Subscribe to THE TEMASEK REVIEWNews FeedSubscribe to THE TEMASEK REVIEWComments

Shanmugam: Singapore is NOT a country

October 31, 2009 by admin  
Filed under Headlines

Leave a comment

From our Correspondent

For a fouth day running, Singapore Law Minister K Shanmugam tried desperately hard to convince a skeptical audience that Singapore is a “democracy”.

He quoted the example of Chicago where democratic mayors have won without interruption since 1931.

‘But nobody questions whether there is a democracy in New York,’ Law Minister K. Shanmugam said on Wednesday, referring to the frequent questioning of Singapore’s democratic credentials given the 50-year dominance of the ruling People’s Action Party.

Drawing on arguments by American economist Bryan Caplan in a recent article, he said Singapore was viewed as a deviation from the democratic norm because it was seen primarily as a country.

‘This is where most people make a mistake…I have tried to explain that we are different. We are a city. We are not a country,’ he told 200 lawyers, many from America, at the New York State Bar Association International Section’s meeting here.

Did Mr Shanmugam make a “honest mistake” or a freudian slip? If Singapore is NOT a country, then are we still considered a sovereign and independent state? So which country owns the sovereign rights of the city of Singapore?

Singapore is unique in the sense that it is both a country and a city at the same time.

As an important minister in the Singapore cabinet, Mr Shanmugam’s words carry a lot of weight.

Why are Singapore males serving National Service when they are only defending a city and not their country? Who does our Prime Minister report to? What value does our pink IC have? Are we citizens of a country or residents of a city?

Mr Shanmugam’s use of Chicago is also highly inappropriate because Chicago is only a city in the United States and not a country by itself.

Furthermore, though the Chicago legislature is dominated by Democratic lawmakers, it has all the necessary pillars of democracy as outlined by former Thai Prime Minister Anand Paranyachun such as freedom of expression, political tolerance and a robust civil society.

You don’t see Chicago politicians being bankrupted by defamation lawsuits or protestors being arrested by the police. That’s the difference between Chicago and Singapore.

It must be a long and tiring week for Mr Shanmugam and he can be forgiven for a slip of tongue. Unfortunately, his flawed arguments can only convince Singaporeans and not the politically astute Americans with a long and proud history of democracy.

Steering committee member James P. Duffy III gave a diplomatic reply to the state media when asked about his thoughts on Mr Shanmugam’s speech:

“While not everything we learnt would fit comfortably with some important Western values, we are at the beginning of what we expect will be a long and fruitful dialogue with people whom we respect and want to know and understand better.”

If you read between the lines, you will realize he is merely “giving face” to Singapore which is the host for the event.

  • Share/Bookmark

Tags:

Comments

54 Comments on "Shanmugam: Singapore is NOT a country"

  1. Political Salesman on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 12:26 pm 

    Ya! Singapore is Not a country! It a commercial HUB for the Man In White (Termite), Taken all your land, Business.Stop At Two(taken innocent life). Sell away National Asset etc…….
    Loss away Sabah & Sarawak (These two state have a lot of resources)So Singapore is Not a country.

  2. Anon on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 1:05 pm 

    I SO wanna join the SAF now. PMC’s ARE COOL. Pretty shitty pay for a PMC though.

  3. BuiTaHan on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 1:12 pm 

    The example quoted by the law minister does not make sense because only in Singapore that the ruling party can adjust the constituency boundary to their advantage, create the GRC to reduce the chance of opposition party being elected, etc.

  4. sgcynic on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 1:15 pm 

    LOL. I’m a cityzen. Uniquely Singapore!

  5. cy on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 1:41 pm 

    I thought shanmugam is a top lawyer, so he only master the art of sophistry but not the call of justice.

    1)you can’t compare apple with oranges, singapore govt controls all organs of the state, while chicago,new york has checks and balances

    2) even you want to compare, the sample size is too small to reach a conclusion

    3) to reject the economist hypothesis, i only need a counter example, say hong kong

    4) as we know, economics is termed “the dismal science” not for nothing. even FED chiefs,greenspan and bernanke got it wrong about the hosuing bubble.They are supposed to be renowned economists. I don’t know the economist mentioned by shanmugam but i am sure you can always find someone who agrees with you. one swallow does not make a summer.

