It’s official – Singapore now has a law designed to
combat the threat of Foreign Interference in Domestic Affairs. The Foreign Interference
(Countermeasures) Bill or “FICA” was passed by the ruling party’s super
majority in parliament after a 10-hour debate.
The result in parliament was never in any doubt.
Whatever points were made, were simply swatted aside and Singapore’s Magically
Unconflicted Law Writer and Enforcer, Mr. K Shanmugam had a field day
presenting himself as a defender of our liberty from the perils of foreign
influence in our domestic affairs. I guess you could say that Mr. Shanmugam had
every reason to celebrate in as much as he’s managed to grab more power in his
hands.
One of the most interesting points in this entire saga
was why was it necessary to introduce a bill to protect us from foreign
influences now. Around a month ago, our newly anointed protector against
foreign influences was playing the role of champion of staying open to
foreigners. Mr. Shanmugam was the man who challenged Nominated Member of
Parliament, Mr. Leong Mun Wai to a debate on CECA (our free trade agreement
with India, which has been the source of unhappiness among many Singaporeans)
and it was he who framed the debate on CECA as “Race Baiting” as was explained by
the following report from Channel NewsAsia:
Perhaps I’m a little slow (since I earn way bellow
S$500,000 a year) but it seems that Mr. Shanmugam is flip flopping. Up to a
month ago, Mr. Shanmugam was a champion of free trade and open borders. Although
he’s never held a “trade portfolio,” Mr. Shanmugam has taken it upon himself to
talk about a “borderless” Asia and Singapore’s role in it. He’s touted
Singapore’s legal infrastructure as a “selling” point for anyone wanting to set
up shop in the region as can be seen in this 2015 speech that he gave:
A month ago, Mr. Shanmugam was arguing that being open
to foreigners was essential not just for our prosperity but our very survival.
Suddenly, the man who was arguing that we needed to be
open to foreigners is now telling us that foreign interference is one of the
most serious threats that we face:
What makes our law enforcer believe that “foreign
interference” is one of the most serious threats that we face at a time when
the only thing people are focused on is the spread of a deadly virus that looks
set to fill up every available hospital bed?
Mr. Shanmugam will undoubtedly argue that being open
to foreigners and foreign interference and influences are undoubtedly two separate
issues. While it may seem that way on the surface, this argument would
illustrate a failure in the understanding of human interactions. It assumes
that Singaporeans are merely passive recipients of influences from elsewhere
just as the Mr. Shanmugam and his colleagues might argue that this is how it should
be – the foreigners come here, park their capital here never get involved in “local
life.”
Unfortunately, that’s not how human nature works. Foreigner
who come here will be mix with the local population through that most beloved
of bureaucratic institutions – the office. Our locals are likely to be influenced
by the foreigners they interact with just as the foreigners are likely to be
influenced by the locals they interact with. One of the best examples I can
think of is the French restaurant owner I used to work for who spoke fluent
Singlish, swore in perfect Hokkien and discussed the joys of durian with a
French accent.
Then, you also work on a policy of trying to get a portion
of those foreigners to stay here long enough to take up permanent residence or
even citizenship. That by definition is a form of foreign interference as the “new
citizens” by definition are going to bring their thoughts and influences developed
from elsewhere into our political system.
Being “pro” being open to people from elsewhere and
claim that you are also against influences from outside coming into the
political system.
Then, we need to look back at what Mr. Shanmugam has done
as Minister of Law, which was to sell Singapore’s legal infrastructure to
people from elsewhere as a reason for them to park their money in Singapore.
So, here’s the question – were there any laws in
designed with the foreigner in mind rather than the local in mind? Did our
magically unconflicted writer and enforcer of laws create laws so that foreigners
would find favour in Singapore. This is not suggesting that there was any wrong
doing on the part of the Minister but its also hard to argue that there was “no”
foreign interference.
Incidentally, one should note that in his arguments as
to why we need FICA, he used Kirstin Han and her work at New Naraif, as an
example as to why we needed protection against foreign interference. Ms. Han is
born and bred in Singapore. She holds a Singapore passport and whilst she may
have had met former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mahathir, she has NEVER once suggested that Singapore should be taken over by
another nation or that any of our political leaders should have harm done to
them. Yet, somehow, she received the dubious honour of being labelled by our
least conflicted minister as an agent of foreign interference.
By comparison, Mr. Shanmugam does not think that his
Fawning Follower aka “The Critical Spectator,” a known Polish blogger, who argues
that dormitory conditions of our foreign workers are good for Singapore – this is
despite the fact that it was established that the dormitories were direct cause
an explosion of Covid-19 cases. Isn’t this an act of bio-terrorism to promote a
disease-causing institution as beneficial to the population and isn’t it a
worry that the man who is in charge of writing and enforcing laws sees a
Singaporean promoting greater democracy and accountability than a foreigner who
is a cheerleader for bioterrorism as a greater threat?
No comments
Post a Comment