;

It’s official – Singapore now has a law designed to combat the threat of Foreign Interference in Domestic Affairs. The Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill or “FICA” was passed by the ruling party’s supermajority in Parliament after a 10-hour debate.

The result in Parliament was never in any doubt. Whatever points were made, were simply swatted aside and Singapore’s Magically Unconflicted Law Writer and Enforcer, Mr K Shanmugam had a field day presenting himself as a defender of our liberty from the perils of foreign influence in our domestic affairs. I guess you could say that Mr Shanmugam had every reason to celebrate in as much as he’s managed to grab more power in his hands.

One of the most interesting points in this entire saga was why it was necessary to introduce Bill to protect us from foreign influences now. Around a month ago, our newly anointed protector against foreign influences was playing the role of champion of staying open to foreigners. Mr Shanmugam was the man who challenged Nominated Member of Parliament Leong Mun Wai to a debate on Ceca (our free trade agreement with India, which has been the source of unhappiness among many Singaporeans) and it was he who framed the debate on Ceca as “Race Baiting” as was explained by the following report from Channel News Asia:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/shanmugam-leong-mun-wai-debate-parliament-motion-singapore-foreign-talent-policy-2176281

Perhaps I’m a little slow (since I earn way below S$500,000 a year) but it seems that Mr Shanmugam is flip-flopping. Up to a month ago, Mr Shanmugam was a champion of free trade and open borders. Although he’s never held a “trade portfolio,” Mr Shanmugam has taken it upon himself to talk about a “borderless” Asia and Singapore’s role in it. He’s touted Singapore’s legal infrastructure as a “selling” point for anyone wanting to set up shop in the region as can be seen in this 2015 speech that he gave:

See also  Pritam Singh Supports Online Criminal Harms Bill, Questions POFMA & FICA

https://www.mlaw.gov.sg/news/speeches/speech-by-minister-shanmugam-iba-4th-ap-regional-forum-conference

A month ago, Mr Shanmugam was arguing that being open to foreigners was essential not just for our prosperity but our very survival.

Suddenly, the man who was arguing that we needed to be open to foreigners is now telling us that foreign interference is one of the most serious threats that we face:

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/foreign-interference-one-of-the-most-serious-threats-faced-by-spore-law

What makes our law enforcer believe that “foreign interference” is one of the most serious threats that we face at a time when the only thing people are focused on is the spread of a deadly virus that looks set to fill up every available hospital bed?

Mr Shanmugam will undoubtedly argue that being open to foreigners and foreign interference and influences are undoubtedly two separate issues. While it may seem that way on the surface, this argument would illustrate a failure in the understanding of human interactions. It assumes that Singaporeans are merely passive recipients of influences from elsewhere just as Mr. Shanmugam and his colleagues might argue that this is how it should be – the foreigners come here, park their capital here and never get involved in “local life”.

Unfortunately, that’s not how human nature works. Foreigners who come here will be mix with the local population through that most beloved of bureaucratic institutions – the office. Our locals are likely to be influenced by the foreigners they interact with just as the foreigners are likely to be influenced by the locals they interact with. One of the best examples I can think of is the French restaurant owner I used to work for who spoke fluent Singlish, swore in perfect Hokkien and discussed the joys of durian with a French accent.

See also  Shanmugam: Gov’t to take legal action against those who spread falsehoods about migrant workers’ dorms

Then, you also work on a policy of trying to get a portion of those foreigners to stay here long enough to take up permanent residence or even citizenship. That by definition is a form of foreign interference as the “new citizens” by definition are going to bring their thoughts and influences developed from elsewhere into our political system.

Can one be “pro” being open to people from elsewhere and yet claim that you are also against influences from outside coming into the political system. 

Then, we need to look back at what Mr Shanmugam has done as Minister of Law, which was to sell Singapore’s legal infrastructure to people from elsewhere as a reason for them to park their money in Singapore.

So, here’s the question – were there any laws designed with the foreigner in mind rather than the local in mind? Did our magically unconflicted writer and enforcer of laws create laws  that would make Singapore attractive to foreigners and make them feel welcome here? This is not suggesting that there was any wrongdoing on the part of the Minister but it’s also hard to argue that there was “no” foreign interference.

See also  Shanmugam sounds reasonable but his government’s record is not encouraging

Incidentally, one should note that in his arguments as to why we need FICA, he used Kirstin Han and her work at New Naratif, as an example of why we needed protection against foreign interference. Ms Han is born and bred in Singapore. She holds a Singapore passport and whilst she may have met former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mohammad Mahathir and George Soros, she has NEVER once suggested that Singapore should be taken over by another nation or that any of our political leaders should have harm done to them. Yet, somehow, she received the dubious honour of being labelled by as an agent of foreign interference.

While Ms Han has received plenty of attention from Mr Shanmugam, he has not mentioned any “interference” or “influence seeking”  by the ruling party’s favourite awning follower who calls himself “The Critical Spectator”. This commentator, a Polish blogger,  has argued that the dormitory conditions of our foreign workers are good for Singapore –  despite the fact that it has been established that the crowded state of the dormitories had been a factor  in 2020’s explosion in  Covid-19 infections. Isn’t this akin to commending bio-terrorism to promote a disease-causing institution as beneficial to the population and isn’t it a worry that the man who is in charge of writing and enforcing laws sees a Singaporean promoting greater democracy and accountability as more of a threat than a foreigner who is a cheerleader for bio-terrorism?

A version of this article first appeared at beautifullyincoherent.blogspot.com