Singapore: China fabricate lies and fake news

After wrecking bilateral relationship with Malaysia, Singapore’s diplomat Bilahari Kausikan now hit at China and accused the Chinese of fabricating lies and fake news to establish diplomacy:
 
“Beijing uses a mix of persuasion, inducement and coercion techniques to create a psychological environment which poses false choices for other countries. This technique of forcing false choices on you and making you choose between false choices is deployed within a framework of either overarching narratives or specific narratives… The purpose is to narrow the scope of choices and they are usually presented in binary terms. The intention is to stampede your thinking so that the critical faculty is not fully engaged and to instill a sense of fatalistic inevitability of the choices forced upon you.”
 
The PAP elite who was the former permanent secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said China keep issuing “falsehoods” like having a better relationship during Lee Kuan Yew’s times:
 
“Several examples of falsehoods that have been put forth by Beijing when dealing with Singapore, include how relations under founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew were much better as compared to now because the current Government does not understand China. These discourses are powerful because they are not entirely fabricated. They do contain a kernel of truth. But they are either extremely simplistic… or leave out vital facts. Mr Lee went against the Chinese-supported Communist united front in the 1950s-60s and prevailed. Other examples of untruths, include how Washington represents the past while Beijing stands for the future, as well as suggestions that those who are close to the United States will find it hard to have close economic ties with China.”
 
Bilahari Kausikan continued his anti-China speech calling it “self-deceptive” and manipulative:
“Other vulnerabilities in the Chinese approach, include cultural altruism as well as a tendency towards self-deception… and rigidity. Even when China’s intentions are exposed, the other parties may opt to play along due to genuine sympathy towards the Chinese position, cultural affinity or to ensure that bilateral relations can be kept on an even keel. This may also be due to transactional reasons – for hope of reward or fear of sanctions.”

The above post is from thestatestimesreview. Bilahari’s anti China speech was prominently published in the main media. What was the intent to give this hate speech so much publicity when it could only create more animosity between China and Singapore? Is this diplomacy or a declaration of hostility with China? Is Bilahari going to say that this is his personal view and he is no longer a govt official, so what he said has no bearing on Singapore’s official position. Likewise, what the official media printed is not the official voice of the govt. This is freedom of speech.
 
If that is the case, more anti China and hate speeches against China is fair game in Singapore’s main media and not done with ill intent to provoke or attack China. They would not affect Singapore’s good relations with China. China would be wise to see that there is no linkage in such hostile media reports against China with Singapore’s intent to have good relations with China.
 
What do you think?
 
PS. Some may be wondering if Bilahari was given a licence to attack China. Can Singapore hope to improve its relations with China with this kind of comments coming from its ex top officials that were involved in making govt decisions and repeatedly published in the main media?