Singapore’s People’s Action Party (PAP) was returned to power on Friday last week in the 13th general election since independence. The PAP has ruled the city-state with a pragmatic hand since 1959 and brought it forward into modernity.
Singapore has become a model for many developing countries, and a display that political control and liberal economic policies can go hand in hand. However, this model has its limitations.
While winning with 61.24 percent of the votes is indeed a comfortable victory, elections in Singapore must be analyzed within the context of its political system.
The PAP, being the only party to ever rule an independent Singapore, has deeply ingrained itself in the system. Thus, general elections, while inevitably bringing the PAP back into power, are referendums on how Singaporeans view the current state of affairs.
To put the results into perspective, the PAP in 2011 scored its lowest ever result, 60.1 percent. The party’s leadership under Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍) apologized for its mistakes and promised to do better.
The 2015 general election saw an upward swing to 69.9 percent, attributed to two major factors: the “feel good” factor of the 50th anniversary of independence and the passing of former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀).
It was an emotional year for Singaporeans. Who would not support the party that led the nation through the difficult years of the 20th century?
This year, the PAP called for general elections amid the global COVID-19 pandemic, hoping that the public would be motivated by a “flight to safety,” choosing what is familiar over something new.
The party leadership thought that in times of crisis Singaporeans would not want to rock the boat. Their goal was to achieve a “strong mandate” to bring Singapore out of the COVID-19 crisis.
The results show otherwise. The major opposition parties made significant gains, although only one such party managed to secure seats in parliament.
The Workers’ Party (WP) won 10 of the 93 seats in the legislature, while the newly formed Progress Singapore Party came in third at 10.18 percent, but without any seats.
Unfortunately, polling and surveys, especially of a political nature, are difficult to conduct in Singapore, but it is likely that the electorate swung against the PAP due to dissatisfaction with the national situation.
Prior to COVID-19, issues like income inequality, rising costs of living, and the increase of the Goods and Services Tax were contentious. Many of these issues, exacerbated by COVID-19, remain unresolved.
However, Singapore is no stranger to opposition politics, the “first wave” of oppositional figures emerged in 1984 when J.B. Jeyaretnam of the WP and Chiam See Tong (詹時中) of the Singapore Democratic Party gained seats in parliament.
The “second wave” came in 2011 when five WP candidates were elected.
This year saw the “third wave,” with the highest-ever number of seats awarded to the WP, in a country where opposition parties are heavily controlled.
What the elections have shown is that the people’s will can prevail. Singapore must continue to build a democratic society, not according to the standards of the West, but by its own standards.
This is neither in support of a “democracy” syncretized with so-called “Asian values,” nor is this in support of a controlled democracy. It means that Singapore must establish a democratic culture worthy of being called so — a Singaporean democracy that does not compromise or bastardize the democratic spirit.
The past few years have been tough for democracy in Asia.
Malaysia, having experienced a moment of euphoria after unseating its long- standing ruling party, saw the very coalition that brought down the National Front coalition government fall apart.
Hong Kong, while being familiar with the demise of democracy, is revered by the world and history for the fortitude of its people.
The Philippines last month saw the passage of anti-terror legislation that has raised concerns about curtailing human rights.
Taiwan’s democratic bastion continues to be threatened by China, and yet the people of Taiwan resolutely stand together.
Building democracy requires momentum, trust and fortitude. If the litmus test of a democratic society is how well alternative voices and oppositional parties make their mark, then the opposition in Singapore has succeeded.
It has for decades demonstrated its fortitude and fostered the trust people have invested in them.
The next great task is to maintain momentum. The opposition cannot afford another setback.
Singapore’s democracy, and the democracies of Asia, depends on the survival of alternatives.
Nigel Li is a Singaporean citizen and a student at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS