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.
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
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
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS