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.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing