Among political leaders in Southeast Asia, Singapore's former leader Lee Kuan Yew (
Beijing once publicly denied Lee his role as a cross-strait mediator for the simple reason that it doesn't trust overseas Chinese. This is not only because of discrepancies in beliefs, but because the success of overseas Chinese in founding independent countries, such as Singapore and Taiwan, has not pleased Beijing. Furthermore, it is embarrassing for Beijing to see these countries prosper because the more they prosper, the worse China's slow social progression looks in contrast. Therefore, China's leaders continue their traditional ideology of despising and distrusting overseas Chinese.
Frankly speaking, with his focus on national economic development, Lee often responds to China in a self-effacing and polite manner. Even when he loses out in his dealings with China, he keeps his grievances to himself. The following two incidents can exemplify Lee's attitude toward China:
First, take the Suzhou City government's undercutting of the Singapore-invested Suzhou Industrial Park (蘇州工業園區), which forced Singapore to abandon this high-profile project in 1999, handing ownership to the Chinese government. Although it was Lee's brainchild, Lee has never publicly voiced any criticism.
Second, an earlier incident involved a Singapore cargo ship, the Mekong River, which was sailing from Singapore to Cambodia. On June 23, 1995, when it reached Redang, 131km north of Malaysia, the ship was hijacked by China's public security maritime officers and taken to Shanwei in Guangdong Province. The ship's captain was forced to confess to tobacco smuggling and entry into Chinese territorial waters.
Everyone on the Mekong River was incarcerated in a hotel in Shanwei, and their cigarettes and camera equipment confiscated. They were not released until 30 days later, on July 12.
The inspection of the Mekong River took place on the high seas, and according to international maritime law, boarding and inspecting a ship on the high seas can only take place with the permission of the country in which the ship is registered. This means that China's public security officers violated maritime law in their inspection. In fact, the Mekong River was reported as missing at the time of the inspection. China could not claim to be exercising the "right of hot pursuit" (
Despite China's stance against his visit to Taiwan, the newly inaugurated Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (
In his Aug. 22 National Day Rally speech, Lee came out with the statement that, "If Taiwan goes for independence, Singapore will not recognize it. In fact, no Asian country will recognize it. Nor will European countries. China will fight. Win or lose, Taiwan will be devastated."
There is no need for Lee to ingratiate himself with China by making such a statement, and his words in turn hurt relations between Taiwan and Singapore.
Lee, similar to his father Lee Kuan Yew, likes to talk about the cross-strait issue. The son carries on his father's tradition of politically dexterous leadership, but their words often connote a sense of denigration toward Taiwan. Don't they know that their pompous words regarding Taiwan are also an intervention in Taiwan's domestic affairs?
Lee also said that if Taiwan moved toward independence, no Asian or European nation would recognize an independent Taiwanese state. There is no question that this is tantamount to telling the world it should not recognize an independent Taiwan.
Is this the kind of activity that Singapore wants to engage in? Or are they banging the drum for China? Isn't Singapore actually helping China sharpen its claws?
We have never heard even a single word from Singapore regarding all the missiles China has aimed at Taiwan along its southern coastline, or China's suppression of Taiwan in the international arena. Singapore's leaders are not ignorant of these facts, but they will not take a position in public because they know they cannot afford to insult China. This is what lies at the heart of the problem.
In 1965, Singapore, led by Lee Kuan Yew, left Malaysia. Didn't Singapore's leaders understand then that the existence of an independent ethnic Chinese government close to Malaysia would create tension in the region, and that they even might be suppressed by Indonesia and Malaysia?
But Singapore persisted, and managed to survive. Their own experience should make them understand what the people of Taiwan want.
Singapore greatly increased its military spending after the financial crisis in the late 1990s and set up reserve military bases around the world. In the minds of Singaporean leaders, the nation does have enemies, only these enemies are currently not very strong and therefore do not pose a threat to Singapore. Once these enemy states are strong, Singapore will find its existence more problematic.
Taiwan is in the same situation as Singapore, only Singapore is located far from China and therefore does not experience Beijing's pressure. If Singapore were located in a geographical position similar to Taiwan's, I don't think it would be so lucky as to be an independent nation.
It is understandable that Singapore for many years has focused on business for its own good, but such utilitarianism will not allow the island state to perpetuate its position.
As Singapore is a Southeast Asian nation, Lee Hsien Loong's statement indeed has some value as a test to see which direction the wind is blowing, but that does not mean the statement is respected by surrounding states.
Leaving aside the Malaysian leaders' view of Singapore, former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid bluntly criticized it, saying that all Singapore cared about was the strong country to the north while showing no concern for its poor neighbors. This should be a warning to Singapore that good things don't last forever -- Singapore's economy will not keep growing indefinitely and the country should therefore take an approach more conducive to maintaining international peace when commenting on international issues.
Although Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong have admonished the world over and over again that China is on the rise and assisted China in many ways, I don't believe this will convince a single country to submit to Chinese hegemony.
If Singapore cannot take a balanced view of the cross-strait issue, at least it should avoid helping a belligerent China sharpen its claws.
Chen Hurng-yu is a professor of history at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS