Article source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24276/84/
Lee Kuan Yew and Corruption - Singapore
Style
Posted by admin
Tuesday, 14 July 2009 11:38
By Shahidan Said
Lee Kuan Yew’s recent visit to Malaysia saw a flood of
predictable commentaries from his admirers in blogosphere. Most
members of his fan club have probably neither read anything
substantive on the history of the struggles of the people of
Singapore, nor grasped the significance of Singapore’s comprador
role in Empire’s scheme of things in the region.
We have become accustomed to the standard chorus of mindless
sheep-like bleating from such admirers who describe Kuan Yew as an
outstanding statesman. One such hagiographical contribution in the
blogs recently was from Tunku Abdul Aziz, who describes himself…’
as a dyed in the wool admirer of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s
Minister Mentor…because Lee undoubtedly played an important and
historic role in the creation of Malaysia as a political entity.’
Tunku Aziz further adds, ‘ Enriching himself or his family has
never been part of his game plan…He has never wavered in his belief
right at the outset that corruption, humanity’s greatest curse, was
not going to be a feature of Singapore’s governance model…
Singapore operates a justice system that is
incorruptible.’
Let us examine these assertions a little more closely. That
Singapore has achieved an excellent record in cleaning its civil
service from corruption, thus ensuring its citizens get their
service as of right and are not subjected to the under table tolls
imposed by corrupt civil servants as is often the case in Malaysia,
is indeed without dispute. We should do all we can to strive
to achieve such desirable standards without compromise in Malaysia
as well. While successful in wiping out corruption in the
sphere of routine day-to-day level of interaction between civil
servants and citizens, it is absurd to conclude that this
achievement suggests that Singapore has an incorruptible governance
model. While the elimination of corruption at this level is a
necessary condition, it is not a sufficient condition to describe
Singapore as having an incorruptible governance model.
As an activist in Transparancy International, Tunku Aziz waxes
lyrical about Lee Kuan Yew’s achievements from a one-dimensional
prism of an anti-corruption campaigner. He addresses the issue of
corruption at the formal expression of this cancer to the exclusion
of addressing corruption at the level of political power, which is
different to the day-day-day corrupt practices most citizens face
in their daily lives as they go about their business. In other
words, corruption must be addressed holistically, including at the
macro political level. Beneath the corruption-free image that is
projected lays a corrupt social order in which citizens’ lives are
policed at their work place, in their housing schemes and in
educational institutes by the ruling party. All the levers of power
and decision making are controlled by the PAP and dissent is
ruthlessly crushed. This is a model of the corporate state. The
reward for acquiescence in this scheme of things is a higher
standard of living than that enjoyed by the citizens in the
hinterland.
The very structure of the PAP, which has ruled Singapore since
independence, is totally corrupt. The PAP is not an open party, but
operates on an exclusivist principle whereby cadres are introduced
and vetted on a secretive basis. This Leninist principle of
organization is to ensure that the leadership - meaning Kuan Yew,
his cronies and their children - are assured control of the party,
as they indeed have been in control for the past half century. This
method of membership selection ensures those privileged to belong
to the party remain grateful for being given entry to the exclusive
political organisation. It is a system of perpetuating the position
of the leaders who have let you into the inner sanctum of the only
‘legitimate’ political organisation in Singapore.
In his excellent book on Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew, TJS George
draws parallels with the Vatican’s process of electing the Pope.
The Cardinals are selected through a secretive process by the Pope
and the Pope is in turn selected through a secretive process,
excluding all other members, by the Cardinals. At the level of
power and decision making, Singapore’s elite, without doubt, ranks
among the most corrupt globally.
Singapore’s treasury has been denuded of tens of billions of
dollars in the recent collapse of Lehman Brothers and other
financial institutions in which investments were made through
Temasek Holdings. This sovereign fund is managed by Kuan Yew’s
daughter-in-law. Don’t hold your breath for any consequences to
arise for the mismanagement of the people’s money, nor is there
going to be an open discussion of these loss-making adventures
anytime soon. Should Transparency International not concern itself
with the opaque non-transparent decision making affecting
Singapore’s citizens by members of Lee’s family on issues such as
these? ‘Enriching himself or his family has never been part of his
game plan’, asserts Tunku Aziz in tribute to Lee’s
incorruptibility. Should the handling of sovereign funds and other
national treasures without accountability by members of the Lee
family not raise questions?
