11th Asia Security Summit

This high power Summit, called the Shangri La Dialogue 2012, commenced yesterday with a keynote speech by H.E. Dr. H Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President of the Republic of Indonesia, entitled “An Architecture For Durable Peace in the Asia Pacific”.The participants include heads of state of Asean and key govt officials of the major powers.

I searched furiously for a report on this event and was frustratingly denied. I thought it would be a front page news in the main media but it seems that a footballer kicking ball into a bumboat as an advertising gimmick was more newsworthy. I finally found it stashed in a corner and spreaded across page 2 and 3, a small column on each page, not bigger than 4R, that befits its importance as newsworthy.

To me this Dialogue is a major event as it is an Asean statement to the big powers of what Asean’s stand is all about with respect to peace and security in the region. Yudhoyono made the Asean stand clear and to the point. Asean welcome big powers in trade and investment, not polarisation and creating military tension in the region. If big powers are here for economic activities, they are welcomed.

He also made it plain to the Americans that it has no right to stop emerging powers to grow and they should not be treated with suspicion by the Americans. Every emerging power has a rightful place in the regional architecture, ‘Asia is certainly big enough for all powers – established and emerging – and there is always room for new stakeholders, as long as they invest in common peace and progress.’

The Americans must know that this is a plain message that every country, big and small, including every Asean country, has a right to grow and be an emerging power in the region. America cannot labelled any country as dangerous just because they wanted to be an emerging power and to be threatened with the raising of tension in the region, just like the case of North Korea. If the American can make a case out of North Korea, it can do likewise to all regional powers, branding them as dangerous and suspicious, and threatening them with sanctions or threats of war.

It is a noteworthy speech that says Asean has a mind of its own and knows where its interest lies, that peace and security in the region is of paramount importance, and regional conflicts incited by the Americans would not be entertained. Asean will conduct its own brand of diplomacy through peaceful negotiations and not through escalating tension or war.

It is interesting to hear what the Americans have to say this time, raising the spectre of a China or North Korean threat again, and Asean needs the US military presence to counter China?

May the farce be with you

I must have written quite a few pieces of farce lately. And I know that whatever I wrote, some will agree with me and some will disagree with me. But that is only natural. Be it farce or truth, facts or fictions, there will be people who agree or disagree with you. The thing is that in every farce there are some truths and in every truth there are always embedded with farces.

One very pertinent truth that I did not say is that the big tree is falling and the monkeys are going to scatter. Agree? As usual, some will, but the diehards will swear with their pants that the monkeys will stay together. My bet is that this day will come and must come. And it will be a time to write about more farces and more truths.

When Yoda told young Luke, ‘May the farce be with you,’ oops, I mean ‘May the force be with you,’ it was a story of good versus evil, and the force was meant to be good. Luke was also tempted by the Emperor to join the dark side. That was Hollywood and good and evil are easy to tell. In reality, the good and evil are interchangeable. The dark side could be the good side and the force or farce could be the wrong side.

What is also very sure is that in uncertain times like this, many able people will step forward to fulfil their destiny. Many are waiting for the moment, and it will come. The moment is imminent. And a new chapter will begin with new players and old players crisscrossing and taking sides. I can sense the forces of change building up, like Yoda said, feel it, feel the force.

Most Singaporeans welcome foreigners but…

This is the finding of the most authoritative English newspaper in the island. It did a survey on 400 individuals on their views about foreigners and the result is published in the paper today.

Coincidentally the finding is as good as what is expected. The people welcome more foreigners and foreigners are needed if we want growth. Also foreigners are more talented for sure. And foreigners will contribute to our growth. But I am to fill the survey form, I think my answers will be very different. And if there are 400 respondents like me, I don’t think anyone will want to publish the result of the survey.

It is not that I am anti foreigners. I think there is a place for some foreigners to be here. But I strongly disagree with the number of foreigners here. I strongly disagree that they are needed for the type of growth the average Sinkies want and the kind of lifestyle that they are forced to live with. And to call them talents is rubbish. There are many more local talents that are now regarded as non talents. Many are not better than the average Sinkies in all levels except the very exceptional like the few American entrepreneurs. And many are of dubious background but with a lot of money to throw.

