Nation to remember Lee Kuan Yew today
Tree-planting, forum among events to commemorate his death one year on
By Charissa Yong and Ng Huiwen, The Straits Times, 23 Mar 2016
Across Singapore, events from tree-planting ceremonies to an academic forum and a morning walk take on special significance today.
They are among the activities planned by various groups to commemorate the death of founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew at age 91 this day last year.
Organisers said these events are meant to celebrate his life as a reminder to Singaporeans of what it took for modern Singapore to be built, and what it will take to ensure the country's success.
Singapore Polytechnic student Fu Kah Deng, 19, hopes they will be "a call to action for Singaporeans to work hard", in keeping with what Mr Lee stood for.
At a remembrance ceremony that will start at 11am at The Arts House, past and present MPs will pay tribute to Mr Lee by remembering the values he stood for and the principles he upheld in Parliament.
The venue - home to Singapore's Legislative Assembly which Mr Lee entered in 1955, and to its Parliament from 1965 to 1999 - was where Mr Lee delivered many of his fiery speeches as an assemblyman and, later, as Prime Minister.
#OneYearOn In Memory Of Mr Lee Kuan Yew
In life, #Yew build a nation. In death, #Yew united a nation. Last March today, was the saddest day for many Singaporeans. We mourned for our loss. #OneYearOn today, we celebrate HIS LIFE, so full and well lived.Video produced & submitted by Tedd Jong Wei
Posted by Fabrications About The PAP on Tuesday, March 22, 2016
In Tanjong Pagar, the constituency Mr Lee represented for nearly 60 years until his death last year, residents and grassroots leaders will gather at Tanjong Pagar Community Club this evening to share their thoughts on Mr Lee and their aspirations for Singapore.
Vera Ang, 11, is among those slated to speak and she plans to talk about Mr Lee's "spirit of standing firm".
Pupils at Mr Lee's alma mater, Telok Kurau Primary, will also pay tribute to him. A special assembly will be held in his honour at the school he attended from 1930 to 1935.
At night, a group of volunteers, brought together by People's Action Party supporters, plans to hand out electric candles to passers-by across from the Padang, where over 450,000 people queued for hours last year to pay their last respects to Mr Lee.
There will also be exhibitions at various museums. A new video installation by local film-maker Royston Tan will be screened at National Museum. It showcases photographs of Singaporeans during last year's week of national mourning. Also on display is an artillery shell casing from the 21-gun salute fired during Mr Lee's state funeral procession.
A selection of the more than 1.3 million tributes - including letters, notes, cards and artworks - that poured in after his death will be put up at the National Library.
"It's not common for Singapore to celebrate an individual this way, and it shouldn't be a spectacle," said National University of Singapore (NUS) undergraduate Nhor Sharafina Sarfrazul, 22. "But Mr Lee was someone who did a lot for the country and there is a need to remember him."
Yesterday, unionists held a ceremony to remember Mr Lee's contributions to the labour movement.
As a young lawyer, Mr Lee represented more than 50 unions to fight for better wages for workers.
National Trades Union Congress secretary-general Chan Chun Sing, together with more than 100 union leaders, resolved to build upon Mr Lee's legacy.
Said Mr G. Muthukumarasamy, general secretary of the Amalgamated Union of Public Daily Rated Workers: "Mr Lee may not be with us, but his philosophy never ends."
At a separate event by the non-profit SG100 Foundation, set up to link young local entrepreneurs with experienced older mentors, 600 young Singaporeans and corporate leaders pledged to keep Singapore going beyond SG100.
Its co-founder Vernon Yim, 23, said: "Mr Lee said he didn't want any monuments, but we want to carry on his legacy and continue his vision for Singapore to succeed. This is our way of doing so."
A year ago today, Mr Lee Kuan Yew left us. Tens of thousands queued for hours to pay their last respects at Parliament...
Posted by Lee Hsien Loong on Tuesday, March 22, 2016
一周年.忆周年
建国总理李光耀逝世一周年来，人们的生活，不变中蕴含着变化。国人所体现的集体哀思已成为一种“国家精神，化作带领新加坡前进的动力”。 http://bit.ly/1RiEgcW
Posted by Lianhe Zaobao on Tuesday, March 22, 2016
A year ago today, Singapore came together to mourn its founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, who died at age 91....