This very corrupt structure of the party was one of many charges
laid against the PAP, resulting in its expulsion from the Socialist
International (SI), an international social democratic movement
whose members include the European, Japanese and Australian/New
Zealand labour parties. The SI found the anti-trade union laws and
other repressive legislation implemented by the PAP to emasculate
the labour movement violated SI principles. Other repressive laws
cited were the printing presses ordinances carried over from
colonial rule to curtail freedom of expression. In fact newspapers
with articles critical of the regime have also been closed down and
editors of newspapers detained. The student’s unions have seen
their leaders who are not pro-establishment victimized and even
tried in the ‘incorruptible’ courts on trumped up charges. Most
damning from the point of view of the SI was the PAP’s use of the
Internal Security Act to detain opposition leaders, some for
decades.
How do the MT commentators praise Kuan Yew as a statesman when
there is a mountain of evidence to prove that the PAP is, and has
always been, a repressive party run by thugs? How do these
commentators oppose the repressive legislation here in Malaysia but
support it in Singapore?
To assert, as Tunku Aziz does, that ‘Singapore operates a
justice system that is incorruptible’ in view of the accumulated
evidence to the contrary is therefore astoundingly stupid. True, as
mentioned above, in the mundane day-to-day crime
prevention/business sphere, the justice system delivers. Has Tunku
Aziz been in deep slumber when media critics and opposition
activists have been railroaded through Singapore’s ‘incorruptible’
judicial system into bankruptcy and political oblivion over the
years? The US State Department likes to protest such infringements
of human rights violations which occur in countries that are not
hitched to the US bandwagon. Singapore is given an easy ride even
when one of its own US citizens, formerly a Singapore national, was
last year sentenced to several months’ imprisonment for questioning
the integrity of the ‘incorruptible’ justice system in Singapore.
No wonder, then, that in a poll in the Singapore press, quoted by
opposition activist, Dr Chee Soon Juan, in an interview with
Lorraine Hahn on CNN’s Talk Asia, “… 93 percent of Singaporeans
have indicated that they are fearful, that they were afraid to
speak up even if they didn't agree with government policy.” (
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw02/020529cn.htm)
The railroading in court of Dr Chee Soon Juan and his wife into
bankruptcy is a recent example in a series of such cases. The
Singapore Democratic Party blog reported the following exchange in
the PAP controlled ’incorruptible’ court last year:
“During cross-examination of Mr Lee Hsien Loong, Mr
Davinder Singh repeatedly objected to the questions. And yet the
hearing was to assess the plaintiffs' reputations so that damages
could be decided.
And yet every time the questions about the Lees' reputations were
raised, Mr Singh objected. And yet none of what Dr Chee tried to
ask was reported in the press.” http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/487-why-let-reality-get-in-the-way
Chee (to Lee Hsien Loong): Would you refer to pg 192 of your
AEIC, para 3 and read it to us.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong starts reading. Just before he gets to the words
he uttered about fixing the opposition and buying over his
supporters, Mr Davinder Singh stands up.
Singh: Objection, Your Honour.
Judge: I'll read it.
Chee: Mr Lee, you read it.
Judge: Dr Chee please tell us the relevance.
Chee: This paragraph will show it's true of him –
Judge Move on, the question is disallowed.
Chee: He has used words like "fix" and "buy votes". He's here to
tell me that his reputation is based on so much. I'm here to
demolish it, when he buys votes -
Judge: Disallowed.
Chee: Let it be recorded then. Mr Lee, come out and don't hide
behind your counsel. You have every opportunity to answer the
questions. You allow your counsel to cover -
Singh: Objection, Your Honour.
Judge: Court has taken note of Dr Chee's conduct.
Chee: Mr Lee, please refer to pg 39 of your AEIC sub-heading "lack
of transparency." Do you agree with the last line and last
paragraph that the GIC operates in secrecy?
Singh: Objection. Dr Chee is seeking to reopen the issue. This
article relates to the offending words. The meaning has been taken
to be false. The question of liability is done.
Chee: Turn then to pg 75 of your AEIC, bottom of the page. Is the
Government transparent? Do you agree with this
statement?
Singh: I object.
Judge: Irrelevent.
Chee: Do you believe the funds belongs to the people?
Singh: Irrelevent.
………….
Chee: Do you think that your Ministers spend too much -
Judge: Disallowed.
Chee: I put to you that the PAP is bent on greed and
power.
Singh Objection.
Judge: Sustained.
