understanding why foreigners are needed, believe the vast
number of arrivals would weaken unity.
Almost two out of every three Singaporeans felt the policy would
“weaken Singaporeans’ feelings as ‘one nation, one people’,” said
the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) after interviewing about
2,000 people.
This was a huge jump from the 38% who felt the same way in an
earlier survey done in 1998, a strong indication of spreading
public concern.
However, the study found that loyalty and pride remained
stable.
The dilution of the Singaporean population content is causing
long-term concerns about its defence, which rests on the shoulders
of young Singaporean males.
From age 18, they have to serve compulsory military training for
two years before becoming part of a reservist army that will serve
as front-line troops in the event of hostilities.
Foreigners are exempted from national service as are permanent
residents; but their sons have to serve.
Even before the immigration wave hit its shores, the question of
whether Singapore was a country or just a global city was
occasionally cropping up.
The earlier anxiety was caused by the country’s limited size and
vulnerability.
It also depended heavily on the outside world.
Last year, the controversy was rekindled by Law Minister K.
Shanmugam in a speech in the United States when he was defending
Singapore’s dominant one-party system.
Critics, he said, were unfairly judging Singapore’s political
system as a country, rather than as a city like New York.
“This is where
most people make a mistake.
“I have tried to
explain that we are different.
“We are a city.
We are not a country,” the Singapore minister
added.
It created a
furore among young Singaporeans who were proud of their city state,
especially a number of servicemen, past and
present.
They were
livid.
At about the same time, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew also touched
on the issue but in a different context when he said that Singapore
was still a work-in-progress when it came to nationhood.
“Are we a nation yet?
“I will not say we are. We’re in transition,” Lee said.
But, more than any of his younger ministers, the 86-year-old
Minister Mentor realises the danger of having too many foreigners
in the social fabric of this multi-racial, over-crowded island.
He said Singapore must cap the foreign content to no more than
one-third of the population.
“... (we must) have a core – at least 65% of people born and bred
here who understand this place”.
Lee is evidently aware of the potential rupture of society should
public resentment continue to rise against newcomers in Singapore,
one of the world’s most over-crowded cities.
There have been increasing cases of friction or conflict between
locals and foreigners in recent months.
To put it in perspective, foreigners are not the only cause of the
relatively weak national bonding in Singapore.
Singapore is only 45 years old, hardly a generation since
independence – far too short a time for nation-building.
Another is the lure of opportunities in foreign countries.
On a visit to Qatar several years ago, Lee talked of the dilemma
facing a globalising nation state: “(People) become citizens of the
world.
“What does that mean? Lost!”
Lee said: “If more Singaporeans worked abroad and their children
forget their roots, there will be no Singapore node to send them
out.
“They dissolve and disappear and there is no Singapore.”
Last week Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said he intended to bring
in another 100,000 foreign workers, indicating the likelihood that
he still wanted to see a 6.5 million population.
Some commentators believe the mass arrival of foreigners may dilute
the city’s sense of patriotism, as well as its roots and traditions
over time.
As the Chinese
saying goes, a country without patriotism is like a country without
soul.
Despite the rising public resentment against the immigration
policy, analysts expect the ruling People’s Action Party to win
another five-year mandate if elections were held now.
What is not known is whether it will be strong enough to push back
an increase in the opposition voice in Parliament (now with two
elected MPs).
Elections are widely tipped to take place within the next 12
months.
Critics believe a
strong indication of public sentiment is the relatively low number
of national flags displayed spontaneously by individuals outside
their homes.
http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?col=insightdownsouth&file=/2010/8/7/columnists/insightdownsouth/6813369&sec=Insight%20Down%20South