Posted by The Straits Times on Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Mr Lee, my mentor - after my maiden speech, he sent a note: Koo Tsai Kee
One year after the death of Singapore's founding Prime Minister, former MP Koo Tsai Kee shares his memories of Lee Kuan Yew
The Straits Times, 22 Mar 2016
This March 23 marks one year since Mr Lee Kuan Yew left us. The pain of his departure has lessened with the passage of time, but his absence does not make us miss him less. How do we remember him when he does not wish to be immortalised?
There are no portraits, monuments and obelisks for anybody to honour him anywhere in Singapore. The best way to remember him is to carry on where he left off. The work of building Singapore is never done.
Nevertheless, the world remembers LKY as a global statesman. Singaporeans remember LKY as our fearless founding Prime Minister. Residents of Tanjong Pagar remember LKY as our beloved Member of Parliament. Many of us remember Mr Lee as our teacher and mentor. I remember him for all of these roles.
A GLOBAL STATESMAN
When I was a graduate student in London in the 80s, an erudite English gentleman asked me where I came from. "Singapore," I replied. A curious look came over him. I raised my voice and said: "Lee Kuan Yew." He nodded. Yes, he knew Mr Lee Kuan Yew. For a long time, the world knew Mr Lee Kuan Yew before they knew Singapore. Letters from the United Kingdom often went to China first before they were redirected to Singapore. Like the postal workers, the Englishman thought Singapore was in China. In the 80s, China was a very poor country. The English gentleman was too polite to ask if I was a Chinaman.
How times have changed. Mr Lee's model of political governance has transformed Singapore from Third World to First World in one generation. LKY made a nation and make us proud to be called Singaporeans.
His style of government and governance has become a school of thought. On an official visit to Israel, the then Foreign Minister of Israel, Mr Shimon Peres, remarked that Lee Kuan Yew was not just a name but a "concept of government". LKY has become an "ism" - LKYism has become a serious course of study for political and economic scientists.
In the week of LKY's death, the then Prime Minister of Australia, Mr Tony Abbot, moved a motion in the Australian Parliament to grieve the loss of a great leader and friend of Australia. He said Singapore under Mr Lee had grown richer than a rich country like Australia. In 1965, the gross domestic product per capita of Singapore was about one-third that of Australia's. Today, our GDP per capita is twice that of Australia. When I was a student in Sydney, the Aussie dollar fetched three Singapore dollars. Today, they are almost at parity.
Mr John Howard, the most successful prime minister of Australia post-Sir Robert Menzies, had a ringside view on Singapore's progress. His very first overseas trip as a young man was to Singapore on July 24, 1964 - one year before Independence - to visit a relative. He came in the middle of the race riots. He witnessed Singapore's incredible metamorphosis from chaos to order and from poverty to affluence. Like so many great world leaders, Mr Howard is a fan of LKY.
FOUNDING PRIME MINISTER
My father-in-law was a Malaysian, an Ipoh boy. He was a bright student from a poor family. He worked hard and obtained a state scholarship and came to Singapore to study medicine in the 1940s. His study was interrupted by the Japanese invasion, and he finished it only after the war. After completing his housemanship, he went back to Malaysia to practise medicine, until the racial riots of 1969 forced him to make a decision to relocate overseas.
He had two choices: return to Singapore, or leave for Australia, to settle in Melbourne. My mother-in-law was Singaporean. She wanted to come back to Singapore. But my father-in-law had no faith in Singapore. He saw the extreme poverty in Singapore when he was a student and thought Singapore had no future.
He was mistaken. LKY proved him wrong. It was a mistake which my mother-in-law regrets to this day. My father-in-law was in Ipoh so he did not hear Mr Lee's 1965 fiery speech: "Here we make the model multiracial society. This is not a country that belongs to any single community - it belongs to all of us. This was a mudflat, a swamp. Today, it is a modern city. And 10 years from now, it will be a metropolis - never fear!"
When LKY published The Singapore Story, I bought the book and gave it to my father-in-law as a gift in Melbourne. He left it on his desk in his study room and never touched it for the entire week I was there. Two years later, I went down again to visit my in-laws. My mother-in-law asked me on the last day of my visit if I had brought Part 2, From Third World to First, for him. I said "no", because he did not even touch Part 1. She hurried into the studyand brought out the first book. It was filled with footnotes and underlined sentences. She said my father-in-law avidly read the book probably twice over.
