Former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), praised as Singapore’s founding father, has died at the age of 91, and the question of whether Lee was the “glory” or “dictator” of Singapore has once again become a hot topic.
Singapore is a nation made up mainly of Chinese together with Malays and Indians. After World War II, it became independent from Britain and in 1963 it entered into a federation with Malaysia only to leave the federation and form an independent country in 1965.
Thanks to its English-language policy, globalization has made it an active part of the world economy, and its average per capita income is now more than US$50,000.
Leading Singapore to independence has been the greatest boost to Lee’s position in history. He studied law at Cambridge University and became a lawyer in the 1950s, which helped him bring about Singapore’s independence from Britain and Malaysia.
It is said that Malaysia either abandoned or expelled Singapore due to its underestimation of the financial and economic potential of Singapore’s Chinese society.
If both Hong Kong and Macau, two other former colonies, had continued under foreign rule, perhaps they too could have gained independence instead of being returned to Chinese rule. Due to Beijing’s deceptive “one country, two systems” policy, the glory of Hong Kong, the Pearl of the Orient, which used to shine brighter than Singapore, has faded.
China may brag about being an “ancient civilization” and a “big power” compared with Britiain, but its democratic capacity and magnanimity is much inferior to that of the UK.
Lee led Singapore to independence and glory, but the city-state’s success has been limited to economic prosperity. His political attitude reflected the lack of democratic awareness in Chinese culture, and as a result, the country is now wealthy but not free. From this perspective, he was more Chinese than British.
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) and Lee were good friends, but Chiang failed to build the fragments of the old China into a new country after relocating to Taiwan, leaving a politically fragmented Taiwan behind. Since he failed to resolve the problem before he died, he could hardly compete with Lee in terms of historical importance.
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Singapore’s Lee could have benefited each other, but Lee Kuan Yew only cared about Singapore’s interests, and had no sympathy toward turning Taiwan into a normal, healthy nation. Meanwhile, since he always thought highly of himself, he was unwilling to submit himself to the talented but arrogant Lee Teng-hui, and the two eventually parted ways.
Some Taiwanese and Chinese have chosen to emigrate to Singapore, which attaches excessive importance to economic development. Its national development might be restricted if it does not review its short-sighted utilitarianism and attach significance to democratic values.
Many Taiwanese officials liked to visit Singapore in the past, but they only gained a superficial understanding by such fleeting visits and learned nothing from the Singaporeans. Now, they like to visit China and make tours to places situated behind the ranks of missiles targeting Taiwan.
Some party, government and military officials have even left the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and their actions are absolutely embarrassing. Without a Taiwanese awareness, there will be no glory for the nation.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations