Singapore’s ruling party was always going to win this election, but in a world rocked by the unpredictability of the US, the trade-dependent nation reached for security. The People’s Action Party (PAP), which has been in power since before the city-state became independent in 1965, won a resounding mandate.
It is a sign of how insecure voters are feeling about the future. The party would be wise to pay attention to them.
Under the PAP, Singapore has transformed into Asia’s richest nation, but it is also among the most unequal. Citizens live in what Freedom House ranks as only a partly free society. Opposition parties have struggled to gain ground in a system they describe as stacked against them, and say the PAP has built-in advantages when it comes to setting the terms of the election — claims it denies.
Illustration: Mountain People
Still, the message that the party knows best how to steer the nation through global uncertainty clearly resonated. Voters in Singapore, like those in many nations, are anxious about bread-and-butter issues — the cost of living, housing and whether their children would have stable job prospects. The PAP should not let them down.
Singapore has benefited immensely from globalization and free trade, but that world order is under pressure. US President Donald Trump’s trade war is threatening the economy — the initial round of new tariffs is already set to hit 60 percent of exports to the US. This could drag on future growth while keeping inflation elevated, according to the central bank.
The economic picture is growing more challenging. Consumer prices are on average 17 percent higher than they were in the last election in 2020. The cost of public housing, where approximately 80 percent of citizens live, has soared, too. The PAP leaned into the uncertain environment as part of its campaign, arguing that only a tried-and-tested team could get Singapore through the coming storm.
For Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong (黃循財), who was appointed a year ago, this election was also a referendum on his personal credibility. He should be pleased with the result.
Wong, who took over from Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍), son of the nation’s first prime minister and founding father Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), made his name during the COVID-19 pandemic, providing reassurance as one of the senior politicians leading the response.
He has promised a kinder, more compassionate way of governing, but many have wondered whether this rhetoric would translate into real political reform. Now is the time to make good on those words.
PAP officials might be tempted to think that voter confidence means that they do not have to worry about internal change and more transparency. That would be a mistake. Singaporeans might not have handed more seats to the main opposition Workers’ Party than in previous elections, but thousands attended their rallies. Young people appear to be drawn to their ideas of more inclusivity and greater openness in governance, with some expressing a desire for more political engagement.
The ruling party might feel that to maintain the control it has had on Singaporeans, it needs to further clamp down on independent media or citizens’ freedom to vent their frustrations online. Doing so would breed more resentment. It should not treat engagement by younger voters as a threat, and instead allow them to help shape the conversation around national issues such as housing and education. After all, it is the next generation that is the most impacted by decisions made by today’s politicians.
PAP politicians would also do well to avoid being tone-deaf around economic issues. They are among the most highly paid public servants in the world, something Singaporeans regularly complain about. The government could address this by finally completing the delayed review of political office holders’ salaries that was due in 2023. (It was deferred because of what the government called other pressing issues, such as the uncertain geopolitical situation.) Renewing the discussion around the level of ministerial salaries would help to reassure Singaporeans that their politicians are not out of touch with regular citizens’ problems.
Despite having one of the shortest campaign periods in the world — this one ran for nine days — voters used the time well, engaging in discussions at housing estates, coffee shops and rallies, comparing manifestos, questioning prospective members of parliament and creating some of the most entertaining political memes that I have seen in my time covering Singaporean politics. These lively conversations reflect a maturing electorate, as I have noted before.
Singapore might have voted for stability in the face of Trump’s trade war, but that should not be taken for granted.
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.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS