Singapore beyond Lee Kuan Yew Mario Rustan  ;  A columnist for Magdalene, a feminist website, and a founding member of Ideapod mini blog

JAKARTA POST, 26 Maret 2015

                                                                                                                                     

                                                                                                                                                           

Singapore finally faced its hardest certainty – the death of its founding father. Lee Kuan Yew departed in the 50th year of the foundation of the Republic of Singapore. The republic was not his ideal form of government (unlike Sukarno’s Indonesia), as what he wanted was a union with Malaya, which was realized as Malaysia (along with Sabah and Sarawak) in 1963. The creation of the new federal monarchy resulted in war with Indonesia and the expulsion of Singapore from Malaysia two years later. Singapore might have the unfortunate distinction of acquiring independence not because of a nationalist campaign for freedom, but because the mother country did not want it anymore. At the heart of the divorce with Malaysia was conflict over race and religion, namely between Malays and Chinese. Adding flames to the fire was socialism, which many post-colonial Asians (including a younger Lee) believed to be the cure to the diseases of ethnic and religious separations and the old “feudal” order. The problem was Malaysia took Islam and Malay nationalism to be the foundations of its existence, in contrast to Lee’s vision of shared destiny between Chinese, Indians and Malays, who were governed by the British Empire in Southeast Asia. Singapore was born a weak child in a rough neighborhood, but had its fortunes changed in a span of just six months after the anti-communist military took power in Indonesia. One year later, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines were at peace, and together with Thailand, they formed the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), checking Southeast Asia’s communism in the former French Indochina. The first 25 years of Singapore history is no less than a miracle – a swampy tropical island converted into the Manhattan of the East, with a first-rate international airport, mass rapid transport systems, an efficient bureaucracy and a glorious skyline. It has become a secondary Hong Kong – an island economy with a Chinese-majority population that speaks English; but it is also safer and cleaner. Indeed, Singapore takes Hong Kong as its rival, whether in education (especially in math and science), tourism (Singapore Airlines vs. Cathay Pacific), banking (Standard Chartered vs. HSBC) and even time zone. Although Singapore is located west of Jakarta, it is one hour ahead of Jakarta, so it can match Hong Kong’s office hours. Malaysia naturally followed suit. Singapore and Hong Kong present interesting cases for social science faculties, at least in the West. Singapore has followed the guidance of the Lee family (including in the government of Goh Chok Tong from 1990 to 2004), while Hong Kong was governed by forgettable British governors, and now by China’s Chief Executives. Hong Kong adheres to a laissez-faire economy where tycoons are the most powerful people, while Singapore follows a very centralized command economy where practically everything is state-run. Both are highly successful and global corporations make both places their Asian headquarters. There are another two uneasy similarities between the two city-states. First, the veteran economic journalist Joe Studwell calls both places “parasitic” and refuses to discuss both in his book How Asia Works. Hong Kong thrives as the vault of China’s wealth, just as Singapore attracts capital and resources from all over Southeast Asia, especially Malaysia and Indonesia. The key to Singapore’s success lay in its achievements next to its neighbors’ failures in politics and economics. Secondly, both Hong Kong and Singapore still feel insecure about themselves. Supposedly, they are at ease with their identities: Hong Kong as a special administrative region of China and Singapore as a multicultural republic where people of different races and faiths work together to build the nation. But democracy is stifled in both places, and Singapore itself has never believed in democracy. It is uncertain what factor is the biggest hindrance to Singapore democracy –Chinese political ethics or a reliance on international financial systems (including a significant number of Western professionals). Interestingly, ethnic Chinese in both places also have a shaky relationship with Mandarin Chinese. Believing a decade ago that Cantonese Chinese was out of date, Hong Kongers now embrace the language as a part of their identity, while Singaporean Chinese still find it unnatural to converse in Mandarin Chinese on the street, though the government has encouraged the exclusive use of Mandarin Chinese (at the expense of other Chinese languages) in Singapore since 1979. The vision and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew will live on, especially with his son still in power. At the present rate, Lee Hsien Loong will be replaced by another regent before his son is able to become the fifth prime minister of Singapore – provided their People’s Action Party keeps winning the general elections. Singapore will always be the richest and most well-governed nation in Southeast Asia, as Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia have of late found creative ways to move backward. Any trip to Singapore is a big joy for me – taking the train from the airport to the hotel, walking through its safe and well-lit streets, passing by beautiful girls with every step and acquiring the most elusive electronic gadgets or apparel easily. I can meet up with my Singaporean friends anywhere, with little hassle. On the other hand, going back to Indonesia is a saddening experience; back to the shoddy airport, the terrible, dangerous roads, to a country where only malls and churches are viable social spaces. Such are the respective legacies of Lee Kuan Yew and Soeharto. But there is no way I could have written political articles for more than eight years in Singapore. ●