The recent flee to Johor Bahru, a Southern Malaysian state, of a major Singapore opposition politician in the wake of Singapore's recent January election because he "did not feel safe" in Singapore, provided more than Singapore bargained for and sparked a diplomatic row with Malaysia. For fleeing Singapore for fear of political persecution is not an uncommon event, while upsetting fellow ASEAN neighbours and risking "loss of face" is.
Founding father/patriarch Lee Kuan Yew, as part of a writ from his legal firm commented that it was surprising that Lim had felt safer in Johor Bahru because it was "notorious for shootings, muggings, and car-jackings". Now, while in the rest of the world this sort of verbal joust would generally be ignored, in South East Asia where diplomacy is the name of the game, Malaysian leaders, not unsurprisingly, took exception to the remark and the Malaysian press had a field day. It is also the sort of commentary that if
made of Singapore, especially by a Singapore citizen, would not be looked on kindly by Lee himself. That citizen may also be visited by some "polite" interrogators.
Meanwhile, the Jakarta Post reported this week of a demonstration outside the Singapore embassy in Kuala Lumpur against abuses of human rights in Singapore. Demonstrators wore masks to cover their faces which at first thought may be somewhat of an over reaction, but the sight of embassy staff photographing the demonstrators gives pause for thought. I am not sure whether the demonstration was reported in Malaysian or Singapore papers.
Which all brings us to Christopher Lingle's book "Singapore's Authoritarian Capitalism" which landed at this editorial office 3 weeks ago, and has stayed in the in tray while we discussed whether it was worth publishing a review of this book when 20% of our readers indeed come from Singapore, and the Singapore government is not unknown for "banning" WWW sites that provide an "erroneous view of Singapore". The fact that Lee made these remarks however, completely justified as the opinions of one person on Johor Bahru, would suggest to us that he would not mind opinions on the state of Singapore to be made by others as well. Again, the right to voice an opinion, is key to a mature society, as is the right of others to rebut, and for others to make up their own mind.
The author of the book, Christopher Lingle, a Visiting Associate Professor of Economics in the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University, at one time did make negative comments about a foreign country... and lived to regret it.
Lingle, as you would remember, was the academic who fled Singapore in the wake of questioning by authorities following the publication of his letter in the Straits Times which referred to "intolerant regimes in the region (revealing) considerable ingenuity in their methods of suppressing dissent" and "relying upon a compliant judiciary to bankrupt opposition politicians". No where was Singapore itself mentioned. However it must have touched a raw nerve as Lingle was visited and questioned by authorities soon after, and subject to other actions at his place of work that were enough to have him,
like Lim Kit Sian, departing Singapore in fear of his safety. As an academic, Lingle mentions the principle of "Publish or Perish". In essence this means that to prosper as an academic you must continually publish in academic journals. In a clever turn of phrase, Lingle shows, that for him,
voicing an opinion in a small city state where opinions are less the province of the people and more of the state, it was "Publish AND Perish".
This first hand account mirrors recurring themes and issues in the Asia Pacific Management Forum and the mission by which it was established, and contains food for thought for all Asian political and indeed, management, observers. For Singapore, through various factors, not the least being de-regulation, has become a major force in the region. For this, those behind its rise must be held in the highest respect. On the other hand, some of the social mechanisms that have partly oiled this rise has not invoked the same almost universal support.
The book is part personal account, part analysis of Singapore's political system that for an academic, is surprisingly easy reading. Invited to Singapore as Senior Fellow in European Studies at the showcase National University of Singapore, Lingle is certainly qualified to write and while the style is definitely passionate and sometimes personal, the facts presented are very objective. It is clear where the author is stating opinion or fact, and the reader is well provided with the background to the often very critical opinions presented. But throughout, it is still very hard for this reviewer, at least, to disagree with much of what Lingle says.
Despite the pride in which Singapore hold their adoption of the English Westminster system, the ignorance of the key principle of "separation of powers" is evident in the close relationship between the judiciary, government, and media. Lingle provides many examples, including his own and the more recent Lees on/Fay episodes as evidence of the extent of the independence of the judiciary.
