Foreign Policy
‘Apple polishing’ diplomacy
We should stop blatantly defending China’s (or anyone else’s)
interests; it’s unbecoming and it’s ineffective.
By Seah Chiang Nee, littlespeck.com
Apr 12, 2008
During the early days, the late Mr. S. Rajaratnam had helped to win
Singapore a lot of world respect by speaking out clearly and
sincerely to defend Singapore’s interests.
I’ve reported him in action many times in pursuit of our foreign
policy.
He spoke out against the Chinese Communist Party’s support of Chin
Peng’s insurgents and Sukarno’s confontasi against Malaysia (we
were in it).
We were then speaking up for ourselves, a small state against
threats from a bigger foe.
Since then the world has changed; so has our conduct of foreign
policy.
These days we seem to have forgotten one simple tenet: We’re too
small to be taking sides in others’ conflicts.
We sometimes forget we're still a small trading state, which can’t
afford to make enemies unnecessarily involving ourselves in someone
else's quarrels.
In recent years under Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew – and now his
son - we seem to have become self-appointed defenders of China’s
interests. We blow the trumpets of their “achievements” every
chance we get.
Recently Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong came out to warn the West
not to anger the Chinese people over Tibet by disrupting the
Olympic Torch run or boycotting the Games.
"Whatever the intentions of the demonstrators, the people of China
believe they want to inflict maximum humiliation on China and the
Chinese people more than the Chinese government," Mr. Lee
said.
Let me declare here that I am against any Games boycott or violent
disruption of the relay and hope this will stop. Peaceful
demonstration is, however, another matter; China has to learn to
live with a big diversified world.
Indonesia and Hong Kong
We also adopted such a tactic by speaking up for the ills of the
late Suharto of Indonesia, whose excellent relations with Lee is
well documented.
The smooth relations with Indonesia has come on the back of
incessantly defending his dictatorship and playing down his family
corruption – at the expense of upsetting many of younger
Indonesians.
Hong Kong - For a week in 1997 I spent a week in the city to report
on the hangover from Britain to Beijing.
One evening I was invited by an old friend – a government nurse -
to have a meal with her family when invariably Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s
advice to the Hong Kong people came up.
Their strong point was making money, and they should carry on doing
that, forget about fighting for democracy, Lee had advised.
”We Hong Kong people don’t like Mr. Lee to tell us how to behave
politically. We are not like Singapore people. We’re used to having
personal freedom under the British,” said the nurse, who had always
been apolitical during the years I knew her.
As for Taiwan, its animosity to Singapore's stand needs no mention
here. Some of Lee's advice sounds fair to me, but the island’s
government and people were largely unhappy with Lee’s pro-Beijing
rhetoric.
China
There had been previous occasions Singapore had been a loyal
friend.
From the Tien An Men crackdown to conflicts with the US and Europe
over ‘human rights’ to Taiwan and Hong Kong, Minister Mentor Lee
had often condemned China’s foes and any one criticising
China.
In the early days of China’s emergence when Beijing and America
lacked understanding of each other, Lee had a case to play the
middle man articulating both their positions to each other.
If nothing else, it had helped to prevent unnecessary friction, and
frankly I believed it had, to an extent, helped to quicken their
pace of rapprochement.
Today, however, China is a different country; it has developed
beyond recognition and is more than able, and certainly strong
enough, to speak for itself against anyone.
There is no need for Singapore to keep hammering people or
countries which criticise or demonstrate against China.
It is poossible that “sucking up to China” is part of Singapore’s
foreign policy to gain economic and political leverage. What Lee
did was possibly aimed at drawing a sanguine response from the
emerging economic giant.
Fair enough, if it works! But can such a strategy work in gaining
friendship and respect from the Chinese? I doubt it.
If there is gratitude, it has not been evident. Lee himself said
that China has never regarded Singapore as ‘ee jia ren’ or ‘same
family’, i.e. there is nothing special in Sino-Singapore
relationship.
And don’t forget the broken promises (since partly remedied) of the
Suzhou Industrial Estate!
Even if this strategy is pleasing the Chinese leaders, there is a
price for Singapore across the wide world.
To please China over Tibet we risk upsetting millions in the West
and elsewhere who believe that China is behaving too high-handedly
- just as condemning protestors in Taiwan and Hong Kong had done to
our reputation in these places.
Some countries (and some of our own citizens) may see us as China’s
little puppy with an unwritten global role as damage controller of
its faults. Which, of course, we are NOT!
yes, as compared with kevin rudd, the australian pm, our pm
is really disgraceful!