He came from a generation which did not reveal its true feelings. He never quite reconciled his ideals with LKY, but he had quietly revered LKY and acknowledged that he was a great leader.
A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
In 1955, Mr Lee stood for election in Tanjong Pagar. At that time, he could have chosen from any of the 25 constituencies. But he picked Tanjong Pagar and he explained why. Tanjong Pagar was a largely working class area with a high proportion of workers. He was adviser to several unions and many of the unionists lived in the area. LKY told them that, if elected, he would improve their lives. Although he couldn't speak Chinese, and his opponents made this a big issue and ridiculed his Straits Chinese background, he won convincingly.
The people of Tanjong Pagar entrusted their lives to him and Singapore's modern history was made. LKY honoured his 1955 promise for 60 years. When Tanjong Pagar became a GRC, it was uncontested for five successive general elections from 1991 to 2011. No other GRC comes close to this record. Even LKY could not believe it. While preparing for the 2011 General Election, LKY asked me: "What results did we get in the 2006 General Election?" I said Tanjong Pagar GRC had never been contested. He was taken by surprise. How was that possible, he asked rhetorically. The reason is LKY.
I knew Tanjong Pagar well before I became an MP. My wife and I bought a resale flat in Spottiswoode Park in the early 80s. It is a very quiet, green and beautiful estate inside Tanjong Pagar. I was then working in the Public Works Department. I walked to work. We walked to the railway station. We walked to Chinatown. We love the place. But when I went to teach in the then Nanyang Technological Institute (NTI), we sold the flat and moved to Jurong.
In the 80s, Jurong was most inaccessible from town. There were no expressways, MRT trains or direct buses. I had early morning lectures and it took forever to get from Spottiswoode Park to NTI. So with great reluctance we moved. Never did I dream that I would return as a member of Mr Lee's GRC team to find an even more beautiful Tanjong Pagar.
Mr Lee the MP, never left Tanjong Pagar because he never forgot that it was the people of Tanjong Pagar who gave him the opportunity to become their MP, which in turn allowed him to become the Prime Minister. He was always thinking of his residents.
At a Chinese New Year dinner gathering, he sat on the stage and saw the huge greying crowd of his residents below. He asked me why there were so few young people. I said there were no new flats in Tanjong Pagar. The children of Tanjong Pagar were forced to move to new towns, and the old were left behind to fend for themselves. He then instructed that we needed a gentrification programme to bring back the young so that they could look after the old. He also wanted more energy in Tanjong Pagar. From this was born Cantonment Towers, and then later the iconic Pinnacle@Duxton.
AS A MENTOR AND TEACHER
For me, the saddest part of LKY's departure was the loss of a mentor and teacher. I remember giving the maiden speech in Parliament in 1991. He was not in the House when I delivered the speech. After my speech, a note came to my seat.
He asked to see me. He told me he heard my speech. He advised that I should speak in a direct voice, with more pauses, and that I should slow down my speech. I thought, how awesome. He was not present in the Chambers when I spoke, but yet he was listening. No wonder senior MPs warned me, albeit half in jest, that LKY was omnipotent - he knew everything and he was everywhere! It was an exaggeration, of course. But the message was clear. He was watching over us and Singapore. He was always giving MPs encouragement, advice and guidance.
LKY used to invite small groups of MPs to lunch and discuss matters big and small. We called these lunch sessions "tutorials". Sometimes these sessions finished up with homework. We had to write papers for him to justify our views or positions.
It was a privilege and opportunity to work with and for him. We could not have had a better mentor and teacher. The Chinese have a saying, "Yi ri wei si, zhong shen wei fu". The meaning is lost in translation, but it loosely translates, "To be a teacher is to be like a father".
Singapore lost LKY. But his life's work remains for eternity. He never asked to be remembered. But we will never forget. Singapore remembers. And we remember.
The writer was a Member of Parliament in Mr Lee Kuan Yew's constituency of Tanjong Pagar
MP Alex Yam: Mr Lee Kuan Yew gave his all to Singapore so that later generations can benefit. #OneYearOn from his...
Posted by People's Action Party on Thursday, March 17, 2016
Last year, when Mr Lee Kuan Yew passed on, something happened in many of our hearts.And we gatherd in the sun, in the...
Posted by StandUpFor.SG on Saturday, March 19, 2016
In dealings with the world, Lee Kuan Yew focused on Singapore's interest: Chee Hong Tat
Minister of State Chee Hong Tat was Mr Lee Kuan Yew's principal private secretary from 2008 to 2011. He recollects what he learnt from Mr Lee about global affairs and putting Singapore first.
