US embassy cable - 05SINGAPORE2058

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SINGAPORE 002058 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/06/2015 
TAGS: PGOV, PHUM, SN 
SUBJECT: SINGAPORE POLITICS: OPENING WINDOWS, SWATTING FLIES 
 
REF: A. SINGAPORE 1197 
     B. SINGAPORE 1178 
 
Classified By: Acting E/P Counselor Paul Horowitz, reason 1.4(d) 
 
1. (C) Summary and Comment: Technology, social change, and 
hopes for creativity-driven economic growth engines have 
pushed Singapore's government to adapt its style, but little 
has fundamentally changed.  From a well-publicized debate on 
whether to allow casinos to essays calling for political 
liberalization, the recent abundance of public discourse in 
Singapore might cause some to think that a more open society 
is taking shape here.  The GOS still decides which issues are 
open for debate and its levers of control -- including 
defamation suits, a compliant press, and vaguely defined 
"out-of-bounds" markers -- are still firmly in place.  In our 
view, there is no political liberalization at work, but there 
is more latitude for personal expression.  It is important 
not to extrapolate from these modest changes and project a 
fully open or democratic society.  Singapore leadership has 
simply established a new equilibrium point in their desire to 
maintain an orderly environment while promoting a vibrant, 
creative intellectual domain.  End Summary and Comment. 
 
The Spirit of Lee 
----------------- 
 
2. (U) In his first National Day Rally speech last August, 
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said, "We are so capable, we 
are so efficient, we are so comfortable that we stick with 
what we have tried and tested and found working and we are 
reluctant to take risks and try new things.  And that is a 
weakness."  This reflects a widely accepted prescription for 
"fixing" the Singapore model -- fostering entrepreneurship 
and creative thinking -- in order to mature from a 
manufacturing to an information and services based economy. 
Lee cautioned, however, that the government was unwilling to 
give up all control over public debate.  Quoting Chinese 
leader Deng Xiaoping's dictum, "When you open the windows, 
the flies come in," Lee added his own twist: "So, you can't 
close the windows, you'll just have to have a fly swatter." 
 
Some Subjects No Longer Taboo... 
-------------------------------- 
 
3. (U) Increased media coverage of "sensitive" issues during 
the first ten months of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's 
administration suggests a more open society.  The most 
obvious example, dominating the news for the past year, was 
the contentious debate over whether Singapore should allow 
casinos (Ref A). Singapore's censors have continued to shed 
some of their traditional discomfort with sexually explicit 
material -- in May, for example, a Straits Times article 
announced (with a full-color photo) the Crazy Horse Paris 
Cabaret had selected Singapore as its Asian venue, with 
(semi-nude) performances beginning this fall. 
 
4. (U) Discussion of more overtly political issues also has 
increased.  For example, the government's move in March to 
ban a short film about an opposition figure (Ref B) sparked 
negative reactions on weblogs that spilled over into 
mainstream media.  In April, a government agency's threat to 
sue a Singaporean graduate student in the United States who 
had criticized the agency on his blog led to internet and 
newspaper discussion of the propriety of the government's 
using defamation suits to stifle free expression.  In May, 
the impending execution of a man convicted of trafficking one 
kilogram of cannabis prompted a public forum, a candlelight 
vigil, and opposition party calls for abolishing capital 
punishment.  Political observer Catherine Lim set off a 
modest storm of commentary when she argued in the "Straits 
Times" that, while the new practice of seeking bottom-up 
feedback was welcome, political freedom was still lacking. 
While individually these stories are unremarkable, taken 
together they present a contrast to Singapore's normally 
stifling media atmosphere. 
 
But Off-Limits Still Broadly Defined 
------------------------------------ 
 
5. (U) Many boundaries are still firmly in place.  The GOS 
continues to enforce its ban on "foreign interference" in 
domestic politics.  In April, a local NGO invited an Amnesty 
International representative to speak at a forum opposing 
capital punishment; authorities let him attend, but did not 
allow him to speak.  Afterwards, the police publicly 
questioned the forum's MC about her nationality -- she had 
alluded in her remarks to living abroad.  In May, immigration 
officials denied entry to an American non-violence advocate 
who was coming to participate in a workshop organized by an 
opposition party; a Ministry of Home Affairs press release 
about the case cited an internet account of a similar 
workshop he had conducted in Singapore in January as the 
reason for the exclusion. 
 
6. (U) The effective ban on artists' commenting on political 
subjects is another persistent boundary.  While the GOS 
publicly claims it wants to cultivate creative talent, when 
local first-time filmmaker Martyn See entered his short film 
about opposition figure Chee Soon Juan ("Singapore Rebel") in 
the Singapore International Film Festival, he was advised to 
withdraw it and was later called in for police questioning. 
 
Old and New Techniques 
---------------------- 
 
7. (C) Government figures continue to sue opponents for 
defamation (Ref B).  By downplaying the role of 
intermediaries such as opposition parties, NGOs, and 
religious institutions, the GOS inhibits political 
mobilization by keeping interactions between individual 
citizens and the government.  It reinforces the more overt 
"out-of-bounds" markers by creating a sense of quiet but 
ever-present official vigilance.  The suggestion that a 
defamation suit could be filed against someone who posts 
objectionable material on a weblog plants the idea that the 
government monitors the internet.  Home Affairs Minister Wong 
Kan Seng's statement that Singaporeans have no reason to fear 
being "locked up in jail, disappearing in the middle of the 
night and you don't come back" reminds Singaporeans that such 
things have happened here in most citizens' living memory. 
Political commentator Cherian George remarked to poloffs 
that, with its rich history of using the machinery of state 
to keep its political foes in line, the People's Action Party 
(PAP) today only has to employ token amounts of "repression" 
to remind would-be opponents of its power. 
 
Comment: Finding the New Equilibrium Point 
------------------------------------------ 
 
8. (C) Singapore's leadership recognizes the impossibility of 
maintaining a monopoly on the flow of information in the 
internet age and they are experimenting with ways of 
selectively loosening the reins without losing control.  The 
casino issue tested this new approach:  the government 
selected the issue and set the terms of debate; it encouraged 
the public to express their views and professed to listen 
when they did; it announced the decision everyone expected 
and signaled its expectation that the public would close 
ranks in support. 
 
9. (C) Singaporean leaders are changing their style because 
they believe they must.  They have created a prosperous, 
efficient, crime-free state, with a cosseted press and no 
effective opposition.  They remain vulnerable, however, to 
exogenous economic developments and are single-minded in 
pursuit of guarantors of future economic growth.  Fine-tuning 
the level of political discourse responds to the challenges 
to governing that a technologically savvy society in the 
information age poses.  They hope it might also contribute to 
domestic dynamism.  Given the sophistication and education of 
the population and its unfettered access to information about 
the rest of the world, one is tempted to conclude that 
Singapore's constraints on public discourse and political 
activity are unsustainable in the medium term.  While this 
may be an attractive proposition, the PAP nevertheless 
continues to satisfy most of the people most of the time, and 
we see no signs of bubbling discontent serious enough to 
disrupt the orderly and disciplined polity that is Singapore. 
 
10. (C) The government has limited appetite for reform, 
seeking as it does the benefits of a more open society 
without the costs.  Yet its rhetoric will continue to imply 
more open days ahead.  In part, this allows the government to 
co-opt the issue.  In part it reflects at least a bit of 
sincerity.  If Singapore has to choose between control and a 
more vibrant society, it will choose control every time. 
Remember, changes in Singapore are undertaken in order to 
perpetuate the system, not to reform it. 
LAVIN