War might actually be good for Singapore
Singapore is 1st-Tier Arms Maker http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_325946.html
Sometimes, I don’t know whether or not to be proud of my country’s achievement. This is one of those times. (Other times being when I know that our high cost of living means that we can afford maids, and human organs, and fancy holidays in the region. Or when I hear that Singapore has one of the highest per capita execution rates in the world — it arguably keeps our country relatively drug-crime free)
There are some political figures, media personalities, or segments of society that hype up the role of religiously-motivated ideology/terrorism in violent conflicts around the world today. There are also those who take a more moderate , rational stand and ask if power struggles and corruption are the puppeteers pulling the strings of irrational fundamentalists. Israel is facing an unpcomming election for example, and Afganistan’s leaders have been implicated in corruption, no matter which party takes over.
One big group that stands to benefit the most from these conflicts are the arms manufacturers. The Bush presidents who presided over 3 of the USA’s most recent major wars were backed strongly by the gun/weapons lobby group & oil lobby group. However, I hardly see any news , editorials and commentaries questioning the moral responsibility that this very powerful lobby group have in the violent conflicts of today. I wonder why. Could it be because Singapore is a 1st-Tier Arms Maker? Could it be that our mainstream media is highly regulated?
Like I said at the beginning, sometimes, some news makes me wonder if I should be happy or sad, proud or ashamed.
I remember more than 10 years ago, reading that singapore was the TOP landmines supplier to the 1st Iraq war. A quick search today reveals that Singapore is one of the 37 countries that are NOT signatories to the Ottawa Treaty, which seeks to ban anti-personnel mines ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Ottawa_Treaty ) .
Qouting from http://www.bambooweb.com/articles/l/a/Landmine.html (can’t find the publication date) :
“The legal export of anti-personnel landmines has ceased as of 1999. Anti-personnel landmines continue to be produced in the following countries:
- Burma
- People’s Republic of China
- Cuba
- Egypt
- India
- Iran
- Iraq
- North Korea
- South Korea
- Pakistan
- Russia
- Serbia and Montenegro
- Singapore
- Turkey
- United States
- Vietnam “
On one hand, our citizens are signing petitions calling for the end of conflict in the Middle East, for human rights to be respected by Myanmar, for countries to stop using landmines. On the other hand, our citizens are benefitting(?) from the revenue from arms sales, and gem trades. Manufacturing jobs are created. The Straits Times reports that “The UK deal makes it an important ‘reference customer’ that opens the door to similar acquisitions by other First World countries serving in the Afghan theatre.” I ask, do Singaporeans really want the Afghan war to end?
“But the deal is a breakthrough for Singapore’s defence industry in that the Republic is now supplying weapons systems not to Third World countries, but to a First World nation like the United Kingdom. ” I wonder which Third World countries Singapore has been supplying arms to. Do anyone of you readers know and care to share? Or is it confidential, like the way our town-councils invest money is confidential? I wonder which wars were fought with Made-In-Singapores. I also wonder, how many of our neighbour’s citizems, fighting for a better home, where shot with Made-In-Singapores by the very people supposed to protect them? I hope none, but I guess I’ll never know .
Honestly, in the context of arms revenue, I suspect (I’ve yet to ask) that many Singaporeans would support arms manufacture, and may support the ongoing war efforts, even though they may be paiseh to admit. Assuming that this is the case, is it right for Singapore to toe the ethical line, or to respect the decision of the majority, a key tenet of democracy?
I’ve often struggled with this question. When the majority of the population wants to criminalise homosexuality, when the majority of the population wants their maids to be locked at home 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, when minority rights become an act of mercy and charity given at the wimps of the majority, should the democratic principle of respecting the majority’s decisions still hold? Of course I’m pressuming that the democratic principle of respecting the majority’s decisions do hold ………..
