This was an essay/assignment where the topic was to discuss different aspects of Singapore as a Global City.

When you got skin the game
You stay in the game
But you don’t get a win
Unless you play in the game

Hamilton: An American Musical

Introduction

In a 1972 address to the Singapore Press Club, then Minister of Foreign Affairs, S. Rajaratnam, introduced Singapore’s role as a “global city” (Rajaratnam, 1972), citing Toynbee’s Ecumenopolis (Toynbee, 1970). In suggesting that “the world is our hinterland”, Rajaratnam’s speech focused on the economic aspects of the Global City and how Singapore’s participation in the global economy is paramount to the small state’s survival and success. Towards his conclusion, Rajaratnam mentions:

In this address, I have dealt largely with the economic aspects of Singapore as a Global City. But the political, social and cultural implications of being a Global City are no less important. […] The political, social and cultural problems, I believe, would be far more difficult to tackle.

Rajaratnam, 1972

Fast-forward nearly fifty years, Singapore has demonstrated enormous skill in navigating the dangerous waters of foreign political relations. As a belated supplement to Rajaratnam’s speech and armed with the benefit of hindsight, I explore the role of foreign political relations in Singapore’s identity as a global city.

Promoting Foreign Trade and Investment

In her 2005 article, The Global City: Introducing a Concept, Saskia Sassen introduces seven hypotheses, which altogether comprise the “dynamic of dispersal and of centralization” that she describes as globalisation (Sassen, 2005). Specifically, Sassen’s third hypothesis suggests that “specialized service firms engaged in the most complex and globalised markets are subject to agglomeration economies”. Such agglomerations then result in the creation of new producer-services complexes (Sassen, 2012).

In Singapore’s case, this has taken the form of its specialisation in financial services (Kotkin, 2014). Sassen, in a section on specialisation of cities, attributes this to Singapore ranking as first on important variables including “ease of entry and exit [for businesses]”, “contract enforcement” and “investor protection” (Sassen, 2012).

While these financially-grounded variables are important, it is crucial to give credit to Singapore’s foreign policy as a critical enabler. The most direct influence of Singapore’s foreign policy on its Global City identity is from the myriad of free trade agreements (FTAs) that Singapore participates in. As of last count, Singapore has thirteen bilateral and nine regional FTAs in implementation and several more undergoing negotiation (Enterprise Singapore, 2018).

These FTAs promote foreign trade and investments through tariff concessions, an important factor in Singapore’s role as a Global City. In contrast, consider the recent trade war between US and China with tariffs and counter-tariffs (Pong et al., 2018). Given Singapore’s reliance on the world as its hinterland, it would be unthinkable and utterly irresponsible for Singapore to engage in such squabbles.

Encouraging Globalisation

Recently Singapore hosted the North Korea–United States summit, otherwise known as the Trump-Kim summit. In 2015, Singapore also hosted the meeting between Ma Ying-jeou, then President of the Republic of China (Taiwan), and Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China (Mainland China). This was in turn inspired by the Wang-Koo summit in 1993 (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2015).

For Singapore, promoting better international relations goes beyond altruism and is entirely in Singapore’s self-interest as a Global City. Saskia Sassen suggests that “the key feature of the current era is a vast number of highly particular global circuits that crisscross the world” (Sassen, 2012). When Rajaratnam refered to the world as Singapore’s hinterland, Singapore is effectively tapping into these global circuits. More extensive global relations and networks naturally increase the proliferation of these crisscrossing circuits. Encouraging peace and better relations simply increases Singapore’s effective hinterland.

Singapore also participates actively in establishing global regulations such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (Koh, 1982). Again, this goes beyond altruism. The UNCLOS as an attempt to enforce a safe sea space for maritime activities encourages international maritime trade, which benefits Singapore’s reliance as a Global City on maritime trade.

A second subtler consequence of regulations such as UNCLOS relates to Singapore’s physical vulnerability as a small nation state. Without regulations like UNCLOS, the law of the jungle implies no room for Singapore against the might of larger powers, which relates to the next section on small state survival.