Chee Refer to pg 9 of your AEIC. Is the information on the cost of
labour of building HDB flats available?
Singh: Objection.
Judge Sustained.
Chee: Is information on the cost of material of building HDB flats
available?
Singh: Objection.
Judge Sustained.
Chee: Do you agree that the HDB is operating in
secrecy?
Singh: Objection.
Judge Sustained.
To suggest, as Tunku Aziz does, ‘…that Lee undoubtedly played an
important and historic role in the creation of Malaysia as a
political entity’ gives Kuan Yew more credit than he deserves.
Colonial rule in Malaya, Singapore and the Borneo territories of
Sabah and Sarawak became untenable, due principally to the
anti-colonial movement and also because of strong opposition to
colonial rule in its neighborhood by Indonesia.
Kuan Yew initially acted for the leaders of the anti-colonial
movement who were detained by the British as their legal counsel.
As his Machiavellian traits unfolded, he supported the Chinese
educated left and at the same time collaborated with Sir William
Goode to instigate the detention of these anti-colonial activists
while laying the blame for the detentions on the Brits.
He thus maneuvered himself into the mainstream of the
anti-colonial movement led by the PAP while his colonial masters
detained all the senior leaders of the PAP: Dr Lim Hock Siew, Dr
Poh Soo Kai, Said Zahari, Lim Chin Siong, Chia Thye Poh and over a
hundred other leaders representing a cross section of trade
unionists, academics, and student leaders. Some of these leaders
were held under detention without trial for over a decade and a
half. In fact, Chia Thye Poh was a prisoner of conscience for a
longer period than Nelson Mandela.
Kuan Yew wanted Singapore to be in Malaysia desperately because
he wanted to expand his power base from the red dot to its
hinterland from where he could speak on behalf of a larger
constituency as he trotted around the globe as a US-sponsored
leader in the region. He did not feel constrained to negotiate with
Tengku to oust the MCA from the Alliance coalition and replace it
with the PAP so that he could speak on behalf of the Chinese.
Though Kuan Yew’s relationship with China and his Chineseness is
evoked by the Chinese chauvinists on MT as his strong armour, that
relationship is actually skin deep. He has always been and remains
to the present a man described by some Commonwealth leaders as
yellow outside, but white inside. He has been a reliable puppet to
the US imperial agenda in the region, including the US containment
of China strategy. He provides naval facilities to the US navy and
was championing their effort to introduce US Marines into the
Straits of Malacca to purportedly fight potential terrorist
threats.
The US strategy is, in fact, to control all the choke points
such as the Straits so that it will be able to turn off the energy
flow to China when it deems it necessary. Over 70% of China’s
energy needs flow through the Straits. The resistance to this part
of the China containment policy was provided by Malaysia and
Indonesia whose leaders argued the introduction of US marines into
the Straits of Malacca would violate the sovereignty of the
littoral states.
Lee Kuan Yew was a supporter of the US war of aggression against
Vietnam in which some three million Vietnamese were killed and many
more injured. US armed forces personnel fighting their war of
aggression in Vietnam were rewarded by Kuan Yew with the opening up
of Singapore as a Rest and Recreation destination for these forces.
Well, we all know what that means: US dollars flow in while the
dignity of local women gets violated.
We should also recall the US invasion of Iraq to get rid of its
arsenal of WMDs, which turned out to be a pack of lies. One of the
puppets in this region to support the US invasion, which has
unleashed a civil war under US occupation and has caused the death
of 1.3 million Iraqis and has turned more than 4 million Iraqis
into refugees, was Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew, together with
like-minded puppets, wanted to provide the US with the fig leaf of
legitimacy for the invasion after the US-led war-mongers failed to
secure UN Security Council approval. The US presented its murderous
enterprise as having the popular support of a 30-nation coalition
of the willing. Lee Kuan Yew was one of the willing. In taking
Singapore to war in Iraq, the people of Singapore were not
consulted by this paragon of incorruptibility.
Do people like Tunku Aziz, who admire Lee Kuan Yew, not
understand that their mentor is justifiably deemed a loathsome
opportunist by progressive political opinion as their mentor has
partaken in an orgy of death and mayhem by joining a coalition that
launched an illegal and immoral war to support US imperialism, a
war that is deemed by the Nuremburg Principles as the most heinous
crime against humanity?
Original link also has 26 comments on the page at time of this
posting.
Note: I did not read the
article in its entirety and am just putting it up as it seems like
a topic members of this forum would like to read.