The Straits Times, 23 Mar 2016
The first and only time I wore a tuxedo was in October 2009, when I attended the United States-Asean Business Council's 25th Anniversary Gala Dinner together with Mr Lee Kuan Yew. I was then his principal private secretary, which was a privileged position that offered excellent learning opportunities, and was also the best job I ever had in my 17 years with the civil service.
The council presented Mr Lee with its first Lifetime Achievement Award to honour his contributions to strengthening US-Asean relations, and for his unwavering support over the years for the US to remain a stabilising force in the Asia-Pacific.
Mr Lee was a firm advocate of having a balance of power to create a conducive global environment and international order for small countries like Singapore to survive and prosper. This was true during the Cold War, when US presence was crucial in preventing the spread of communism in South-east Asia. It remains true today. In his speech at the gala dinner, Mr Lee said that "the size of China makes it impossible for the rest of Asia, including Japan and India, to match it in weight and capacity in about 20 to 30 years. So we need America to strike a balance".
Mr Lee's remarks did not go down well with some commentators in China, who criticised him for not taking China's side despite being an ethnic Chinese. These critics missed the point. Mr Lee was not taking sides with the US or China; he was doing it for Singapore. Top Chinese leaders understood this and did not take exception to his support for the US presence, and valued his advice.
Mr Lee was always looking at ways to advance Singapore's interests and to improve the lives of Singaporeans. He believed that having a balance of power in the region would facilitate China's "peaceful rise" (a term coined by Chinese scholar Zheng Bijian and used by various Chinese leaders), which in turn benefits Singapore and other countries in Asia.
But the reactions of the Chinese commentators to Mr Lee's speech also revealed how many Chinese assume that because Singapore is a Chinese-majority country, we would automatically be sympathetic to China's interests, and that we should support them when they have disagreements with other countries. They are wrong. Singapore is not a Chinese country and we are not a mini-China. We are a multiracial, independent nation. We want to be good friends with China, but also remain friends with the US, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia, India, Russia and, indeed, all major countries, in order to safeguard our security, trade and international space.
When Mr Lee met former Chinese president Hu Jintao at the 2009 Apec Summit in Singapore, Mr Lee recounted a story to him. Earlier that year, the Chinese government had invited groups of overseas Chinese to attend the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China in Beijing. When the People's Liberation Army marched across the parade square with its equipment and weapons, the overseas Chinese from Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia shed tears of pride and joy. To them, the motherland had finally risen! Mr Lee told Mr Hu that the only group of overseas Chinese who did not cry were the Singaporeans. Although Mr Hu did not react to the comments, I noticed that some of his delegation members shifted uncomfortably in their seats. They understood Mr Lee's point.
To be sure, Mr Lee did not view China's rise as a threat. On the contrary, he saw it as a positive and inevitable development, with tremendous potential to create new opportunities and improve lives for countries and people in Asia. The key factor was whether the rise would be peaceful or disruptive.
He believed that continued US presence in the region would benefit all countries, including China. Unlike US-Soviet relations during the Cold War, the US and China do not have diametrically opposed world views and national objectives. The two countries do compete with each other in certain areas, but there are also many areas where they can cooperate for mutual benefit. Hence, Mr Lee felt that the US and other Western powers should welcome China's rise and encourage it to be a responsible stakeholder in the world order.
Mr Lee was neither a China dove nor a China hawk. He was more like a wise owl who understood the motivations and thinking of both Chinese and Western leaders. He had a pragmatic view of how geopolitical forces and the relationships between global powers would affect small states like Singapore.
A retired French president once told Mr Lee that the Chinese were a peace-loving people. Unlike the Europeans, they did not colonise any country in their history, so the world should not worry about a rising China. In response, Mr Lee said that when the Sultan of Brunei was in Nanjing, the Chinese government took him to visit the grave of his ancestor who died in Nanjing many centuries ago while paying tribute to the Chinese Emperor.
The lesson for me was clear - China is an ancient civilisation which used to dominate the region. It is always unwise for small countries to depend on a larger neighbour's benevolence and goodwill for their survival. If there is no balance of power in the region and we cannot defend ourselves, our interests will likely be undermined and our international space will be curtailed.