Asserting Small State Relevance

In 1992, Singapore led the establishment of the Forum of Small States (FOSS) at the UN, which has grown to comprise over a hundred members out of the 193 UN members (Kausikan, 2015). In 2010, Singapore also organised the Global Governance Group (3G), meant to facilitate the participation of non-G20 countries in G20 discussions (Menon, 2010).

Both the FOSS and 3G reflect Singapore’s emphasis on acknowledging smaller states. In particular, asserting the relevance of small states is fundamental to Singapore, the small Global City that wishes to play in the global circuits. The alternatives? To be disregarded and excluded from the global arena, or to be manipulated and exploited by larger powers. As S. Jayakumar puts succinctly in the title of his 2015 memoir: ”Be at the table or be on the menu.” (Jayakumar, 2015)

The previous section also raised the UNCLOS as an example of the importance of international rules and regulations to Global City Singapore. Another telling example is Singapore’s declared opposition to the Russian annexation of Crimea (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2014). On a deeper level, the opposition of the annexation is very personal to Singapore. If superpowers can willy nilly disregard small state sovereignty, what is stopping Singapore from being next on the list?

Singapore’s relevance as a small state is founded on its sovereignty. The Crimea example illustrates Singapore’s assertive response to threats against small state sovereignty. Similarly, Singapore has responded boldly against pressures and threats to its own sovereignty and authority. Singapore’s sentencing of Michael Fay was enforced despite strong pressure from the US. Another significant incident is the capital punishment of the two Indonesian marines for the MacDonald House bombing.

I want all of you to bear in mind the political and strategic circumstances in 1968. We had just been kicked out of Malaysia. The British had just announced their intention to withdraw their forces from Singapore. We were still fighting a communist insurgency. Can you imagine the guts it took for the leaders in 1968, facing such circumstances, to stand up and do the right thing?

Balakrishnan, 2017

Challenges

Internationally, right-wing populist political entities, such as Trump in the US and the Sweden Democrats, have been gaining traction through an appeal to anti-globalisation attitudes. Back in Singapore, local protests against the Population White Paper and negative local sentiments over the Trump-Kim summit echoed similar anti-globalisation and nationalistic sentiments. The lack of local support and understanding could be detrimental to Singapore’s success in the global arena, which would in turn undermine its Global City role. Navigating this domestic dilemma could prove every bit as challenging as a fragile foreign negotiation.

On the foreign Western front, the erratic nature of US leadership has already led to several thorny issues, including the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the latest rejection of globalism by US President Donald Trump at the UN podium (UN Affairs, 2018). Such decisions and declarations go against Singapore’s small state survival instincts and threaten to undermine globalisation initiatives advocated by Singapore.

On the foreign Eastern front, Kausikan and Chan have highlighted possible attempts by China to assert an ethnic authority over Chinese-majority Singapore (Kausikan, 2015; Chan, 2017) - a soft threat to its sovereignty. This also adds a degree of complexity to intricate regional relations, characterised by Singapore being the only Chinese-majority nation in the region.

Conclusion

Successful foreign relations and Singapore’s role as a Global City reinforce each other in a feedback cycle. Extensive and strong relations with many countries demonstrate Singapore’s openness to foreign investments and pave the way for more FTAs. Singapore as Global City and global financial hub positions it as a first-world country well poised to participate in international discussions.

Its successful foreign relations have been built on foundations of integrity, consistency and hard-nosed pragmatism. Yet Singapore’s success is clearly a double-edged sword. Singapore’s reputation has allowed it to play an outsized role in global politics and global economy. However, the same reputation also increases the burden of expectation and reduces Singapore’s margin for error. Singapore’s success also increases its value as a strategic pawn for potential manipulation by larger powers.

If we want to be a First World oasis, we must produce First World conditions - not just the environment, but facilities, health standards, services, connectivity, security. We just have to keep up with the highest benchmarks that exist at any one time. Then, you are in the game.

Quoted from Lee Kuan Yew (Han, 2015)

As a small state, Singapore has overcome initial challenges and gained entry into playing amongst superpowers. Singapore is “in the game”. But whether Singapore stays in the game depends entirely on how well Singapore plays in the game.

