foreign affairs

MFA: Navigating US-China Relations

Committee of Supply Debate, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
3 Mar 2025

Singapore’s most pressing foreign policy challenge today is managing the escalating rivalry between the United States and China. As a small state with an open economy, Singapore is highly vulnerable to disruptions from this great power competition.

Balancing strong military and economic ties with the US, with deep economic links with China requires careful diplomacy, strategic autonomy and economic adaptability.

To mitigate these risks, Singapore should diversify its economy by strengthening trade and investment ties with ASEAN and the EU, as well as with India, Japan, South Korea and other growing economies, ensuring these relationships are based on stable and predictable legal and institutional frameworks.

Changes in US engagement in Asia and rising military tensions with China create new security challenges for Singapore. To strengthen its defence resilience, Singapore should strengthen its defence partnership with the US while expanding security cooperation with more countries, including with our some of neighbours in Southeast Asia. At the same time, Singapore must continue building up the capability and competence of the SAF to ensure it remains a credible deterrent against emerging threats.

Building diplomatic goodwill through bilateral engagement and assistance will also be important in winning international support for Singapore in times of crisis.

MFA should expand efforts to educate businesses, NGOs and the public about our strategic interests through town halls and closed door briefings. It could also make better use of social media, podcasts and short videos to ensure foreign policy messaging reaches wider domestic and international audiences.

Could the Minister outline what MFA is doing in these areas and how it plans to strengthen such efforts?

MFA: Strengthening ASEAN’s credibility

The Workers’ Party supports Singapore’s efforts to work with our neighbours to bolster ASEAN. The regional grouping plays an important role in fostering deeper social, cultural and economic ties, enhancing regional stability and integrating Southeast Asian economies. An effective ASEAN can help countries in the region — including Singapore — punch above their weight when dealing with major powers.

Despite all its benefits, ASEAN’s flaws have been laid bare on several occasions, most recently with the crisis in Myanmar.

A key tenet of ASEAN is the requirement for decision-making to be based on “consultation and consensus”, effectively giving any member the veto power over decisions. This requirement can hamper ASEAN’s ability to address critical security issues.

How is Singapore working with ASEAN to overcome situations where consensus is hindered by a minority of member states? According to Article 20 of the ASEAN Charter, “where a consensus cannot be achieved, the ASEAN Summit may decide how a specific decision can be made”.

Has there ever been any push by Singapore at the ASEAN Summit for a decision to be taken by majority vote, on issues where arriving at a consensus is impossible?

Has Singapore asked ASEAN to adopt stronger mechanisms to enforce its own consensus decisions? For example, little progress has been achieved by the Myanmar Armed Forces in the implementation of ASEAN’s Five-Point Consensus to put Myanmar back on the path to peace following the military coup. Does the ASEAN Summit have the authority to decide by a vote to suspend Myanmar from participation in all ASEAN meetings and initiatives? This will send a strong signal to the country’s military rulers that their violent actions against their own citizens are not compatible with ASEAN’s principles.

Committee of Supply Debate on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 27 Feb 2023. Cover photo by nguyenthuantien on Pixabay

Visit to Singapore by the former President of Sri Lanka

Mr Gotabaya Rajapaksa fled Sri Lanka and arrived in Singapore on 14 July 2022 on a social visit pass. He was allowed entry into Singapore on a private visit and submitted his resignation as President of Sri Lanka shortly after his arrival. According to the Straits Times, Mr Rajapaksa arrived at Changi Airport on board a Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia) flight at 7.17pm. TODAY saw a Saudia plane moving to Changi Airport’s VIP Complex two minutes after it touched down. Both newspapers reported that a convoy of three vehicles — a white BMW, a black Mercedes Vito and a black Toyota Alphard — accompanied by two Certis Cisco riders on motorbikes were seen driving out of the premises around 8pm. TODAY reported that shortly after, two cars were seen leaving the adjacent JetQuay terminal, which is catered to “commercially important persons”, with at least one police car accompanying it. It should be kept in mind that Mr Rajapaksa was still the President of Sri Lanka at the time he arrived in Singapore.