To achieve this balance of power, Mr Lee wanted to persuade American leaders to withdraw from Afghanistan and shift their focus to Asia. In his speech at the US-Asean Business Council Gala Dinner, Mr Lee told the audience: "In the end, whatever the challenges, US core interest requires that it remains the superior power on the Pacific. To give up this position would diminish America's role throughout the world."
He conveyed the same message when he met President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. During the meeting with Mrs Clinton, Mr Lee asked me to bring along a copy of Rudyard Kipling's poem "The Young British Soldier". He recited the last few lines to Mrs Clinton to reinforce his point on why the US should pull out of Afghanistan and focus more resources on the Asia-Pacific region.
"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains And go to your God like a soldier."
In his interactions with world leaders, Mr Lee was always able to navigate the international arena adroitly, advancing Singapore's interest and maximising our political and economic space every step of the way. He was an exceptional leader, with a single-minded focus on doing what was good for Singapore.
It has been a year since Mr Lee's passing on March 23 last year. As we think about what Singapore has gone through over the past 50 years and our challenges ahead, it is important for us to stay the course and build on the foundations which he and other pioneer leaders have put in place.
We are now in a more complex and interdependent world, with many emerging threats, but also many promising opportunities. To succeed, we have to stay connected with the world and continue to be a cosmopolitan city which welcomes talent and ideas. We must remain exceptional as one people, one nation, one Singapore. Together, we can follow the beautiful rainbow and build a bright future for ourselves and our children.
Chee Hong Tat is Minister of State for Health, and for Communications & Information, as well as an MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC.
From abroad, tests for a nation as others try their luck
Observers are optimistic that Singapore’s fundamentals in foreign policy — laid down by Mr Lee — have survived the founding Prime Minister
By Sue-Ann Chia and Kenneth Cheng, TODAY, 22 Mar 2016
Founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew put in place a system here that has proven robust and can run effectively without him, and other countries that deal with Singapore have had the opportunity to take a measure of this system for many years after Mr Lee stepped down in 1990. But following Mr Lee’s death in March 2015, some countries have tried their luck at putting Singapore in its place, shared Ambassador-at-Large Bilahari Kausikan.
He did not specify the countries or elaborate on what they did, but the famously frank diplomat said: “There will be some countries that certainly will probe and test us to see if there are things they can get away with now that Mr Lee is no longer with us, and some such probes have already begun.
“Please don’t ask me which countries. All I will say is that if they persist, they will be in for a rude surprise.”
When asked to elaborate, he candidly added: “They think our ability to stand firm only depends on Lee Kuan Yew — that’s rubbish. Or if they think that now he’s not around you can redo things, no, sorry…”
Mr Kausikan was replying to a question on whether a post-Lee Kuan Yew Singapore is regarded differently by other countries, especially those in the region.
It is a valid concern, one that many observers and diplomats interviewed believe is something to reflect on. “Yes, there is some degree of shift in other countries’ perceptions of Singapore,” said Mr Ong Keng Yong, executive deputy chairman of the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).
“The fact is different leaders have different styles and personal chemistry among leaders works in mysterious ways in international encounters and meetings. Also, the regional and global situations have undergone rapid changes. Technological advancement has compressed the space and time for information exchange between countries and events, resulting in leaders in different parts of the world operating quite differently these days in connecting with their counterparts elsewhere.”
But like Mr Kausikan and Mr Ong, observers are optimistic that Singapore’s fundamentals in foreign policy — laid down by Mr Lee — have survived the founding Prime Minister. He stepped down in 1990 but continued to keep a close watch on global and regional affairs even as his health deteriorated in recent years.
“I think the system can endure. Put it this way, it is for us to screw it up — not that it cannot work without him,” said Mr Kausikan, who was permanent secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA).
Retired diplomat K Kesavapany noted that Mr Lee was able to bring up a core group of leaders who shared his ideals.
“Mr Lee took pains to make sure that after he’s gone the system will still run, (that) Singapore is still (well) regarded … So long as we remain true to what he has taught us and left behind, then Singapore should be okay,” he said.
Retired diplomat Tan Seng Chye said Mr Lee has set the tone for Singapore’s foreign policy and put in place a system that his successors have further established.
“No country can have just one leader and only that leader can do things, but he must put in place a system, a succession of leaders that can continue to build the country,” said Mr Tan, who stepped down as Singapore’s ambassador to Vietnam in 2005 after a diplomatic career spanning almost four decades, including stints as the Republic’s envoy to four other South-east Asian nations.
Some of Mr Lee’s ideas and values that have lived on in Singapore’s foreign policy include putting Singapore’s interests first, being principled and neutral and making as many friends as possible, said Mr Ho Meng Kit, his former Principal Private Secretary.
“These values are deeply ingrained in the psyche and culture of our leaders and officials,” he added.
Mr Ong noted that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his senior Cabinet ministers have been working with their counterparts in other countries for many years.
“From various international conferences and events, notably the recent climate change negotiations in Paris, the other countries have seen the leadership capability and effective diplomacy of Singapore. In general, they see a Singapore leadership which is worldly and task-oriented. This leadership exudes Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s visionary intellect, practical approach and focus on the future.”
While Mr Lee had bequeathed enduring systems and institutions to the country, his lasting legacy is building up the Singapore brand name, said experts interviewed by TODAY.
MR LEE’S LEGACY
As an influential interlocutor on the global stage, Mr Lee had advised every United States President from Mr Richard Nixon to Mr Barack Obama, and across the Pacific, he met and counselled every Chinese leader from Mr Mao Zedong to Mr Xi Jinping.
His insightful and incisive views are also valued by leaders in the region, as one of the founding fathers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) who brought together a disparate regional bloc.
On why his views were sought after, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy Kishore Mahbubani explained that Mr Lee had incredible experience, gave wise advice - including on prickly cross-strait relations between China and Taiwan - and was “remarkably blunt” in offering his views.
Mr Kesavapany added: “He told things as they were and he didn’t try to play games with any of the leaders”. Mr Lee would say things that “they themselves would not say,” he noted.
“It’s his indescribable sense of charismatic personality plus an intelligent mind and he was also a realist who accepted the world as it was and not as he wanted it to be.”
All this made Mr Lee and by extension, Singapore, relevant to the world. This is his legacy that he left behind for Singapore, that observers say current leaders are building on to ensure the little red dot continues its outsized role in the global arena.
Indeed, Mr Lee’s contributions go beyond transforming the country from mudflat to metropolis but also turning vulnerability into invincibility, ensuring that a small island state will not be trampled on or sidelined by bigger powers.
He also elevated the island state’s status to a role model for other developing economies in search of similar success.
“As a small country, we are not a threat. Many regard his advice as neutral and objective. We do not have our own agenda,” said Mr Ho, his former aide and now chief executive officer of Singapore Business Federation.
At the heart of Mr Lee’s overseas overtures was Singapore’s security and survival. To this end, he has been described as a pragmatic realist, hard-nosed and even unsentimental in his approach. Yet he was prepared to change his views as the world changed.
Veteran diplomat and former top civil servant Barry Desker said: “As a realist, he appreciated the need to maintain good links with the West to promote trade and investment at a time when leaders of many newly independent countries believed their own rhetoric and thought that they could adopt autarkic policies.”
In 1967, two years after Singapore gained independence, Mr Lee started making trips to the US to woo American investors.
“Lee did not wait for US investors to serendipitously discover Singapore as a perfect destination for capital. He seized every opportunity to promote Singapore and stressed the efficiency and quality of the labour force in the country,” wrote Dr Daniel Chua, research fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at RSIS.
Political leaders in US also started to pay attention to this young Asian leader. Mr Francis Galbraith, the first US Ambassador to Singapore, wrote a 16-page report recommending the US government to engage closely with Mr Lee and Singapore in 1967.
As Mr Lee built a firm friendship with the US and Europe, he also expanded networks in Asia, such as with growing giants India and China.
His foresight in engaging China early in the 1970s, despite its communist links and even before its opening up and economic reform, was a game changer. He had astutely recognised its potential to be an economic powerhouse that would rival the US.
“Who else had the foresight to engage China just at the right time when China was amenable to adjustments in an evolving world stage,” said Mr Sajjad Ashraf, Pakistan’s high commissioner to Singapore from 2004 to 2008.
“Mr Lee foresaw changing global power equation. In addition to private advice to the American leadership, he said it publicly that with growing economic and political clout that ‘China will want to sit as an equal at the top table’.”
From his vantage point in the early years of being close to leaders in both US and China, and coming from a “non-threatening” position, he was then able to act as a trusted contact to help both sides understand each other better, noted Dr Lam Peng Er, senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute.
Added Mr Ho: “This role as link between US and China crafted a niche for Singapore and enhanced our own relationship with these two countries.”
This philosophy of being friendly to all countries and not making enemies is critical, said Associate Professor Alan Chong from RSIS, adding that the Republic was flexible in its foreign policy and did not see anyone as a permanent enemy.
“While Mr Lee appreciated the fact that we needed to deter certain unfriendly countries within Asia, he did not close the door to sincere forms of cooperation,” he said.
“I can also bet that Singapore would be the first to invest in North Korea if and when that country opens up - this is the extent of our flexibility. Because why should we make other people’s mortal enemies our mortal enemies?”
Such pragmatism also shaped Singapore’s views on geopolitical shifts and stability.
“Mr Lee Kuan Yew was a master of geo-strategic realism and planning for the future. He believed that some issues in international relations would never be resolved. The best way to deal with these challenges would be to manage them coherently, keeping in mind the big picture and looking for the balance needed to prevent upheaval,” said RSIS’ Mr Ong, who’s also an Ambassador-at-Large at MFA.
“This would require longer-term thinking and decisive leadership at the key levels of government. The problem today is often short-term political expediency and inconsistent management of the complexities involved.”
Mr Ong added that Mr Lee’s mindset was all the more relevant today given the tensions over competing territorial claims in the South China Sea and debate about how to reshape security architecture in the Asia Pacific.
“Recently, I attended a conference in China where a prominent Chinese scholar of international studies openly yearned for Mr Lee’s exceptional principled approach in managing the competition and rivalry of big powers in our region.”
BALANCE OF POWER
Mr Kesavapany, who stepped down as Singapore’s High Commissioner to Malaysia in 2002 after spending three decades in the Foreign Service, shared an example of how Mr Lee’s belief in continued American presence in Asia has led to stability in this region.
“Twenty years ago, there was a feeling that after the Vietnam War, American presence should go away. The Philippines asked them to leave Subic Bay and Clark Air Base in a fit of nationalism, but it was Mr Lee who saw above the horizon and saw the necessity of US continued presence in the region,” he said.
“He felt that only the US could counterbalance any attempt by an emerging power to dominate the region. It was this reasoning that led Singapore to establish its naval base and made it clear that the US Navy could make use of the base.”
Mr Lee reiterated his position several times. In his keynote address after receiving a lifetime achievement award from the US-ASEAN Business Council in Washington, DC, in 2009, Mr Lee said: “The size of China makes it impossible for the rest of Asia, including Japan and India, to match it in weight and capacity in about 20 to 30 years. So we need America to strike a balance.”
His comments drew the ire of Chinese netizens and media commentators then, but Chinese leaders continued to welcome him as they understood his position of seeking stability in the region which was also in China’s interest.
Mr Lee’s neutrality was also appreciated, said Dr Paul Evans, visiting professor in International and Asian Studies at the Singapore Management University.
“He steadfastly emphasised that Singapore was independent of both China and US. The ability to have a strong economic and political relationship with China…and to do that while also speaking to Americans bluntly about their strengths and limitations, those were defining features of Mr Lee,” said Prof Evans.
For all his deft diplomacy, Mr Lee did not fancy himself as a statesman.
In an interview, when asked how he wished to be remembered, he said: “I do not want to be remembered as a statesman ... I do not classify myself as a statesman. I put myself down as determined, consistent, persistent. I set out to do something, I keep on chasing it until it succeeds. That is all ... Anybody who thinks he is a statesman ought to see a psychiatrist.”
No matter how Mr Lee viewed his contributions, his pragmatic and prescient advice was clearly valued.
Will his legacy and values that have shaped Singapore linger on without him?
“Obviously, there won’t be another Mr Lee...but there is certainly a need for the clinical, cold-blooded analysis that was his style,” said Mr Kausikan.
Will his legacy and values that have shaped Singapore linger on without him?
“Obviously, there won’t be another Mr Lee...but there is certainly a need for the clinical, cold-blooded analysis that was his style,” said Mr Kausikan
“Actually it is one of the things he bequeathed to Singapore that this is the way we look at the world – at least most of us (in government). So it’s not that we need somebody like Mr Lee, but we need the kind of cast of mind that was, I think, his most valuable legacy, at least in the foreign affairs field.”
Mr Kausikan noted that while no system can last forever as every system is prone to error or sheer bad luck, Singapore has an adaptable and resilient system.
“You can still screw it up com