Additionally, Lingle launches a well thought through attack on "Asian Values", which in this reviewers mind could be better referred to as "Singapore Values" or "Chinese Values". While this culture has proved successful economically for Singapore in the past for their own situation as a mainly Chinese, postcolonial "nation state", its adoption in cultures of other ASEAN nations at another time, and which do not have the advantage of a small, dense, fairly and relatively less diverse population, may be inappropriate, if not disastrous. This is even ignoring the effects on social, rather than economic progress. In one way, Singapore can be seen as one of the most successful experiments in social engineering of modern times; where experiments of the left in Europe failed in the 1960's, Singapore's experiment of the right was an outstanding success. To those who value freedom of debate and respect for the individual however, the experiment was less of a success. And among this group, are not only those
from the much maligned US, but also many in Singapore and other ASEAN nations. Even Singapore's much touted "multi-culturalism" is overstated. With over 3/4 Chinese, many countries near and far boast a more culturally diverse population, and govern them successfully with more consideration to the unique individual potential of ethnic groups rather than the Singapore communalist style.
Singapore's attitude to the West also comes in for regular comment. The negative portrayal of the West, especially the US, as a "democratic role model" in the major English language newspaper Straits Times may well give a visiting expat who relied on the paper for world news the feeling that the US was verging on collapse with reports of moral decline, and increasing violence. In the reviewer's view, the xenophobia evidenced towards the West, not only in Singapore but also in neighbouring countries approaches that of the West towards Asia in past, less enlightened times. Lingle traces this to
the loss of the bogey of communism. Even casual students of social science and political theory know that the best way to ensure unquestioning loyalty at home is to have a common threat. If one does not exist, it is necessary to invent one. The 'decadence" of the West, has replaced communism as the bogey. One need only remember that in true pragmatic Chinese style, Lee courted the communists when it suited him, and dropped them when it didn't.
Finally, Lingle broadens his bow and offers a critical perspective on the predicted shift of power from the US to Asia. Indeed, there are several theories at present of shifting balance of power of varying credibility, including the one recently espoused to me as a question at a seminar in Jakarta, that the shift will be from the White nations (yesterday) to the Yellow Nations (today) to eventually the Dark Nations (explained as the rise of the Malay business).
Viewing claims of a "Pacific Century" as a self serving prediction from the "Singapore school", Lingle offers a run down of the major problems with such a prediction. This final section of the book has perhaps the most to offer readers of the Forum and again is a useful contribution to the debate. Prime
Minister of Malaysia, Dr Mahathir, has been at pains recently to reduce talk of a "Pacific Century", citing that it is causing some disconcertion among the West. Lingle contends that several factors, including business practices such as "guanxi", continuing corruption, racial disharmony especially in Japan, political stability, over government and the position of China as key problems. Rather than the term "Pacific Century" he proposes "Global Century" "where a rising tide of global free trade lifts all ships".
This is a book that deserves to be read, as an alternative to other accounts that often ignore the negative aspects of Singapore's meteoric rise to world respect. If only to be reminded of one overriding reason for Singapore's economic success... a relatively opposition-less government that rules paternally with its supporters and fairly ruthlessly with opponents. Do the ends justify the means? Is it enough to have steered Singapore to a standard of living the envy of other Asian nations and to "developed nation" state by 1996? Like the Catholic convent girl, protected from the rest of the world, eventually finding the real world difficult to cope with, one trusts that the Singapore populace copes rather better with the coming era of globalisation, regionalization, and Kenichi Ohmae's "end of the nation state".
As Lee himself said, one wonders why Lim Kiat Sian, (and this is no endorsement of Lim's politics which attempts to bring about a more Chinese dominated Singapore), felt safer among the "shootings, muggings, and car-jackings" of Johor Bahru than Singapore.
Maybe Lee asked the question rhetorically; for the rest of us, we may give it a bit more reflection.
Reviewed by 
