Lee Kuan Yew: Memory and Lessons

The “father of the Singapore nation” Lee Kuan Yew died late on March 22; it was he who brought that country effectively from the third to the first world. A few days before his death, he was admitted to hospital with pneumonia in a very serious condition.

The current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong declared period of national mourning for his father, the nation’s first prime minister who ruled the country for 31 years. “He fought for our independence, built a nation where there was none, and made us proud to be Singaporeans. We won’t see another like him,” Lee Jr. said in an emotional televised address.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said he was “deeply saddened” by death of Lee Kuan Yew. US President Barack Obama described him as a “giant of history.” Chinese Foreign Ministry called him “a uniquely influential Asian statesman.”

The great respect for this leader can be seen from a steady stream of people going to the Prime Minister’s Office to express their condolences.

Lee Kuan Yew was a co-founder of People’s Action Party, which has ruled Singapore since 1959, and became the city-state’s first prime minister. The biggest challenge for him was the exit from the Malaysian federation. Speaking immediately after the split in 1965, he promised to build a meritocratic multiracial nation. However, to do it, the tiny Singapore, which had no natural resources, needed a new economic model.

He told The New York Times back in 2007: “We knew if we would be like our neighbors, we would perish, so we had to come up with something that would be different and better than they had. To understand Singapore, you’ve got to start off with an improbable story. It should not exist. To begin with we don’t have the ingredients of a nation, the elementary factors, a homogenous population, common language, common culture, and common destiny. History is a long time. I’ve done my bit.”

Lee’s “Singapore model” is often criticized for its soft authoritarianism, which combines the centralization of power, clean government, and economic liberalism with the suppression of political opposition and severe restrictions on freedoms of speech and assembly, which has created a climate of wariness and self-censorship. This model is, however, admired and studied by leaders of Asia, including the Chinese.

The Day asked an expert to comment on the role of the “father of the Singapore nation” in the creation of the state, which by definition could never exist, but has become a model of governance and corruption suppression.

Viktor MASHTABEI, Ukrainian researcher, diplomat, Ambassador Extraordinary and   Plenipotentiary of Ukraine, associate professor of the Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine), secretary of the International    Center for Policy Studies’ supervisory board:

“First of all, he was a well educated man, an English-trained lawyer. He then attended the school of macroeconomics at Harvard, where well-known professors, including some world-famous economists, offered him a special course. He studied it thoroughly. Thirdly, he had a pretty decent team of like-minded associates, which is another achievement of his, because it was Lee who created it. He ruled the country for 31 years, despite some serious trials which he experienced personally as well, like when he almost accidentally learned that Malaysia had abandoned the federation idea. In fact, Lee was faced with a choice: either admit the end of his experiment, or be the one to bring it to a successful end. He did the latter.

“Looking closer, the Singapore way of organizing society has its advantages. Lee was not a fan of American democracy. He always stressed meritocracy instead, that is, promoting people in power based on their personal services to the nation. It made the basis of the country’s success. Besides his book, we have a book written by his associates, who presented the techniques they used. It happened so that they created the country, and nobody thought about how it was done. When they retired, they decided to collect it all and write this book. It actually describes the techniques of how everything was done, their know-how in pure form.

“It included doing political and technological assessments, endless testing and so on. When they were absolutely sure that everything was in order, they went ahead. They started with attracting multinationals, and succeeded in it gradually. They then erected an economy of their own, in fact. Few people know that they have a 60    percent market share in building marine drilling rigs, as well as being pretty decent ship repairers, so much that even Russia repairs there, trusting Singapore over Russian repair facilities. They have other high-tech industries as well, such as repairing Rolls-Royce aircraft engines. They have made a real bet on education too. To have the country easily participating in the international division of labor, they have learned English. Even though they now learn Chinese again, nevertheless, English gave them free access to everything while allowing them to stand equal with the rest of the world. In other words, they were able to say something about themselves in English, in addition to borrowing from someone else. It was all this, plus management, management, and more management. And one more important detail, these people had basically another major feature in common: they believed in their cause and were sufficiently patriotic.”

Western media often emphasize the “father of the Singapore nation” authoritarianism and limits on the freedom of speech...

“To some extent, these claims are also true. However, just imagine what would happen to a fairly small country, which, short of immigrants, has about two million residents, should they be subjected to propaganda which awaits for them. They live in a rather dangerous place, with two Muslim countries nearby, Malaysia and Indonesia. These countries have had major outbreaks of terrorism, which would be an almost disaster for Singapore. Especially since such outbreaks did happen, they did apprehend terrorists who, incidentally, were Malaysian.

“Besides not having their own water or raw materials, they are vulnerable to any ideological influence. For example, installing a satellite antenna requires permission there. In some manner they control thought. Still, it is understandable. However, they communicate with the world. There are many Britons living there who bought homes, yachts, and feel good working there, while they could not find a job in Britain.”