On the 1 Aug 2022 sitting of Parliament, I asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what privileges, immunities and hospitality are accorded to former Heads of State or Heads of Government who visit or transit through Singapore; (b) whether any public resources are expended in such instances; and (c) whether the former Sri Lankan President was accorded any privileges, immunities and hospitality in Singapore following his resignation.

The Minister gave this written reply: “In general, the Singapore Government does not accord privileges, immunity and hospitality to former Heads of State or Heads of Government. Consequently, former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was not accorded any privileges, immunity or hospitality.”

Countering Misinformation

In an increasingly digital world riven with military conflicts and great power rivalries, it is important for Singaporeans to be equipped with modern media literacy skills. We need to view all news reports, whether on television or on Telegram, with a critical eye and take the effort to check the facts before forming our own opinions, lest we fall victim to misinformation campaigns.

On 4 Apr 2022, I raised three questions in Parliament on countering misinformation. Read my full Parliamentary Questions and the answers here:

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs how does the Government intend to respond to Singaporean key opinion leaders who express or transmit partly false information that can potentially undermine Singapore’s foreign policy positions.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: In this digital age, the spread of misinformation that sows fear, suspicion and discord in a population is a clear and present danger. All of us should exercise discretion and not share anything unless we are certain of its veracity. This responsibility to avoid disseminating misinformation applies particularly to public figures and opinion leaders.

A Singaporean public that is well-informed, that recognises the geostrategic forces at play and understands our national interests, is essential for our defence against misinformation and disinformation campaigns. We encourage the public to verify information with official sources, and apply a critical mind to what you read and share.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what is being done to increase public education and enhance awareness of Singapore’s national interests with regard to the Russia-Ukraine conflict and Singapore’s relations with the US and China; and (b) whether the Ministry has considered (i) pushing out factual information on the situation through messaging apps and social media and (ii) providing information about independent fact-checking websites which the public can use to counter misinformation.

Mrs Josephine Teo: The Member asked what is being done to increase public awareness and understanding of Singapore’s national interest in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. He also asked what we are doing to put out accurate information on the conflict.

First, understanding Singapore’s position on the conflict: The Government has taken a strong and unambiguous position, starting with the ministerial statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in February. Government agencies and their community partners have explained this position on a wide range of platforms – not only on social media and messaging platforms, but also in print and broadcast media, as well as directly to schools, business associations, grassroots organisations, to youth and public officers, national servicemen, as well as the general public. It is of the utmost importance that Singaporeans know the national position, the principles at stake for Singapore, why the Government has taken certain actions as a result, and why our position has nothing to do with taking sides.

Most Singaporeans understand, and agree. A publicly available poll conducted by Blackbox Research found last month that 95 per cent of Singaporeans supported or sympathised with Ukraine. Almost 70 per cent blamed Russia for the conflict; 60 per cent supported Singapore’s sanctions on Russia; while 35 per cent said they were unsure or had no opinion.

We accept that there are some differences in views and opinions among Singaporeans. That is understandable in any country. The Government will continue to communicate our position clearly as the situation develops, and counter whatever misinformation there might be about our position.

But as for pushing out factual information on the conflict itself, this cannot be the Singapore Government’s responsibility. We are in no position to independently verify the truth or otherwise of every report, image, photograph, video or post emanating from or on Ukraine. For the most part, we are dependent on the international media, including our own, to vet this avalanche of information. The National Library Board has published a set of third-party fact-checking resources about the conflict on its website. We urge all Singaporeans to exercise caution and apply a critical eye to all that they read and view on the conflict.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education to what extent are teachers engaging students to discuss with them, in age-appropriate ways, the positions Singapore has taken on complex foreign policy and security issues like the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Singapore’s relations with the US and China and hostile information campaigns targeted at Singapore’s population.

Mr Chan Chun Sing: In schools, issues relating to international relations and geopolitics are discussed in subjects like History, Social Studies, General Paper and Character and Citizenship Education (CCE). At the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), students also take modules and courses that help them make sense of key issues affecting Singapore and the world.

