The animosity between Malaysia and Singapore won't die a natural death once the baggage carried by their former leaders is buried with them.
The buzz in the island republic is about another bulky tome, Hard Truths To Keep Singapore Going, by former prime minister and current Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
Published excerpts provoked criticism from his one-time Malaysian counterpart, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. But this was what was written by Asad Latif, a former Straits Times editorial writer, recently in the Sunday Times about Lee's world view: "He, having been a socialist, ...till he was mugged by reality. Singapore's expulsion from Malaysia -- because he refused to buckle under and soften his insistence on a multiracial meritocracy -- set the stage for a wider and longer regional encounter.
"The very demography of Chinese-majority Singapore -- the only such entity outside China -- determines regional perceptions of it. Combine racial perception with the religious resurgence in Southeast Asia, which has developed a cutting militant edge, and Singapore's predicament is clear."
So the Singapore narrative that Lee engenders -- that the island is hostage to outside perceptions of it and is, therefore, helpless about its ultimate fate -- lives on, dovetailing with the Singapore government's desire to keep its population under a siege mentality.
What better way to foster that view than to raise the spectre of unfriendly, even jealous, neighbours?
But how much of that view is real or even, if real, relevant to Singapore?
How much does it actually mask a view prevalent in Singapore, the region and globally?
It strikes one as odd that as Singapore strives to rise above racial and religious sentiments in the region -- what Asad describes as attaining a "new type of post-racial polity" -- it is at the same time encouraging immigrants from China to maintain the racial balance in the city-state, given the declining birth rate among its Chinese population that causes its leaders sleepless nights.
It appears that "the very demography of Chinese-majority Singapore" will remain immutable, by government fiat if necessary, when that very majority refuses to cooperate to sustain it.
Why do away with the threat of foreign malevolence towards Singapore when it can use it to keep its citizens submissive?
Does a quota exist in Singapore about the origins of immigrants and, if so, does that not negate the view that the country is a meritocracy?
Or is Singapore wise to the ways of the world even as it seeks to pretend not to be: that a meritocracy is likely to be easier to attain and sustain if the majority of its people remains Chinese?
If minority groups in Singapore become greater in number than the Chinese, will they clamour for quotas in employment, education and other areas?
As Singapore grapples with challenges brought about by multiracialism and multiculturalism, it cannot but recognise that it is similar to other countries in dealing with minorities to create national cohesion.
The wonder of it all is that Malays in Singapore go with the flow while cognisant of its status as a minority group.
In that sense, Singapore is a lucky country, no matter how much its leaders want to show the world that its success has nothing to do with luck.
There are presumably people on both sides of the Causeway who hope that the past will remain buried and that both countries will forge a more mature and rational future that will benefit both countries.
But it takes two to tango. And Singapore, ever quick to sense and resent bullying by larger neighbours, must realise that people live in multiracial societies.
And the first rule of living under such situations is not to throw stones at others.
Perhaps that is the hardest truth of for Singaporeans to understand, made more difficult by the blind spot of their founding father. By John Teo for The New Straits Time Kuala Lumpur
No comments:
Post a Comment