Like this:
9 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
I think there will still be demand for weapons and equipment even if the Afghan War ends. Its not just about warmongering. Soldiers operating under UN or internationally agreed auspices, i.e. for peacekeeping or peacebuilding efforts will also need weapons to enforce the peace. I suspect we will see much more of such efforts in future.
As a basic principle, democracy should not be a case of the majority shoving policies down the minority’s throats. It should also take into account the views and concerns of the minority. Otherwise the minority will have less and less of a stake.
Hi Fargoal, Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
I agree with you, Peacekeeping does require weapons too and I would be proud of Singapore supplying to such efforts
However, do you think that citizens should get a say (at least through representation in Parliamentary debates at the minimum) on who these weapons are being sold to? For eg. In the decision to go to war in Iraq, most countries had to persuade their people (or their representatives) that this was a war they wanted and supported. Supplying weapons, and supplying troops, I think both count as contribution, what do you think?
(I’m not suggesting tho, that troops are tools like weapons are. (I know leaders have said stuff like “what our country has are people, let’s see how they can match us”, and their people just echo the leaders’ words without realising that their lives has just been de-valued to that of mere tools)
And for stuff like landmines — well, you know, in Singapore, we give death(or is it just super harsh?) sentences for illegal arms trading etc etc. Has there been any debate about our citizen’s willingness to be a illegal arms manufacturer’s on an international level? I’m assuming of course, that the report is right, that we still manufacture and export landmines.
I completely agree with you. Minority views need to be taken into account. I wonder how the minority can ensure it is done. If the minority group in question are rich, powerful elites (I’m thinking along the lines of the jews in the US, correct me if this is a bad eg.) they can have a lot of clout. But the minority rights of the poor and powerless eg. the migrant manual labour — they are literally at the mercy of the employers, the authorities, and kind hearted people to lend a ear and hand to their needs.
Hi Mathia
I can agree with the broad principle that citizens should get a say in the larger issues of war and peace, especially if supporting a war means that our soldiers will be put in harm’s way. For the case of Iraq, I am glad that our troops went and came back in one piece. I personally had many reservations about the war in the first place. But I can also appreciate that our leaders made a difficult political decision. Someone once said something to the effect that the most brilliant idea from a small country like Singapore can be safely ignored, but the most foolish idea from a large and powerful country like the US must be taken seriously.
Unfortunately, I have a feeling that going forward, the trend will work against this principle (of democracy). The decision to go to war will become less and less democratic, not so much because leaders choose to ignore public opinion, but because of pure necessity. The Iraq War might be one of the last few “big-bang”, “textbook-style” wars between countries where everyone gets to offer his or her two cents way before the fighting takes place. Future wars (in the broad sense of the word) will be preemptive, undeclared and unannounced, to maintain the advantage of surprise against asymmetrical foes. Witness the US’ missile strikes against Al-Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan in the late 90s and Israel’s bombing attack against Syria in 2007.
I don’t have a good answer to this issue. An interesting analogue that springs to mind is the UN. Within the UN, the General Assembly (the 192 UN member states) has delegated the responsibility for international peace and security to the UN Security Council, which consists of 5 permanent members and 10 non-permanent elected members. Similarly, in a democracy of citizens, we delegate the responsibility for war and peace to our elected political leadership and trust them to do what is best on our behalf. I don’t pretend that this is a perfect arrangement but it is nonetheless an interesting parallel.
For landmines, Singapore is indeed in a minority of countries that have not acceded to the Ottawa Treaty. I am not sure whether it is because of defence or commercial considerations (or possibly both). I would tend to agree with you that this should be explored further. Maybe more Singaporeans should be more interested in the complex dynamics of our foreign policies. There are many issues, e.g. our position on arms control, death penalty, drugs, etc. that deserve debate and consideration.
As for safeguarding the rights of migrant labour, this is indeed a tricky issue. It’s probably easier to argue for equal rights for citizens rather than foreigners. From a practical point of view, this is one area where the role of the “people sector”, e.g. NGOs and advocacy groups become important.
Regards
Fargoal
The only way to stop war is not to be a soldier.