In the classroom, teachers use real-world case studies, including recent incidents, to help students understand complex issues concerning security and international relations, and Singapore’s role and perspectives on these issues. For example, in secondary and pre-university History, students examine how countries’ relations with each other evolve over time and the role of regional and international organisations like ASEAN and the UN in dealing with conflicts and promoting cooperation. In Secondary Social Studies, students learn about transnational terrorism, cyber security challenges and Singapore’s responses to these challenges. In General Paper, teachers engage pre-university students in discussions anchored on current affairs about foreign policy and security issues from different perspectives, while guiding them to understand Singapore’s context and positions.

Through CCE lessons and talks by invited speakers, secondary and pre-university students learn about Singapore’s strengths and vulnerabilities as a small country and the key principles of Singapore’s foreign policy that keep our nation safe. The commemoration of International Friendship Day and Total Defence Day is another avenue. This year, these sessions will offer insights on the ongoing situation in Ukraine and the importance of a rules-based international order, and discuss how Singapore upholds our national sovereignty through diplomacy and strong military defence.

To facilitate such discussions in age-appropriate ways, teachers receive specialised training, including workshops and talks by subject matter experts such as diplomats, academics, and policy makers.

The IHLs similarly engage students on contemporary global issues. The LifeSkills curricula in the IHLs emphasise the importance of critical thinking, global perspectives, and responsibility to the community, nation and the world. Through relevant LifeSkills modules, IHL students engage with educators and peers on current affairs, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and distil insights for Singapore’s context. Beyond this, they have access to external resources that provide insight on Singapore’s place in the world.

Given the proliferation of information, schools and IHLs also equip students with information and media literacy skills. Through the curriculum, students are taught to critically evaluate different sources of information, distinguishing fact from opinion, applying logic and verifying the authority of sources. This is part of a wider education efforts to guard against the dangers of fake news and develop in our students the ability to discern misinformation campaigns.

Pandas can be dangerous if provoked

It’s interesting that the behaviour of pandas quite accurately mimics their country of origin. China is ostensibly opposed to colonialism and interference in other countries’ domestic affairs, but hypersensitive and emotional when provoked.

China’s proposed loan of two pandas to Singapore has turned out to be quite a diplomatic coup for them — and probably a commercial coup for the Singapore Zoo. It has made it to the headlines in local media, invited a letter to the press from a Singaporean gushing over the communist state’s gesture, and one local was quoted in the papers as saying that her “liking for China definitely went up a few notches”.

While I agree that this was a nice gesture by the Chinese government and speaks well of the state of bilateral ties, it would also be prudent not to get completely bowled over by this.

Continue reading “Pandas can be dangerous if provoked”

Singapore’s national interests vis-a-vis China

Our national interest is to see a growing and prosperous China that is at peace with its neighbours and the rest of Asia. But China may not be the benevolent power that it has been claiming to be for the past 10 years.

As expected, Lee Kuan Yew’s recent speech to the US-ASEAN Business Council, where he encouraged the US to engage more with Asia to counter China’s growing might, evoked fierce criticisms by netizens in China of not just the Minister Mentor, but of Singapore as well.

Some belittled our geographical size, while others said that MM Lee had treated the Chinese as outsiders although they had treated Singaporeans as “among their own”.

I previously wrote about MM Lee’s speech and supported his views. Those less in tune with Singapore’s foreign policy may have been under the misimpression that Singapore welcomes China taking the lead in Asia, politically and economically. We don’t.

Continue reading “Singapore’s national interests vis-a-vis China”

Balancing an emerging dragon

I think Lee Kuan Yew’s speech to the US-ASEAN Business Council in Washington on October 27th is an important read for any Singaporean who is going to live to see the next 30 to 40 years in this country.

He was basically appealing to American leaders to get more involved in East Asia than they have been in the recent past. He warned them against ignoring this region, because doing so would risk allowing China to replace them as the pre-eminent power in the region.

