The Global
Times is China’s official media and what is printed in that media is the
unofficial official view of the Chinese govt. When articles in the Global Times
attacked Singapore for siding with the hegemonic power of the USA, it is China’s
way of telling Singapore that it is unhappy with Singapore . And Stanley Loh,
the Singapore Ambassador to China has spoken up to refute China’s criticism of Singapore.
Stanley Loh
dragged out all the economic cooperation and projects as his proof that
Singapore is supporting China or is friendly with China. He side stepped
Singapore’s military cooperation with the Americans, providing a military base for
the Americans to launch warships and warplanes into the South China Sea to
challenge China’s claims to the islands. He also did not mention the political
rhetoric or statements by our diplomats against China that are more vehement
than even those from the Philippines and Vietnam recently.
On the
economic front, Singapore wanted all the cooperation and benefits from a
growing Chinese economy. But on the political and military front, the position
of Singapore is anything but friendly. The comments by Bilahari Kausikan in his
speech in Tokyo and his lectures must have ruffled the feathers of the Chinese
govt. Would Bilahari or Stanley Loh think the comments were fair, neutral and
positive for Singapore China relations?
Singapore is
sticking its neck out, too far out for comfort, by taking a pro American line. The
local media too were putting up almost on a daily basis, American views of the
South China Sea dispute that were unflattering to China. How would China view
these actions from Singapore, supposedly a reliable and close friend with a lot
of economic cooperation, economic projects and a lot of legacies of LKY when he
was around? Would China be seeing a major shift in Singapore’s policy since the
demise the LKY and a Singapore that is increasingly partisan and anti China
instead of walking the tight rope, not to be seen to favour either super power?
What would
Singapore’s position be like should the Americans open a war front in the South
China Sea against China and Singapore providing a military base for the
Americans to attack China? Would Singapore maintain its neutrality by closing
down the American base here, or would Singapore say it is ok and it is neutral
and still a friend of China and allowing the Americans to launch military
attacks at China?
Is the rude
and undiplomatic comment that China is attempting to divide up Asean in the
South China Sea dispute helpful when the other Asean countries were diplomatic
enough to keep mum when they have vested interests and stakes in the dispute
while Singapore did not?
The complaints
in the Global Times are just a tip in the iceberg of the souring of relations
between Singapore and China. There could be official complaints to register
China’s unhappiness that were not reported in the media.
Singapore is
now in a fix, and would have to make its stand clear to China. Is it going to
be neutral or more pro America, more anti China on matters that affect China’s
core interests and how would Singapore’s relation with China proceed from here?
A diplomatic storm is brewing and it does not look good for Singapore. Singapore
may be left out in the cold in China’s OBOR projects and other economic
cooperation as well. Trying to hang on
to China’s gravy train and taking unfriendly positions against China would not
work. Singapore cannot have the cake and eat it.
There is no
LKY to smoothen things out in our relations with a China that is growing in
strength and confidence to deal with small countries. Don’t try to punch above
your weight when dealing with China or any big powers. That is a myth. When the
big powers refused to give you face you will look silly in the eyes of the
world if you try to punch in their face.