    As keynes said” The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.”

  6. janetnt on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 2:19 pm 

    I am abit confuse and hope someone can explain to me. I have just read the FAQ on the interview
    “This is where most people make a mistake. … I have tried to explain that we are different. We are a city. We are not a country. He is the first writer I have seen who has said that.”

    So did Shanmugam said it or is he quoting the writer of the book??

    Anyway, i agreed that Singapore’s situation is indeed ‘Uniquely Singapore’

  7. Exposer on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 2:34 pm 

    Everyone in Singapore is not a Singaporean because Singapore is not a country. Who are we really ? Uniquely Pokemon ?

  8. Anonymous on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 2:45 pm 

    We are NOT a country?

    I hope no one ever claims on the world stage that we are a brothel?

    The nationals of the country called Singapore is Singaporeans who swore the highfalutin pledge for nearly all his or her life – not PRs, foreign workers and plenty of PROSTITUTES.

  9. ric on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 3:03 pm 

    This is what happens when a Kachang Puteh man becomes minister.

  10. ayama on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 3:08 pm 

    Since we are just a city and not a country, maybe we should consider joining the US and become their 51st state.

    No wonder all this Pappy minister are trying so hard to impress the US govt.

  11. Kan_cheong spider on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 3:47 pm 

    according to the Oath of Office, I did not see him or any other minister or the president swearing to the City of Singapore.

    http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/sn01000_.html

    Was he officially sworn in?

  12. Singapore is a city state on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 3:54 pm 

    Singapore is a city state.

    The title’s kinda funny, and this piece’s more opinion than news. Just some comments as a reader.

  13. reader on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 4:04 pm 

    Shanmugam is only looking at the similar end results, but purposely ignoring the differences in PROCESSES.

    And the comparison is not even valid, as where is the logic in Singapore not being a country? Just because we are a city state does not mean we are not a country!

    I really expected much more from our Law Minister than to make such illogical and absurd statements.

  14. George on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 5:07 pm 

    Press freedom here? Watch these from Chomsky:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlyb1Bx9Ic&NR=1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4K2uBI61z4&NR=1

  15. Michael on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 5:26 pm 

    Of course Singapore is not a country, it is a company, Singapore Inc.

  16. Anna on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 6:06 pm 

    He should just shut up. THis is called “the more you stir, teh murky it gets.” we are just paying big bucks for a bunch of idiots to demolish our national identity.

  17. indexer on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 6:41 pm 

    @janetnt,

    Yes, Shanmugam was quoting the author. The transcript is at http://www.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/pdf/20091031/Transcript.pdf

    The Q&A is quite long and substantive. I’m very impressed by the cogency of Shanmugam’s arguments here, and in his speech. It’s no wonder that he was one of Singapore’s top litigators.

  18. donker on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 7:40 pm 

    Shanmugam is NOT a Minister, TAKE A PAYCUT!!!

  19. Ah Cow on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 8:58 pm 

    Of course Sinkapoor is just a city and not a country.
    Why else do you think lky said that the pledge is only
    an aspiration? The Aspiration will magically transform into
    a Pledge only when Sinkapoor morphs into a country!

    And why is everyone being so hard on Shan? He is after all
    only a minister. Can’t a minister make a boo-boo now and then when our dear beloved pm has been ordering mee-siam-mai-hum for his meals?

  20. janetnt on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 9:28 pm 

    Because of TR’s misleading and ill represented bias argument, it had only manage to stir up negative feeling about its reader and not make singaporean any wiser politically. Now i question the reason for its existent.

  21. Brendan on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 9:32 pm 

    Check this out

    http://apps.facebook.com/causes/101078

    The group must be some anti-Jew Semitic under the banner of promoting peace with Israel.

    Now we know who’s a traitor!!

  22. ronin on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 9:48 pm 

    Positively a Freudian Slip.

    I expect the next minister to say …”We are neither a country nor a city. We are just a huge hotel”.