Continue reading “Balancing an emerging dragon”

PM Lee meets with Malaysian opposition leader

The Straits Times reported that PM Lee yesterday met with Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng at the Istana for an official call. Mr Lim is also the Secretary-General of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), a major component party of the Malaysian opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat, which is led by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Mr Lim is the son of DAP veteran leader Lim Kit Siang. He has had an illustrious and colourful career as an opposition activist and politician. In October 1987, he was detained in ‘Operation Lalang’ under the Internal Security Act (ISA), and released after 18 months. He was arrested again by Malaysian police in 1994, following his criticism of the government’s handling of allegations of statutory rape of one of his constituents. He was convicted for causing ‘disaffection with the administration of justice in Malaysia’. After a series of appeals, Mr Lim was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. In May 2004, Mr Lim was elected as Secretary-General of DAP, and after the March 2008 elections in Malaysia where he won a landslide victory in his constituency, he became Penang’s Chief Minister, or Menteri Besar.

I’m glad to see that the Prime Minister is according the necessary respect — as he should — to the Malaysian opposition. While meetings with opposition leaders of other countries are not unusual for Singapore leaders, opposition leaders of close neighbours generally usually receive a less publicised welcome.

The publicity of this meeting could be a reflection of the political realities in Malaysia. One, the Singapore government realises that it needs to start building a relationship with the Malaysian opposition, as it may one day become the Government. Two, they are not so afraid of offending a much weakened Malaysian ruling party by meeting the latter’s political rivals.

Govt wiretapping opposition? MHA must respond to State Dept

I glanced through the US Department of State’s annual human rights report on Singapore. It contains little that I don’t already know. Much of it was a cut-and-paste from last year’s report.

Yet there were a few interesting tidbits that I noticed.

In June a visiting foreign citizen, Gopalan Nair, was arrested for comments he made in his blog about the High Court judge presiding in the hearing to assess damages in the Chee defamation case. He was charged with insulting a public servant, which carried a maximum fine of S$5,000 ($3,759) or one year in prison.

Gopalan Nair is a US citizen, albeit a former Singaporean. I found it interesting that the US State Dept (i.e., its foreign ministry), which is supposed to defend the interests of its citizens abroad, chose to avoid stating that Nair was a US citizen. I can think of two possible reasons. One, most Americans won’t even suspect or care that he is a US citizen; and two, they probably don’t want to cause an uproar back home over him, and jeopardize bilateral relations. Although that latter statement is probably me getting too big headed. Why would a hyperpower like the US care about offending Singapore in this respect?

The Films Act bans political advertising using films or videos as well as films directed towards any political purpose. The act does not apply to any film sponsored by the government, and the act allows the MICA minister to exempt any film from the act.

Another interesting omission was that they failed to mention anything about the AIMS committee, the government’s response to their report and the proposed “liberalisations” of the Internet and the Films Act. Either they thought that these were too insignificant to be worthy of mention, or it happened too late to make it to press time. I know that the US embassy here has taken some interest in these developments, so I’m surprised they didn’t report about it. Or maybe it’s because technically, the Films Act has yet to be amended — I believe it is still pending its second reading in Parliament.

The report also did not mention about the spike in incidences of cheating of foreign workers from Bangladesh, China and elsewhere. This must come as a huge relief to MOM, whose officers had probably already prepared a rebuttal and cleared it with their Minister for release.

The belief that the government might directly or indirectly harm the employment prospects of opposition supporters inhibited opposition political activity; however, there were no confirmed cases of such retaliation.

I’m glad to hear there were no confirmed cases — in 2008. I hope that continues on for 2009 and beyond, especially during an election year. In my opinion, this is the single biggest reason why the opposition continues to face such difficulties in recruiting more capable Singaporeans into their ranks.

Yet,

Law enforcement agencies, including the Internal Security Department and the Corrupt Practices Investigation Board, have extensive networks for gathering information and conducting surveillance and highly sophisticated capabilities to monitor telephone and other private conversations. No court warrants are required for such operations. It was believed that the authorities routinely monitored telephone conversations and the use of the Internet. It was widely believed that the authorities routinely conducted surveillance of some opposition politicians and other government critics.

I wonder who these opposition politicians they are monitoring are? “Politicians” could mean elected MPs, or simply opposition party members. I consider it a gross invasion of privacy if they are wiretapping the telephone conversations and emails of law-abiding opposition members. It will be even more appalling and unacceptable if they are monitoring elected opposition MPs. That would be a huge misuse of government and taxpayer resources for political ends.