Look at recent history, how many soldiers are actually fighting a war in their own country defending their own soil?!
Most are manipulated by the policy makers to fuel their own private agenda of power and glory.
Hence, I have little respect for those who make their living as a soldier.
In fact, I despise them.
The reality is that war will always exist. And there will always be sheepdogs who will stand on the wall at night, ready to do the rough deeds so that the lambs may sleep in peace.
While war is never a nice thing, it is unfortunately unavoidable in this world. Be thankful we did not send offensive forces into Iraq as part of MNF-Iraq, but rather peacekeepers to ensure the Iraqis are able to operate their Al-Basra oil terminal and export the oil they need to get their national revenue streams going again..
Reconstruction does not come free..
“Maybe more Singaporeans should be more interested in the complex dynamics of our foreign policies. There are many issues, e.g. our position on arms control, death penalty, drugs, etc. that deserve debate and consideration.”
Fargoal: I can’t agree with you more.
“Most are manipulated by the policy makers to fuel their own private agenda of power and glory.”
Anon : I can’t agree with you more too.
(However, I would defer from you about our soldiers. For many people all over the world, joining the military is their only option out of starvation, their only chance at life. In other places its compulsory. Yet for others, they are the ones who have a true sense of loyalty and love for their people. I think, like many professions, soldiering is an honorable profession I respect deeply, but there will be the black and white sheep. I just hope that soldiers will find the courage to disobey if the orders they are given are obviously cruel eg. running over / shooting to kill at peaceful civillian demonstration)
CelloidReality and Fargoal: I actually agree with you in supporting Singapore’s position on Iraq. Strategically, I think our leaders did what was best for our people.
But I don’t know if that makes me happy or not.
A very thought-provoking and insightful book on war that everyone should read: “War is a force that gives us meaning” by former NY Times journalist and war correspondent Chris Hedges. Whether you are a realist or an idealist, and you may not agree with everything Hedges has to say, but overall the book will make you think and question your own beliefs about war.
Having said that, war sucks and I hope Singapore never has to fight any wars, ever. Humanity should stick to football (minus hooligans), diplomatic grandstanding, K-1 kickboxing and computer games. But maybe there is some room for optimism here. Many cross-national issues like trade, maritime relations, border security, etc. have been brought into the realm of peace in terms of how they are handled, greatly reducing the potential for war.
And just maybe, regular soldiers could be a dwindling breed. My guess is that future wars will be fought with non-regular “warriors” who won’t be wearing uniforms. They won’t have any stake in civil order and society either. Witness the factional fighting in Somalia, the civil wars in West Africa, the warlords in Afghanistan, the death squads in Yugoslavia… In some ways, we are going back to ancient history.
Anyway, looking forward to more good posts from you Mathia.
I’m finding it hard to find a place on the Internet to have a civil discussion but this blog is a good start.
Thanks Fargoal for the recommendation! I’ll go check that book out!
I agree that stuff like trade and real, material vested interest between countries reduce the likelihood of war greatly. I’m hoping that countries will use the power they have from these trade ties in an ethical manner eg. pushing rogue countries for more reform and respect of human rights, rather than giving into pressure from them to repatriate or persecute dissidents from oppressive regimes.
Yeh, the face of war is changing. Sometimes, I do wonder violence is necessary, when there is no other road that the common people can take (Think Myanmar, think N. Korea. Think about whether terrorists became what they were, because they felt like that was the only course of action left) It’s getting harder to tell who the enemy is anymore, once you’ve heard both sides of the story, or even dug deep enough into history.
Thanks Fargoal for your support ! I think it’s people like you that make Internet discussions civil, and more importantly, meaningful and sensible =)
[...] Life in a Snapshot: faster pat ourselves more, we are dying under our own adulation – Mathia Lee: Is War good for Singapore? Do you support War? – My thoughts: Of Dragons And Shopping Centres… – Yawning Bread: Independent investigation [...]