Dear Mr. Ma Ying-jeou (
Warm greetings to you from Singapore. I understand that you are visiting Singapore and would like to welcome you. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your candidacy in Taiwan's presidential election next year.
However, I read with great dismay in Singapore's Straits Times on June 2 that "Ma cites Singapore as an example for Taiwan." In the report, you were quoted as saying that "Singapore is different from us [Taiwan] as its emphasis is not on democratization. Nevertheless, it is professional, corruption-free and efficient, which is worth our learning" and that "The Singapore Government is very efficient. They can reach consensus easily and there is no squabbling or fighting."
The paper also said that you had cited the high pay of Singaporean ministers as one example of the country's pragmatism.
Perhaps what you have read or heard about Singapore is the official line. The government puts out a lot of misinformation and propaganda. Please allow me to reveal some truths.
The "corruption-free" image that the People's Action Party (PAP) government projects to the world stems from the fact that the state's leaders have used draconian laws to silence its critics. Opposition politicians have been bankrupted, imprisoned and run out of the country for trying to hold the government responsible to Singaporeans.
In the numerous civil lawsuits and criminal trials which the country's leaders and the government have brought against their dissenters, the courts have always ruled against the defendants.
All forms of media here are controlled by the authorities. Newspapers, magazines, TV and radio networks are owned by the state. Even Internet service providers are government-owned.
Singapore has been dominated by the PAP since the 1960s. The party has always had more than 95 percent of the seats in parliament even if it might have less than 70 percent of popular support. Elections in Singapore are far from free and fair. The Elections Department is answerable to the Prime Minister's Office. The Group Constituency Representation was established in 1988 to deal with the rising unpopularity of the ruling party. During elections, the government hands out bribes in the form of shares that can be cashed in. This, in the view of many in Singapore, is vote-buying. Lee Kuan Yew (
These are just some of the tactics that the PAP government uses to ensure that it wins with a overwhelming majority in each election.
As you have noted, Singaporean ministers are highly paid. The prime minister of Singapore is paid 12 times what Taiwan's president earns. Even the salary of a junior minister here is more than seven times that of President Chen Shui-bian (
Other countries are also looking at Singapore as a role-model for economic success. Thailand (under ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra), Hong Kong (under former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa (
However, economic progress and political development are not mutually exclusive. In trying to follow the Singapore model, political and social landscapes will be severely and negatively affected. The type of "affluence" achieved in Singapore cannot be realized without the suppression of rights and basic freedoms.
While you say that Singapore's emphasis is not on democracy, you also say that the government is corruption-free. Yet I am certain that you are aware that democracy is the most effective way to hold a government accountable and ensure a corruption-free system.
I am sure that the people of Taiwan cherish their hard-won political freedom and are proud to live in a democratic society, a society they contribute to and continue to shape. In fact, in many ways democracy advocates in Singapore draw inspiration from Taiwan in its transformation from martial law to a bona fide democracy.
I am perturbed that a leader from one of Asia's most vibrant and proud democracies should cite the PAP as a model-of-sorts. I sincerely hope that during your visit to Singapore you will express support for Singapore's struggle for democracy.
Chee Siok Chin
Singapore Democratic Party
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is