Imagine if Internal Security Department (ISD) officers — who are civil servants — are monitoring opposition party conversations and emails, and are reporting all their election strategies to the Prime Minister! I sure hope this is not happening, because I think the ISD and the PAP will lose every remaining shred of credibility if they do revolting things like that. If they don’t, then the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) should come out and strongly rebut this accusation by the US and state clearly that nothing of this sort happens in Singapore.

I have written separately to MHA to highlight this to them and request for their action.

Obama’s engagement with Indonesia will reap great dividends

The administration of President Barack Obama demonstrated a stroke of genius when they chose Indonesia as one of their key pillars in their strategy of “smart power”.

Indonesia was only the second country, after Japan, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited since taking up office as her nation’s top diplomat. She told reporters in Jakarta that “building a comprehensive partnership with Indonesia is a critical step on behalf of the United States’ commitment to smart power”.

Her visit paves the way for President Obama’s expected state visit to Indonesia either before or after the APEC conference in Singapore later this year. In Indonesia, he is likely to deliver his much anticipated landmark speech addressing US-Muslim relations.

I must admit that when I first heard that Mr Obama was to deliver such a speech on the US’ relations with the Muslim world, I assumed that it would be in Cairo (Egypt) or Riyadh (Saudi Arabia). Egypt has long been one of the most influential Arab countries, and is the largest in terms of population. It is also the recipient of more US aid – including military aid – than any country in the world, save Israel. Saudi Arabia, with its oil wealth and being home to Mecca, stands out as one of the most obvious countries to engage Muslims from.

Yet, the Obama administration appears to have chosen Indonesia. On further analysis, Indonesia could turn out to be an ideal choice.

Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslim majority country by far. It is the fourth most populous nation, after China, India and the US. When people think of the “Muslim world”, many immediately conjure up images of bearded Arabs in turbans and long flowing robes. But the reality is that most of the Muslim world resides outside of the Middle East, in places like Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent and North Africa.

Indonesia is also the world’s third largest democracy. By engaging Indonesia, the US is not-so-subtly giving notice to autocratic regimes in Egypt and Saudi Arabia that the US is not turning a blind eye to their dictatorial ways for the sake of pragmatic expedience. This gels in well with Mr Obama’s repeated campaign promises to wean America off its addiction to oil which makes it beholden to their “enemies”.

Indonesia is not only aligned with the US’ renewed focus on Asia, but also lies in the heart of a dynamic region that the Bush administration sorely neglected – Southeast Asia. It doesn’t hurt that Mr Obama spent five of his formative years living and schooling in Indonesia, making him a ready celebrity in the vast country.

So by engaging Indonesia, the US is killing multiple birds with one stone.

But how does this affect Singapore? By engaging Indonesia, the US shifts the sights of the world on Southeast Asia and the ASEAN countries, which includes Singapore.

One area of engagement with Indonesia will surely be improved military-to-military relations. Indonesia is Singapore’s largest neighbour and a potential military threat, particularly if their armed forces are not sufficiently professionalized and under the full control of a democratically-elected civilian government. With improved military relations, the US will be able to influence the development of the TNI (the Indonesian army) and possibly base more of its forces in the region. This will be a much needed force for stability in the region, possibly averting a disastrous situation like in 1999 when the TNI went on a rampage in East Timor after the latter voted to separate from Indonesia.

Greater US engagement will bring with it greater economic opportunities for Indonesia and the region. The economic development of Indonesia is in Singapore’s best interests, since a thriving Indonesia will provide a nearby market for Singapore’s exports, and help us diversify from our dependence on the US and Europe to sell our goods and services to.

Obviously it is still early days into the new US administration. Whether he makes good on his promise to build a bridge to the Muslim world remains yet to be seen. It is also unclear whether the focus on the non-Arab Islamic world will win over the Muslim ground, which still looks with much reverence to the Arab world as the heart of the Muslim ummah. Nevertheless, I am optimistic after seeing these first steps, and I look forward eagerly to President Obama’s visit to the region in November.