|
|
Police surround
protesters during
the WB-IMF Meeting
|
Money
silences human rights in Singapore
Human Rights
Features
South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre
3 Nov
06
http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/
The
annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the
World Bank held in September 2006 in Suntec City, Singapore,
revealed the jarring contrasts of the wealthy city-state. On the
one hand, Singapore's affluence and modernity was on parade, with
lush new landscaping and newly renovated bridges and flyovers,
traversed by the world's most powerful financiers and businessmen
in over 800 limousines and BMW sedans.
Simultaneously,
Singapore banned outdoor demonstrations so as not to detract from
the pageantry, and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng asserted
in January 2006 that protestors breaking the law would face full
penalties including caning for those who engage in
violence.
Indeed, Singapore managed to assert its
authoritative muscle, denying anti-poverty activists entry to the
main venue, leading even the IMF and the World Bank to record
their disapproval of such strong arm measures. This state of
affairs reflects the attitude of Singaporean authorities:
economic progress has first priority, with human rights a distant
second. Democracy is also not a high priority in Singapore; the
recent celebrations marking Singapore's 41st year of independence
simultaneously marked the 41st year of rule by the authoritarian
People's Action Party (PAP).
Citizens are not permitted to
circulate newspapers, make broadcasts, hold demonstrations or
even speak to a public audience without prior government
authorisation. The treatment of opposition leader Chee Soon Juan,
arrested in March 2006 for questioning the independence of the
Singaporean judiciary and summoned to court in May for speaking
publicly without a permit, attests to these realities. Migrant
workers are particularly vulnerable in Singapore and are
frequently subject to physical abuse and exploitation.
So
why is the international community so reluctant to speak out in
the face of so much oppression? The answer is simple. The
economies of the world's most powerful voices are tightly
intertwined with commercial interests in Singapore. The European
Union (EU) and the United States have substantial business
interests in Singapore, which would be compromised if they were
to condemn the oppression perpetrated by the Singaporean
government.
A vital trade and business link
The
IMF-World Bank meeting was a premier opportunity for Singapore to
present itself as a world convention and exhibition centre, as
well as an international hub for business and banking. As a small
city-state with few primary resources, Singapore's development
strategy has of necessity focused outward, relying on external
investment and trade. In this it has been notably successful.
After borrowing from the World Bank in the 1960s and 70s, loans
ceased by 1980 and Singapore remained resilient during the East
Asian Crisis of the 1990s. Since then it has hosted IMF and World
Bank seminars on crisis prevention and management. Currently,
over 7,000 multinational corporations from the US, Japan, and
Europe are invested in Singapore. Businesses take advantage of
low tax rates and tariff barriers as well as liberal investment
laws.
Singapore is also a crucial actor in world trade.
The port of Singapore is one of the busiest in the world,
facilitating total trade of 716 billion Singapore dollars (about
US$ 438 billion) and trade growth of 14 percent in 2005, with
future growth expected at seven to nine percent. Singapore is
also a member of the ASEAN Free Trade Area and has concluded
bilateral free trade agreements with countries including
Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Jordan, India, and Panama, among
others.
The US, the EU, Japan, China and Malaysia all
have important trade links with Singapore. The US and the EU each
receive 10 to 13 per cent of Singapore's exports annually and
each provide between 12 to 14 percent of its imports. Singapore
is Europe's largest trading partner among the ASEAN countries and
the 11th largest importer from the US. Malaysia is Singapore's
primary trade partner and has offered no criticism of human
rights abuses in Singapore. This is not unexpected, given
Malaysia's own human rights record. However, the silence of
countries that profess great concern for human rights issues is
somewhat more conspicuous.
Why the US and the EU need
Singapore
In 2004, the US-Singapore Free Trade
Agreement (USSFTA) came into force, marking the first free trade
agreement between the US and an Asian nation. Two years later, US
and Singaporean government officials applauded the 13 percent
growth in trade between the two countries since the agreement
came into force. The USSFTA particularly aims to increase the
trade in services, of increasing importance to both countries.
According to the US Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the "strong
economic ties" are broadening into new sectors, such as
information technology, health, and education. But the US has
more to gain from Singapore than bilateral trade benefits.
Economically, it is hoped that the USSFTA will provide a
springboard for further trade agreements which will lead to "a
network of FTA's in the region" and better trading
relationships with countries like Indonesia. Strategically, the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs views US-Singapore relations as
increasingly "multi-faceted," encompassing not only
economic but also defence interests.
It should also be
noted that increased cooperation between the US and Singapore has
arisen out of the global campaign against terrorism. In its
determination to cement relations with Singapore, the US has
essentially ignored Singapore's human rights record. While the US
State Department's human rights country reports annually
acknowledge violations there, including infringements on freedom
of the press and abuse of foreign workers, the deliberations of
the US Congress subcommittee on commerce, trade and consumer
protection on the USSFTA featured little anxiety regarding
Singapore's human rights record. The statement of Thea M Lee,
chief international economist of the American Federation of
Labour and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), urged
Congress to reject the USSFTA, highlighting its effective failure
to commit the parties to international labour standards. However,
the legislation passed easily in both the House and the
Senate.
The EU appears similarly determined to turn a
blind eye to human rights abuses in Singapore. In an overview of
relations with Singapore, the EU describes the country as "an
important trading partner" and emphasises its strategic
position for facilitating trade between Europe and Asia. The 2003
launch of "A New Partnership with South East Asia"
described Singapore as crucial for the sound implementation of
the programme. Growing recognition of mutual economic interests
led to the establishment of Singapore-EC Consultations (SECC) in
2000, which led to joint development projects in the region.
Recently, Singapore has been urging the EU to forge a bilateral
free trade agreement.
There are hopes on both sides that
relations will embrace common endeavours in transport,
intellectual property, and research and development. Clearly, the
governments of the EU and the US have given priority to strong
economic relations with Singapore rather than human rights
issues. In this, the influence of the business community is
readily apparent.
Singapore's response
Singapore's
reaction to peaceful protests fits the pattern of past responses
to criticisms on human rights issues. The Singaporean government
has masked abuses with the flawed 'Asian values' discourse.
Censorship measures, authoritarian governance and laws governing
freedom of speech and freedom of assembly have been excused as
the "Asian way." Singapore's founding father Lee Kuan
Yew claimed that Asians have "little doubt that a society
with communitarian values, where the interests of society take
precedence over that of the individual, suits them better than
the individualism of America."
When Reporters Sans
Frontières' Annual Press Freedom Index ranked Singapore
147th, Information Minister Lee Boon Yang insisted that Singapore
did not operate according to "Western" values. He said
that journalists in Singapore do not have an "adversarial
role" and instead contribute to "nation building."
After a recent visit to Australia and New Zealand, Singaporean
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong expressed the view that rule by a
single party was more efficient and better for Singapore.
Break
the silence
The parade of power and wealth in
September 2006 demonstrated that human rights abuses in Singapore
continue to be tolerated by the international community. It shows
that economic might has allowed Singapore to slip under the
world's human rights radar. The new beginning epitomised by the
UN Human Rights Council must be used to ensure that such States
receive the attention and censure they deserve.
|
|
