Lee Kuan Yew
Why did he say it?
He wants to remind new generation that being small doesn't mean Singapore must be compliant to bigger neighbours. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Sep 26, 2006

Not all Singaporeans regard everything Mr. Lee Kuan Yew says or does these days as superior logic - and the furore he has raised in Malaysia is one of these split issues.

Some people feel his reference to marginalised ethnic Chinese in Malaysia was unnecessarily provocative.

I am one of those who believe that some of Mr. Lee's ideas have become outdated for today's Singapore, but on the current controversy, I am fully behind him.

I am sure his message was not aimed at a Malaysian audience. It was targeted at the new generation of Singaporeans, a reminder that being citizens of a small country would sometimes mean being subjected to irrational demands.

It was a message about good governance. To potential leaders his message was "learn to say no" to unreasonable demands.

He said this on the eve of his 83rd birthday and this sort of reminders can only serve the country well.

In fact, the reaction of Dr. Mahathir Mohamad explains the validity of Mr. Lee's concern about the vulnerability of Singapore's small size.

The querulous Mahathir said, "Singapore is a tiny country. Don't talk big."

He wasn't the only one. Former Indonesian president B.J. Habibie at a peeved moment called Singapore "just a little red dot."

In the 70s when Singapore and Indonesia disagreed over some Asean investment issue, (the then) Indonesian foreign minister Adam Malik told his journalists: "The priority of 140m people takes precedence over a population of 2.5m".

What sparked off the controversy this time was Mr. Lee's comment that the attitude of Malaysia and Indonesia towards the Republic was shaped by the way they treated their own ethnic Chinese minorities

He added: "My neighbours both have problems with their Chinese. They are successful, they're hardworking and therefore they are systematically marginalised, even in education"

"And they want Singapore, to put it simply, to be like their Chinese, compliant"

Mr Lee said Singapore must have a government which must be "firm but polite", able to deal with difficult neighbours "who want to pressure us to build pretty bridges without giving us commensurate benefits".

"You need a government that will be able to not only have the gumption but the skill to say no in a very quiet, polite way that doesn't provoke them into doing something silly," he said.

Mr Lee was being interviewed by former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who asked him what he hoped for Singapore, 40 years from now.

Mr. Lee replied: "My hope is that there will be a government that is equal to the job, as the PAP (the ruling People's Action Party) was."

Reminding Singaporeans to stand up to Malaysia's unreasonable demands was, of course, more relevant during the Mahathir era than the Badawi government.

I remember Dr. Mahathir once telling his ministers there were "many ways to skin a cat (meaning Singapore). He rarely passed up an opportunity to insult the republic.

Imagine what would happen if Singapore had done this.

Once when Kuala Lumpur was mad at Singapore's three-quarter tank rule for cars entering Johor, one of his ministers announced that he would order his staff to go through all Singapore's regulations to find out which one were affecting Malaysians negatively.

Did he not know international law? Of course, he did - at least enough to recognise an act that intrudes into another country's sovereignty.

But because Dr. M, the boss, was anti-Singapore, some of his underlings probably thought they could show him their loyalty.

As a journalist reporting on Malaysia for many years, I feel Mr. Lee's reminder about the realities of regional politics crucially important - especially for young Singaporeans who believe if you are a nice guy, others will always treat you nicely.
Littlespeck.com