In a speech given on Dec. 15 at the National University of Singapore's East Asian Institute (EAI), former Foreign Minister George Yeo expounded on his views regarding how China and the U.S. could coexist in a multipolar world, which is beneficial for both of them, and in spite of differing value systems.
He also had some suggestions for the two major powers on ways to transition peacefully to multipolarity.
Here are the key points:
China should act in a way that, over time, persuades the U.S. that "the kind of multipolarity that China envisages is also good for the U.S.". Chinese officials should also avoid "excessive self-righteousness and be less thin-lipped in responding to criticisms". (Chinese officials to avoid being excessive self righteousness? Where did George got this idea from? Who is being excessive self righteousness and lecturing to the world about human rights, democracy, honesty etc etc? Comment in brackets is mine.)
In the case of the South China Sea, China should meet Asean 60-40 on the code of conduct instead of halfway, since it is so much bigger and stronger. For its border dispute with India, China should go more than halfway – maybe 55-45. (George should tell this to the Americans and see if the Americans would believe him.)
As for the U.S., where the original liberal idea of accepting diversity has become intolerable in recent years, they should accept the fact that different value systems co-exist in the world. (In recent years only? Heard of the Chinese Exclusion Acts. Heard of black slavery?)
A multipolar world is not necessarily bad for the U.S., and it will help extend the period of U.S. ascendancy in the world. (This comment is meaningless to the Americans. They want to rule the world. They did not want to know. Period)
1. How he reconciles differing views on China
Audience member: My question is why are there so many smart statesmen and politicians in Europe who don't share your view at all about China?
Yeo: On the question about anti-China sentiments in Europe, I do not want to go into the justifications for that, or lack of it.
I see it more in civilisational terms that the West is not used to seeing a China that can see eye to eye, and which they even have to fear. And this, emotionally, is hard to accept....
2. Why is his approach to China and the U.S. different?
Audience member: I noticed a pattern in your reflections particularly on the domestic affairs of the U.S. and China. With China, you take a more careful, rather courteous tone. And it's quite the opposite with America, rightfully so. And I can only guess that you are responding to cultural cues right? And as you said earlier, the Chinese are much more sensitive to external criticism. I wonder if you can comment on whether that's in fact accurate and if you could unpackage it for us.
Yeo: I think in Singapore, we develop a multi-channel capability, which is that when you're dealing with Malaysians, with Javanese, with Australians, with Indians, we make subtle adjustments to the way we behave, to the way we express ourselves even in body language because we respect the other party....
3. On his exchange with former Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi in 2010
Audience member: Good evening, my name is Ravi Velloor and I work for The Straits Times. In your speech, you referenced that meeting, obviously with Yang Jiechi, where he, according to the Western narrative, as you put it, is supposed to have told you that “there are some countries that are big, some countries are small.” And that's just the reality. You said your recollection of that meeting is a little different, what is your recollection of that encounter?
Yeo: As for what happened at the 2010 Hanoi ARF, where Yang Jiechi had a sharp exchange with Hillary Clinton. According to U.S. accounts, he glared at Singapore, and he said that some countries are big, some are small. If he was directed at (inaudible), it happens that Yang Jiechi is a fan (of Singapore). And he had been to Singapore before he became foreign minister, before anyone knew that he was becoming foreign minister.
He had told me that the people of China and Singapore share a common mutual affection for each other. And I saw him a day before the ARF meeting, and he rehearsed the same point to me. So if you look at me, he was happy to say excuse me, you know I said this to you yesterday. I did not feel that at all. But no, they say the wish is mother (father) of the thought.
And maybe the U.S. thought that Singapore being bullied by China openly fitted the narrative, but frankly I don’t think it is in China's interest, even if it wanted to bully Singapore, to do it that way....
Above is an edited version of a CNA article on George Yeo's take on US China relations. My reading of the above is very different from the author and also on George Yeo's mindset about China and the US. I must add here that the author's view is very subjective, so is George Yeo's and so is mine. We all look at things differently.
For a start, the title of the article is a reflection of the author's view of George Yeo and his inherent biased in favour of the US. My understanding of George Yeo is that he is careful about expressing his view on China, we agreed, but there is this underlying deference to the US. George has more or less accepted that the US is the dominant power and China must give way to the Americans without questioning the domineering and bully position the Americans are taking. The Americans' position as the Empire of the world, the dominant power, must be accepted as the premise in the changing relationship between China and the US. China must understand, China must be polite, China must compromise, China must accept that it is the weaker power and must give way to the Americans. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Americans' arrogant, bullying and provocative behaviour against China. Despite the Americans being on the offensive in everything involving China, fabricating lies and vicious attacks against China everyday, and China always on the defensive, there is nothing wrong with these roguish and gangster behaviour. The Americans are above rebuked. It is normal, or the American's right to bully and attack China!
