Singapore’s democracy is maturing. About 2.8 million voters are to elect their next government tomorrow. Political discourse during the nine-day campaign has been notably robust, a positive sign for a nation that has been governed by a single party since its independence from Malaysia in 1965. At rallies, coffeeshops and online, discussions about policies and their impact are becoming commonplace.
This is a welcome evolution of an environment where political pluralism has been constrained by limits on freedoms of expression, assembly and association. Human Rights Watch said the country’s “political environment remains overwhelmingly repressive.”
Competition among candidates can help surface good ideas and offer a broader range of solutions at a time when the nation is under pressure from the US’ trade war. The export-dependent economy has long benefited from the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) leadership and political stability. The PAP enjoys genuine popular legitimacy, winning 13 consecutive elections — although in 2020, the party’s share of the popular vote slipped by almost 9 percentage points to 61.2 percent, as economic woes weighed on public sentiment.
The city-state is among the richest countries globally, transformed into a global financial hub under the stewardship of its first prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), and subsequent generations. Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (黃循財) is betting on that legacy to secure a strong mandate.
Wong needs to navigate a global trade war that could pose great risks to future growth and inflation, according to the central bank. The initial round of tariffs is set to hit 60 percent of exports to the US. Wong has big shoes to fill, having taken over from Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍), Lee Kuan Yew’s son, who ran the country for two decades. He has also appealed to the electorate to return a strong government, implying that voting in more opposition members would be a distraction.
Wong said that a vote for the opposition is a vote to weaken the government, at a time when Singapore is facing serious challenges. That argument is overstated. This year marks the first time since 2011 that not all constituencies are being contested by other parties, they are vying for 92 out of a total of 97 seats. In contrast, the PAP is fielding the largest number of new candidates in recent years.
The Workers’ Party, the nation’s main opposition party, is fielding 26 candidates. Leader Pritam Singh has said that there is no way he could form the next government, in an attempt to assuage voters who worry electing opposition members could see key ruling party ministers thrown out of office. Instead, Singh said he and his teammates want to provide checks and balances.
Any further gains by the opposition this year would be “part of the nation’s evolution, not revolution,” Singapore Management University associate professor of law Eugene Tan (陳慶文) said.
“This is the 66th year of one-party dominance,” he said. “The whole system has been designed and built with the PAP DNA in mind. Any sudden disequilibrium can be potentially very damaging, for the nation and foreign investors alike.”
The city-state’s appeal to investors has always been stability. It stands out as oasis of political and financial calm in an often unpredictable region. More diversity of thought in government has had real-life repercussions. In 2011, the PAP had a setback, after it received 60.1 percent of the vote, the smallest margin of popular votes since independence. Subsequently, it recalibrated immigration policies and the inflow of foreign workers. It also became more selective in granting permanent residency, and drew sharper lines between benefits for citizens and migrants.
Today, concerns over the high cost of living, especially among younger voters, are pressing priorities. Many voters worry that their children would not have the same opportunities they had enjoyed and would struggle to find work or own a home. The nation boasts a highly educated population. Fresh ideas should be welcomed, not dismissed. It should not be surprising that citizens expect meaningful debate on major policy issues.
Any political evolution is likely to be gradual, and for most citizens, that is the preferred path. There are similar sentiments from supporters on both sides. Voters do not want to throw the PAP out, but they do want different voices in parliament to provide accountability.
A healthy democracy can benefit from diversity of thought. A senior party cadre has said voting in more opposition in parliament and a weaker government go hand in hand. Instead, the PAP could embrace other parties as partners offering different perspectives. The government has made some space for opposition voices through the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament scheme, but they lack full voting rights on issues such as amendments to the constitution, a motion of no confidence in the government or the removal of the president from office. It was the PAP that pioneered the idea of having alternative voices in parliament. It can continue to lead this evolution, not resist it.
Singapore has survived because of a culture of constant reinvention. The system is resilient enough to handle feedback. Constructive criticism can only make it stronger.
Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC’s lead Asia presenter, and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS