TR EMERITUS

Social Media was full of talk yesterday about the glaringly disparate reception given by the Chinese government to Anwar Ibrahim, Lee Hsien Loong and the Spanish PM, Sanchez when they arrived in Beijing yesterday from the Boao conference in Hainan, which all three of them had attended. Both Anwar and Sanchez were given the red carpet treatment upon arrival with honour guards and State cars on the tarmac, waiting to whisk them off,accompanied by a phalanx of outriders. Lee Hsien Loong and his 50 strong entourage were ushered onto the airport buses to be taken to the arrival lounge. There may be a reason for the disparate reception, but Zaobao and Mothership gave a most ridiculous and disingenuous explanation for the difference in treatment accorded to Lee Hsien Loong and Anwar. It was suggested that the treatment was different because Anwar arrived in Beijing onboard a Malaysian Airlines plane, whereas Lee Hsien Loong arrived on a local plane- Hainan Airlines. I was in stitches and almost fell off my chair when I read the explanation given by Mothership. I thought this can’t be serious coming from the mainstream media and an alternative media which professes to be a serious and reliable source of journalism. There are “Rules of the Game”as Lee Kuan Yew liked to put it. We are all familiar with how visiting Heads of State are often given a 21-gun salute at the official welcoming ceremony. But I am prepared to say that the parameters of these rules are not etched in stone. If a country genuinely likes a visiting Statesman, there is nothing stopping the host country from giving the guests how many guns salutes it deems fit! It could be multiples of 21. It could be a gun salute every minute! The latter sounds extravagant, but I am using it to make my point. A person does not even have to be in power to be accorded a grand reception. I am reminded of the story of how Mao Tse-Tung sent an official plane and his Chief Protocol Officer to bring Richard Nixon to China for a private visit after Nixon’s resignation as President following the Watergate scandal. This was the unprecedented treatment accorded to a former President. The two men had, of course, been part of the most sensational diplomatic breakthrough in the 1970s, which was Nixon’s opening to China. In Beijing, following their private meeting during which they toasted each other with tea, Nixon was treated to an extravagant evening of musical entertainment with a program carefully put together by Mao himself. So please, Zaobao and Mothership, such disingenuous explanations are not appreciated by intelligent Singaporeans.   Lim Tean      Read More →

I have read Lee Hsien Loong's speech at Boao Forum on both Today's online and CNA online. I give it an average grade. Just average. Let me explain. To me, today, the biggest threat to Asia's peace and stability is not China's peaceful rise, the so called China's hagemony, China's unreasonableness, China's export of communist propaganda or refugees...etc. With a China that is growing richer and more powerful by the day, there will always be bilateral issues with its Asian neighbours but as long as countries are willing to observe and behave according to international rules, laws and norms such as non-interference in each other affairs etc but continue talking with each other and making serious efforts to better understand each other's concerns and positions, many issues are manageable. The clear and present danger to Asia's peace and well-being are 2 and they are the Taiwan issues which is essentially a China domestic issues and US's attitudes and perceptions of China as an adversary and a threat and their correspondingly responses and reactions. In short, I conclude that the current Biden administration lacks strategic depth and wisdom. I am old enough to remember the late Lee Kuan Yew's rare honour and his address to the joint meeting of the US Congress in 1985. Among other things, he strongly advocated continuous US trade in the east and South East Asia despite very strong protectionist tides running in the US politics body at that time. In order to add value to a forum or bring value to the table, so to speak, one has to deliver or say things that people don't know or are not yet fully aware of. The late Minister Mentor had done that brilliantly. Think.   Simon Lim      Read More →

1. China had foresight. They required social media platforms to be subject to state censorship, to prevent false and harmful content from being spread. 2. The western nations and their social media platforms smeared China for the "censorship" against "freedom of speech". 3. The western nations now realize that they also have to censor the content that is being spread on their social media platforms. They created a new term for censorship. They said that it is to meet "community standards". 4. The method adopted by the western platforms is more sinister. Apart from censoring false and harmful contents, they appear to be acting for commercial reasons as well. Their algorithm will block or reduce the spread of content that are detrimental to their advertising revenue. 5. Being dishonest, the western nations will never admit that the approach taken by China was the wise and correct approach. 6. I have, for a long time, held the view that the censorship of social media should be extended beyond what was adopted by China. I would require every user to be registered and verified. I would disallow multiple profiles for the same person. This will ensure that the views being spread are identified to the person who will be responsible for the view.   Tan Kin Lian      Read More →