George was also polite in answering the first question that was loaded with the comment that European leaders and politicians were smart. This is smack of pure arrogance and ignorance on the part of the questioner. George tried to explain it away diplomatically be saying that it was cultural. To me the audience that posed the question was European centric and could not see the truth or the arrogance of the Europeans. Smart is the furthest from the truth. It is pure racism. The Europeans, the white men, after invading China, then an ancient Empire, much more civilised than the white savages that just emerged from the advantage of the Industrial Revolution, destroyed China completely in every field and framed a narrative that China and Chinese were backward, uncivilised and inferior people, a people that should be condemned as the inscrutable, poor and untalented people of the world. The Chinese were subhumans. How can such bad people become a super power?
And the Europeans have been living and believing in this lie till today. Chinaman are untrustworthy, cheats, no talents and despicable. Today, China and the Chinese Civlisation have returned to reclaim their past glories and have proven to be as good as the Europeans and better than the Europeans in many fields of science and technology. No, the Europeans still cannot accept these facts, the Chinaman is still dishonourable, not trustworthy, not worthy creatures, cannot be trusted in anything. China stole everything from them. And China is out to conquer the rest of the world, if not today, they will do it tomorrow.
This is the kind of shit the Europeans and the Americans are propagating to condemn China and Chinese, to divert attention from their wildness, vile and aggressive nature, and their records of crimes against humanity. How can China be so rich and powerful, how to trust China as peace loving and progressive people? China is the devil, if not today, would be the devil tomorrow. China is the threat to the world. The white men, the savages of Europe would save the world from China.
The only peace loving, progressive and honest people are the savages of Europe, the very people that invaded and conquered practically every country in the world and suppressed them as inferior human beans, massacred them when they resisted, took over their countries, plundered and looted them and stole their resources and labour with no respect to their human rights. China did not do any of these things, never conquer or colonise the rest of the world, never invade any of these countries, never invade Europe, but China was a victim of the white savages from Europe that had grown rich with their oppression and robbing of China and the rest of the world. And today, putting on suits and ties the white savages got the cheek to go around preaching and lecturing the world about human rights, about protecting human rights, and strutting around as angels and do gooders.
This is the hypocrisy of the Europeans, biased, deluded conceitedness and a deceptive narrative.
I would like George Yeo to be more objective, frank and less deferential to the West and call a spade a spade. There is no necessity to be so deferential to the murderers and robbers of the world. The wars and killings all over the world were committed by the Europeans/Americans, the white savages, yesterday and today, and is still going on.
Where did China participate in the wars and massacres of the innocents? See what the Americans are doing to the Arabs/Muslims, Latin Americans, Russians and to China? A word to all the Americans and Europeans, look into the mirror and cut off your hypocrisy. Where is your feeling of guilt, where is your conscience? You are only liars and cheats. The world has had enough of your wars, massacres, oppression, bullying and lies. You are the threat to peace in the world. You are the worse violators of human rights. You are the worse warmongers and terrorists...NOT China! Ask the Cubans, the North Koreans, the Venezuelans, the Iranians, the Afghans, the Iraqis, Syrians.....
You can't even see how you are killing each other in Europe, in Ukraine. Peaceful, peace loving, law abiding my foot. The white men must be told the brutal truth. George Yeo is just too polite, too deferential and not wanting to face the crimes against humanity committed by the white men and still committing today. The lying Americans and Europeans have no principles.
What is happening in Ukraine is the best thing for the rest of the world. After sowing divisions and inciting wars all over the world, finally the white savages have run out of wars in the rest of the world and have to fight among themselves, in Europe. Hope this war would last for another 30 years or more while the rest of the world go about their lives in peace. What the rest of the world can do is to do the same like the white savages, help them with more aids to perpetuate the Ukraine War to eternity, in Europe. When the white savages are killing themselves, the rest of the world is safe.
This is the formula the Americans have been using to keep American homeland safe, starts wars everywhere, create instability around the world and instigate countries to keep on bickering and fighting among themselves.