  23. Exposer on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 10:56 pm 

    MIW,
    whatever clown you are please choose one of the options when you make the remark.
    1) It is just Freudian Slip
    2) It is a honest mistake
    3) It’s the lapse. What to do, it happens.
    4) I’m drunk.
    5) Forgive me for my baldness.
    6) Forgive me, as I am paid to talk highfalutin nonsense to please my incorrigible master.
    7) I am not a Singaporean. I am just a Citizen Without Borders. I might even be a alien from outer world.
    8) I suck when I under stress and pressure.
    9) I need to give nonsense to keep my million dollars job.
    10) I’m a asshole.
    11) All of the above

  24. Exposer on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 11:07 pm 

    “I’m very impressed by the cogency of Shanmugam’s arguments here, and in his speech. It’s no wonder that he was one of Singapore’s top litigators.”

    Having read all the answers given by the clown, I amost puke. It is really an insult to reader’s intelligence. I suggest everyone read the highlighted pdf file and be entertain as though you are in http://www.talkingcock.com

    Everything eventually come back to one answer: => SINGAPORE IS UNIQUELY DIFFERENT.
    But then, you ask, is the rest of countries of the world uniquely the same too ? Can’t there be a common ground which is the same such as justice, honesty, integrity, credibility etc …. I finally understand that Singapore gov use a uniquely different dictionary from the rest of the world because the words can only suit to PAP’s liking and interpretation.

  25. Cheese on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 12:11 am 

    since singapore is not a nation or a country then we are not her sillyzen, right? Why do we need to do NS har?

  26. linguist on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 12:44 am 

    There are many linguistic experts here. No wonder the big hoo-ha over a few words (taken from one sentence plucked out from many others, which are totally ignored).

    Great topic for a discourse. Good substance. Salute to the stringent linguists. My dictionary must be ever-ready.

  27. knnbccb on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 2:31 am 

    It’s a Freudian slip on the real nature of Singapore Inc.

    Give it a rest, Mr. Shanmugam. Enough with the democratic/non-democratic, poor/biased ranking from RSF issue. Get on with your cushy Law Minister job. Do your convincing with real action, not empty rhetoric which so many lawyers are fond of.

  28. janetnt on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 2:38 am 

    I seriously wonder how many ppl here actually read the interview before commenting. From my lain man understanding of the interview, Nair did not say those words, he quoted 3 example given by an UK writer, 1 example being Singapore is unique as its only a City size and ask the person who question him to decided for himself which is the answer.

    TR has successfully spin this into an anti PAP thing and got so many ppl to respond accordingly. -.-

  29. fpc on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 3:40 am 

    //janetnt

    onus is on the lawyer.

    why quote when you disagree.

    did he disagree with the writer? no.

    so, he has to agree with the writer.

    he is not getting away from this by a technicality.

  30. fpc on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 3:42 am 

    //linguist

    not a small hoo ha over a few words.

    it reflects the inane effort of the pap to stay in power.

  31. fpc on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 3:44 am 

    //ronin

    we ‘r a huge hotel because this generation of pap people made it out to be one.

  32. Peter Su on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 8:32 am 

    After so many days of twisting and turning, he got himself badly twisted. Should ask the PM instead.

  33. XiSd Tay on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 8:39 am 

    One SINGLE famiLEE Lawyer versus 200 Seasoned Lawyers from the USA? Cow also die lar. :)

    I think what he meant to say but did not managed to complete it was Sinkapore is NOT a country, its is a famiLEE business. Tsk Tsk

    @indexer who said: I’m very impressed by the cogency of Shanmugam’s arguments here, and in his speech. It’s no wonder that he was one of Singapore’s top litigators.

    Please don’t make my toes laugh. He qualified as a top litigator because he practically walked through the court processes without any competition with the Judges on his side and MM Lee backing him up.

    He will be no where if not for MM Lee. I am sure many truely Top Lawyers from Sinkapore will beg to disagree.

  34. Don't cry for me, Singapore on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 11:01 am 

    Singapore is not a country but a zoo in which citizenry is now watching closely and amusing themselves at the comical utterances of those uniquely Singa-enriched and well-fattened specie of white tigers protected by the cage of denial, misinformation and lies.

    It is getting harder and harder of trusting by the day now and could be by the minutes when election comes around.

    So tragically sad for all my fellow non-citizens unaffectionately called Singaporeans of not even allegiance rights of highfalutin pledge ( this zoo actually now implicitly declared to be constitutionally “owned” by foreign PRs and foreign workers????) of this state of affairs prevailing.

    So please don’t cry for me, Singapore. We lost you!!!

