Hold your horses and see the M'sian GE with a S'porean lens

By SEAN LIM



What a heavy news day yesterday - from getting updates on Malaysia's General Election (GE) in the wee hours, to swearing in and press conferences over the course of the day, and rounded up with confirmation of Singapore being selected as the venue for the historic Trump-Kim summit, slated to be held on June 12.

Well, with the summit putting Singapore in the spotlight on the international stage, I'm glad that (hopefully) at least people of the world will know that we are no longer part of China. While we are at it, why not cane and "discipline" these two baddies when they arrive in Singapore, eh?

To say the outcome from the 14th Malaysia GE is overwhelming would be an understatement. After all, who would have expected the ruling coalition to fall after six decades of rule?

Politically, it is not very surprising. We have seen how the then-ruling Liberal Democratic Party in Japan lost power in its 2009 polls, after 50 years. But to see such a political revolution across the causeway is a different story altogether.

Perhaps the BN should have seen it coming - the 1MDB scandal, high cost of living and the stagnation of economy, among others. Signs have shown their power was eroding, from losing the customary two-third majority in 2008 and the popular vote in 2013.

I cannot help but to notice the irony of it all - using elections, which is a democratic tool, to bring back an authoritarian leader back to power. Mimetic challenge? Probably so, but this is a signal for westerners that oriental politics differs from liberal democracy of the west, and should stop being ethnocentric.

Or did people had a sense of nostalgic nationalism?

Anyway, the rakyat decided that enough was enough, and used the power of their vote to bring about change. Hence, there you have, Tun Dr M being Malaysia's PM once again after 15 years of political hiatus. Many of my Malaysian friends were elated over this upheaval, and were glad there is hope for a better life with a new old leader back at the helm. Obviously, the celebratory spirit up north was contagious enough to affect Singaporeans too.

Singaporeans, especially those who traditionally support the underdogs in everything they do, were cheering at the tenacity and unity of Malaysians to overthrow the incumbent BN, who were deemed ineffective in governance by the people.

But...let's take a step back and view this outcome as a Singaporean. Let us see what ramifications the outcome of this GE have on our domestic politics.

It is puzzling to see fellow peers cheering on Dr M's victory, or getting overjoyed at the prospects of an underdog's surprising victory. It is one thing to be happy for our fellow Malaysian friends for an outcome in their favour, but another thing altogether to forget that one is a Singaporean and not an actor in Malaysian politics.

It is indeed a revolution, unheaval, transformation, uprising - whatever you call it, and can be quite exciting especially when it happens in our neighbouring country. And political change always make good and attractive headlines, getting everyone's adrenaline rushing.

I have decided to hold my horses and stop short of feeling overly happy or overly upset at the Malaysian GE, if we look at it from a Singaporean perspective.

If one recalls, Tun Dr M is historically more hostile and less friendly to Singapore. Just flip through the archives and one can see the frequent thorny words he made in the past to Singapore, from crooked bridge and potong air - cutting away Singapore's imported water supply.

Well, at least he is honest about it and openly expresses his dissatisfaction on Singapore, said a teacher whom I met earlier this morning.

Najib, with all his flaws in leadership in domestic politics, has good diplomatic ties with our government and Singapore-Malaysia relationship has "never been better". From a realist's viewpoint, whatever Najib does back home is of little concern for SG leaders, as long as our national interests are not compromised. This is not hypocrisy - this is the rule of international relations.

What does it mean to have Dr M back in power? Will he remain hostile towards Singapore, or has he mellowed down on his foreign policy towards us with age? These are questions worth pondering on because this is what directly affects our country, be it cross-border policies or projects, such as the high speed rail. But one thing is certain - this poses a new challenge for our 4G leaders as they deal with a new leadership up north.

Of course, a hostile approach is never a good thing for Singapore, that is why it is crucial for Singaporeans to hold their horses, think critically of potential ramifications on our local politics, instead of relentless cheers over reformasi in Malaysia.

After all, we are still Singaporeans. What happens in their domestic politics does not affect us - at least superficially - but their foreign policy approach does. You can cheer (or grumble) all you want over the abolishment of certain taxes, repealing fake news laws etc, as said by Dr M, but ultimately these are policies for Malaysians, not us. The foreign policy aspect is the more pertaining issue for us. Singapore has to navigate carefully in this new unchartered waters of a leadership transition.

Let us remember which side of the border we are standing on and bear in mind that Singapore's interests should come first. In the midst of supporting and cheering for the underdog's victory - which can be quite exciting - let us not forget that we are Singaporeans first.