We definitely need the foreign workers in the construction industry and some lower level jobs that no Sinkies want to do. We definitely do not need plane loads of questionable middle level executives to compete with our graduates from the three top local universities. Unfortunately, somehow, the local graduates from the local universities will never be good enough. Even at top management level, many are also found not good enough, especially in finance. But this problem will be solved in 20 years time. They realised that we are not producing good finance talents and they are starting to work at it. In 20 or 30 years time, the top banking institutions may see a chance to be headed by our own, genuinely local talents.

I wanted to conduct a survey on the views of netizens on how they feel about this survey and how they feel about foreigners. Then I know that the result would be what I expected. I humbly understand the biases in a survey sample and would not have the audacity to claim that it reflects the view of the average, or majority of Sinkies. That is how real people can be and how unreal people can be in the conduct and findings of surveys.

If I were to do a survey with an intended outcome, I can even jig or rig the result by carefully choose who I ask, how many is the sample size, the smaller sample the better, how the questions are phrased, and even throw away those answers that don’t fit the results that I wanted. Heh heh, it is so easy to conduct survey to produce the result that I want or for whoever wants it. I can simply cheat or game the result.

But that is me, or that is the kind of result one can get from the netizens, biased and unrepresentative. Big reputable organisations will not do such silly things or conduct surveys on netizens when the results will be known even before the survey is completed.

Back to the ST survey. Now that it is confirmed that Sinkies are quite happy with the foreigners here, then everything is fine and there is no problem bringing in more, except a little bit more, not so many. How many is not so many?

An exceptional talent

He molested an undercover cop and tried to bribe her with $100. He was jailed for one month and fined $10,000 for attempting to bribe a police officer.

In mitigation, his defence lawyer told the court that he ‘was an exceptionally talented individual, who graduated with a first class honours degree in engineering... He was also very good singer and had qualified for vocal training at the London School of Music.’

I am not sure if the court took into consideration the molestor’s exceptional talent when passing the sentence. What I thought was a pity is that he was not recruited as a foreign talent to boost our economy. First class engineering must be rare and in high demand here. And good singer could be usefully employed in our entertainment industry.

What a waste of talent. He could be another esteemed FT and may even become an MP with potential to be a minister.

Are we putting our soldiers at risk

Our soldiers and NSmen are there to defend this country against external threats. What are these external threats? They are threats from another country and will come in the form of foreign soldiers. They can be any foreigners.

We are importing millions of foreigners and issuing them with pink ICs to call them Singaporeans. How reliable are these new citizens? Would they be one of us, to defend our country, to fight with our children as comrades in arms, or would they do the unthinkable?

We have lost two of our fine young men in Sydney to a foreigner turned new citizens. The foreigner is still alive in Australian jail while our children dead. The foreigner could be paroled and live as another free man and will likely return to his original country.

The question is, how wise is the decision to make so many foreigners citizens and to serve as our soldiers to defend our country and our people? One potential terrorist is one too many. One potential soldier that could harm our sons is one too many. Are we too trusting or too idiotic? As it is, many would not even want to serve. Can they be forced to defend our country like our children? What have to fight and die for? They have nothing, no emotional attachment for this island. And there will be those who serve reluctantly or with different agenda or reasons. Soldiering is already a dangerous occupation. We have to guard our secrets, guard against external enemies, real or potential. You mean we don’t have to guard against these new citizens?

How much added reservations and precautions are needed to guard against new citizens turned NSmen? What is the margin of error? A little percentage that could do mischief can be a serious threat to our defence capability, and the lives of our soldiers.

Throwing citizenship crazily at anyone is already bad enough. Embracing total strangers, train them and arm them and expect them to defend our country will incur additional risk that is unnecessary.

‘What money can’t buy’ is a very appropriate question here.