  35. George on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 12:26 pm 

    Once again, my long held theory that lky would only recruit into the cabinet someone with a serious flaw is being vindicated by Shanmugam’s first public utterences at an important event.

    Shanmugam has clearly demonstrated that outside of the courtroom, whatever substance, wits and cleverness he possess, amounts to very little outside of it. He must have come across as so mundane to his American audience who come from a vastly different social and political milieu. Most must be simply exercising the art of being the perfect guest by grinning and bearing it, biting their tongue or have their tongue firmly implanted in their cheek!

    Shanmugam is in good company. One can immediately think of peers like Vivian Bala and Lui Tuck Yew, to name two.

    lky broght them in for their most important attribute attributes -’controlabilty’ (recall what he said to Charlie Rose about China’s fear of losing control…?)

    In contrast, I have always placed Davinder Singh above Shanmugam. That man is a real tiger. Do you recall him making stupid public statements? lky would be positively afraid of letting him into cabinet. DS looks very much like a man with his own mind with none of the proclivity mentioned above.

  36. Matt on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 1:10 pm 

    whole lot of you should complain to your MP’s and ask him to explain himself…

  37. Left your brain on MRT train on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 3:05 pm 

    @janetnt on Sat, 31st Oct 2009 9:28 pm

    Today is Sunday, if yesterday is your working day, could we be forgiven thinking you left your brain on the MRT train before you commence your “work” – hopefully paid at penalty rates for the enthusiasm you displayed in that post?

    I am just disagree with your post, NOT you!

  38. FPC on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 3:09 pm 

    //indexer

    why do u quote when you disagree with the quote?

    fluency or not, hus arg sucks.

  39. Omega Lee on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 4:42 pm 

    “Why do we need to do NS har?”

    Someone hinting we are going to rejoin Malaysia, join America or China soon. :)

  40. TL on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 8:19 pm 

    This is just another example of TWIST and TURN roti prata technique!!!

  41. knnbccb on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 9:21 pm 

    (Real) Purposes of NS:

    1) Social control of hot-blooded teenage men and all the way till middle age with reservist liabilities.

    2) Generates business for companies like Singapore Food Industries, ST Logistics, Chartered Industries and various contractors and sub-contractors doing anything from landscaping to web hosting.

    3) Cheap labour for the military regulars. Conscripts are also cattle for the regulars to manage. Manage well and a swift promotion ensues. Botch it up and off to the ‘hentak-kaki’ mode he/she goes.

    4) Cheap labour for NDP. Every year.

    5) Who can forget the good ol’ SAF doing humanitarian/peacekeeping tasks in other people’s backyards? Post independence East Timor, tsunami-hit parts of Indonesia, an obedient support navy fleet dispatched to the Middle East coz’ Uncle Sam says so.

    National defence and deterrance etc. are nothing more than a bunch of steaming horse manure, which might get some patriotic dude all choked up, discerning men familiar with the ways of the SAF will laugh off.

  42. nabb on Mon, 2nd Nov 2009 1:22 am 

    was reading the transcript and he was saying that the gov lets the people of singapore decide whether or not the PAP should be in office

    well, first of all, if they would just stop suing opposition politicians and moving electoral boundaries at wimp

    secondly, 33% of Singaporeans have decided that you should not be in office and this number is gonna just keep increasing with your staid policies … let’s show them what you’re made of singaporeans

    time for change, vote opposition.

  43. fair and square on Mon, 2nd Nov 2009 2:55 am 

    WELL NOT A COUNTRY?
    i THINK IM BETTER GO BACK TO SCHOOL?
    THESE DAYS THEY REALLY TEACH NEW STUFFS!
    GUESS I AM BEHIND THE CURVE..SMALL WONDER THEY NEED SO MANY FTs.
    So when will our PRIME MINISTER assume his NEW portfolio of
    CHIEF MINISTER?

  44. Neil Bishop on Mon, 2nd Nov 2009 9:15 am 

    James P Duffy III is also weak as piss (always the case with someone who insists on “III” in his name). “Western values” is as stupid and nebulous a concept as LKY’s “Asian values”. What he should have said was: “We understand that Singapore’s system of government exists for the sole purpose of making the Lee Family look good and hiding Family mistakes. On that basis, we understand that the Family has chosen not to allow the judiciary to be independent because if the truth of how poorly the Family governed Singapore was revealed then there could be massive social unrest.”