Of course, as we remain realist in approaching Dr M's victory in GE14, there is nothing wrong with feeling happy and admire our neighbours for their courage and unity in overthrowing the government, given by what was at stake and how the opposition was crippled with gerrymandering efforts. Just remember not to be too carried away and forget what is at stake for Singapore with a leadership transition.

Then, we have Singaporeans from the anti-PAP camp who were heartened over what happened across the causeway as they hope the winds of change there will influence a political awakening back home.

We can't exactly transpose what happened in Malaysia to the situation here in Singapore because circumstances are different, though I will not rule this out in the long run.

The situation in Malaysia has reached a stage where it has become rather unbearable to the people, ranging from high costs of living and the serious erosion of public trust from the 1MDB scandal by Najib himself.

For politically stable countries where it is perceived as "risky" or "rocking the boat" for the opposition takeover of a government, especially with single-party hegemonic dominance, there are a lot at stake for Malaysians to have voted the BN out of power after 60 years. The situation must have been dire enough for Malaysians to gamble at the ballot boxes and hope that a change in leadership can bring improvements to their lives.

Have things reached such a bad stage in Singapore that it warrants a change in hands of leadership? We grumble about the imperfections of the PAP government and doubts over certain policies. We argue and complain about it. There was the reserved presidential election last year which caused an uproar. Certain controversial policies passed this year such as the Public Order (Special Powers) Act. Increase in water prices and GST etc.

But things have yet to reach a stage where life is unbearable, like hyperinflation and extremely bad inequality. We do not have massive unemployment currently. It may not be perfect living but at least things things are under control, or at least what I think it to be. Do not underestimate the power of people's rice bowl. After all, the caveat for the government's authoritarian control over Singaporeans is the promise for a decent material standard of living, as well as public trust. That was one reason why Aljunied GRC was lost in the 2011 General Elections - housing prices were too high, overpopulation issues because the government had let hell broke lose and allowed a huge influx of foreigners, leading to competition for jobs and strained infrastructure.

While things are still relatively stable for now, the government cannot be complacent and should in fact take GE14 as a lesson that when rice bowl is at stake and public trust is shaken, the possibility of being voted out of power is there.  Cost of living is high but not unbearable yet (unlike in China where the 1989 Tiananmen incident was triggered by letting go of price controls, leading to overnight hyperinflation of products), and public trust in our government is still high.

At least our government remain clean and honest, where corruption is concerned. The 1MDB scandal in Malaysia and the protagonists' subsequent denial of the affair affected public's trust in Najib as a clean government, and this is something our government should be wary of. Even the old man has said before that the moment the PAP is less than honest, they deserve to be out, emphasising the need for honesty in governance. Hence, if the current government does not want a repeat of GE14 in Singapore, it has to ensure standard of living is there and public confidence in them is high.

Lastly, there is the "Mahathir factor" in Malaysia which made GE14 a totally different ball game altogether (and an exciting drama to watch). It is clear that Najib had a strong opponent, which was Dr M himself, a former PM with track records and large public support from Malaysians, especially from those who lived in an era of prosperity under his premiership from 1981 to 2003. A robust alternative posed a strong challenge to Najib's regime and also a contributory factor why Dr M managed to wrestle power from the BN this election.

Whereas in Singapore,  for the time being, we have yet to see a viable alternative that can replace the current PAP government. Even the dominant opposition party in parliament WP has often reiterated ad nauseam their role as a "check and balance" of the government, rather than an ambition to take over the government today. Perhaps they might have the potential to form an alternative government in the future, as said by former party chief Low Thia Khiang that they are working towards the goal to be an alternative government.

But the status quo is the WP wants to continue to keep the PAP government accountable and provide alternative voices. We also have to consider that the WP as an opposition is not an opposition of the traditionally sense. WP is unique that it somehow complements the PAP, rather than opposing for the sake of it as we see in other legislatures. In fact, there were criticisms that the WP is increasingly becoming the "PAP in blue", since they do not provide robust alternatives to policies, but rather, suggestions for improvements. There may not be that strong an impetus for Singaporeans to yearn for an opposition takeover of the government, since both parties are not very dissimilar.

With all these being said, that is why what happened up north in recent days is unlikely to happen here in Singapore, at least in the short term. Circumstances and political dynamics differ, so too bad for those in the anti-government camp who are inspired by the wave of ubah in Malaysia.

But it serves as a strong wake up call to the government to shore up their governance, and not to take things for granted because anything could happen. In contemporary politics, the people and government establishes a social contract, where the government maintains a control over the people (in the case of Singapore, a curtailing of certain liberal rights such as an absolute freedom of speech and press etc) under the condition that its citizens enjoy a decent standard of living.

It is only when things have reached a dire stage and trust is broken that people are willing to take that step of faith to change a government.

Top photo taken from The Straits Times