References

  • Balakrishnan, Vivian. “Full speech: Vivian Balakrishnan highlights principles underpinning Singapore’s diplomacy” Channel News Asia, Mediacorp, 17 July 2017, https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/full-speech-vivian-balakrishnan-highlights-principles-9038582. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  • Chan, Heng Chee. “Striking a balance between principle and pragmatism.” The Straits Times, Singapore Press Holdings, 3 July 2017, https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/striking-a-balance-between-principle-and-pragmatism. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  • Enterprise Singapore. “Singapore Free Trade Agreements.” Enterprise Singapore, Enterprise Singapore, https://ie.enterprisesg.gov.sg/Trade-From-Singapore/International-Agreements/free-trade-agreements/Singapore-FTA. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  • Hamilton: An American Musical. By Lin-Manuel Miranda, directed by Thomas Kail, 21 April 2016, Richard Rodgers Theatre, New York, NY. Performance.
  • Han, Fook Kwang, Warren Fernandez and Sumiko Tan. Lee Kuan Yew: The Man and His Ideas, Marshall Cavendish, April 2015.
  • Jayakumar, S. Be at the Table Or be on the Menu: A Singapore Memoir, Straits Times Press, 2015.
  • Kausikan, Bilahari. “Small? Become Extraordinary.” (speech at the Institute of Policy Studies annual conference, Singapore Perspectives, 26 January 2015). Singapore is not an Island, edited by Tan Lian Choo, Straits Times Press Pte Ltd, 2017, pp. 38-45.
  • Kausikan, Bilahari. “This ain’t Kansas, Toto: Some Personal and Eccentric Reflections on the UN.” (published earlier in Tommy Koh, Li Lin Chang and Joanna Koh, 50 years of Singapore and the United Nations, Singapore: World Scientific, 2015). Singapore is not an Island, edited by Tan Lian Choo, Straits Times Press Pte Ltd, 2017, pp. 172-186.
  • Koh, Tommy T. B. “A Constitution for the Oceans.” Remarks at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, 11 December 1982.
  • Kotkin, Joel. “Size is not the Answer: The Changing Face of the Global City.” Civil Service College Singapore, 2014.
  • Menon, Vanu Gopala. “Strengthening the Role of the UN in Global Economic Governance.” Statement to the United Nations on behalf of the Global Governance Group, 2 June 2010.
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “MFA Spokesman’s Comments in response to media queries on the Russian Parliament’s ratification of a treaty joining Crimea to Russia on 21 March 2014.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Singapore, 21 March 2014, https://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/media_centre/press_room/pr/2014/201403/press_20130321.printable.html?status=1. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “MFA Spokesman’s Comments in response to media queries on the announcement of the meeting between the Leaders from the two sides of the Taiwan Strait on 7 November 2015.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Singapore, 4 November 2015, https://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/media_centre/press_room/pr/2015/201511/press_201511040.printable.html?status=1. Retreived 28 September 2018
  • Pong, Jane, Cale Tilford, Joanna S. Kao, Ed Crooks, Robin Kwong and Tom Hancock. “What’s at stake in US-China trade war.” Financial Times, The Financial Times Ltd., 9 July 2018, https://ig.ft.com/us-china-tariffs/. Retrieved 28 September 2018.
  • Rajaratnam, S. “Singapore: Global City” (speech to the Singapore Press Club, Singapore, 6 February 1972). S Rajaratnam: The Prophetic and the Political, edited by Chan Heng Chee and Obaid ul Haq, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2007 (2nd Edition), pp. 213-221.
  • Sassen, Saskia. “The Global City: Introducing a Concept.” The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Volume XI, Issue 2 (Winter/Spring 2005): 27-43.
  • Sassen, Saskia. “Chapter 4 The New Urban Economy: The Intersection of Global Processes and Place.” Cities in a World Economy, Sage Publications, 2012 (4th Edition), pp. 109-156.
  • Toynbee, Arnold. “The Coming World-City.” Cities on the Move, Oxford University Press, 1970, pp. 195-218.
  • UN Affairs. “US President Trump rejects globalism in speech to UN General Assembly’s annual debate.” UN Affairs, United Nations, 25 September 2018, https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/09/1020472. Retrieved 28 September 2018.