  45. Commoner on Mon, 2nd Nov 2009 12:12 pm 

    First, our pledge is just a highfalutin ideas. Next, Singapore suddenly becomes a city, not country. What’s next? Singaporeans because stateless refugees?

  46. x12831 on Mon, 2nd Nov 2009 6:54 pm 

    //Commoner,

    Good one!

  47. janetnt on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 1:22 am 

    To FPC,
    The writer gave 3 reason, and the lawyer ask which of the 3 reason should be correct, how do you say Nair has to agree with all 3 reason when it is a MCQ?

    btw the City VS Country writing is also quoted in another TR article “Minding the gap between THE PINK & THE BLUE” which offer a clearer picture of that argument, be it right or wrong. This current article just want to stir up feelings without real educating or base. I became and supporter of TR around the time of the AWARE sage but is sad to see that they are turing worse.

  48. Anonymous on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 1:44 am 

    If Singapore is NOT a country, why are we having a Government and paying phenomenal amount of salaries every year to upkeep that???.

    We might as well elected among ourselves a village pengulus ( head) to provide token, symbolic leadership -T IS CHEAPER, FASTER AND BETTER, wouldn’t that be the case?

    This is reality, not stirring feelings that need education to anyone.

  49. seconder to jane on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 1:54 am 

    I second Janet.

    This is not news. It’ll be REALLY VERY BIG NEWS if TR agrees with any part of what they said. Even a teeny bitsy part, the sun will rise in the west.

    TR policy now is, every single thing also must disagree, fullstop. Disagree for disagree sake. Very long time ago, sometimes still can see 2 balanced sides. What a waste.

  50. fair and square on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 2:34 am 

    Well,Singapore is unique if what Minister Shanmugam is trying
    to drive at.Yes,we can fall under teh category of a city-state.
    But, that is looking at SINAGPORE from one small perspective.
    Indeed, we are city-state,alright, but first and foremost,we a
    NATION OF SINGAPOREANS OF THE COUNTRY KNOWN BY OTHER MEMBERS OF TEH UNITED NATIONS AS SINGAPORE!

  51. milo on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 4:54 am 

    @ janetnt on Sun, 1st Nov 2009 2:38 am:

    Quote: “Nair did not say those words, he quoted 3 example given by an UK writer…”

    @ janetnt on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 1:22 am:

    Quote: “…how do you say Nair has to agree with all 3 reason when it is a MCQ?”

    WTF are you talking about? Who the f*** is NAIR? What has he to do with Shanmugam’s idiotic Q&A session?
    Have you got Gopalan Nair on that tiny thing you call a brain?

    SHAN THE SHAM dun know the difference between a city-state and a country and you dun know your Shan from your Nair. You were made for each other.

  52. Anonymous on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 8:42 am 

    Didn’t in the 1987 economic recession post the October 1987 market meltdown, we invented this Uniquely Singapore song which we sing “we are a nation”…blah..blah…blah.

    If we are a nation but not a country, so a fiction of a nation called Singapore is just an empty self-loathing song of aspiration of some highfalutin nonsense of hypocritical loyalty??

    Is there NOT something radically WRONG with our very strange national pysche paraded on the world stage??

  53. sheldon on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 9:26 am 

    janetnt

    i read the interview. without a doubt, he is saying we are not a country. as per the standard manifested throughout the pdf, quotes will be in italics. but the following passage is not. it expresses agreement with the author of ‘the myth of rational voter’, bryan caplan, the writer referred to below.

    “This is where most people make a mistake. I have tried to explain that we are different. We are a city. We are not a country. He is the first writer I have seen who has said that.”

  54. sheldon on Tue, 3rd Nov 2009 9:36 am 

    taken from the interview transcript, courtesy of the link provided by indexer.

    shanmugan: We are actually a very paranoid place. We are extremely paranoid about survival. We think of ourselves as a small place that has to constantly run very hard just to stay in the same place. So we never take these surveys and say we have arrived. We always worry about who will take away our lunch.

    aiyoh, don’t want lah. i don’t want to live under a paranoid govt.

    where got forever crisis mode wan?