By Professor Tommy Koh: Asean and China: Past, present, future

Posted on

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) was established in 1949. The Association of South-east Asian Nations (Asean) was created in 1967. From 1967 to 1978, relations between the PRC and Asean were difficult. During that period, the PRC sought to export communism to the Asean member states by supporting local communist insurgencies. Beijing also appealed to the ethnic Chinese population in Asean to support the PRC. Two Chinese leaders, Deng Xiaoping and Zhu Rongji, brought about a fundamental change to the relationship, moving it from night to day and from sour to sweet.

Changes under Deng and Zhu

In 1978, Mr Deng visited three countries in Asean – Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. As a result of what he heard from the leaders of these countries, he stopped supporting the communist insurgencies, stopped the hostile radio broadcasts and stopped appealing to the ethnic Chinese population. For 30 years, from 1978 to 2008, China pursued a policy of good neighbourliness towards Asean. Gradually, trust replaced mistrust and the relationship steadily improved. Mr Zhu Rongji was the premier of China from 1998 to 2003. He was a brilliant man and a strategic thinker. He wanted to bring Asean and China closer to each other by linking their economies. In 2000, he offered Asean a free trade agreement. Asean accepted his offer in 2001. He also offered Asean an early harvest, meaning that even before the conclusion of the FTA, some Asean exports were given tariff-free access to the Chinese market. The conclusion of the Asean-China Free Trade Agreement (ACFTA) has transformed the character of the relationship between Asean and China.

Nature of current relationship

China became a dialogue partner of Asean in 1991. In 2003, the relationship was elevated to a “strategic partnership”. China appointed an Ambassador to Asean in 2012. The current relationship is both broad and deep. The two sides enjoy many points of convergence and a few points of divergence. I will proceed to review the different sectors in which the two sides cooperate to their mutual benefit.

Economic Cooperation

The economic relationship is very impressive. China is Asean’s top trading partner and Asean is China’s No. 3 trading partner. Asean is China’s top foreign investor and China is Asean’s No. 3 foreign investor. The two-way trade in 2017 was US$441.6 billion (S$607 billion). China accounts for 17 per cent of Asean’s external trade. To enhance economic cooperation, China has hosted, since 2004, an annual China-Asean Expo in Nanning. In 2015, Premier Li Keqiang and the 10 Asean Leaders signed a protocol to upgrade the Asean-China FTA. Asean, China and five other dialogue partners are currently seeking to conclude the 16-party Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Cooperation has expanded into many new areas. This year, we successfully concluded the Asean-China Year of Innovation. There is demand in Asean for innovative technology, and China has many high-tech solutions.

Political and Security Cooperation

Asean and China share the objective to promote peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific. They seek to build a regional order which is transparent, inclusive and rules-based. China’s leaders have consistently expressed support for the central role which Asean plays in the regional architecture. Asean and China cooperate in various forums, including, Asean + China, the Asean Regional Forum, Asean + Three (China, Japan and Republic of Korea), the East Asia Summit and the Asean Defence Ministers Meeting Plus. In October last year, Asean and China carried out, for the first time, a joint maritime exercise. The exercise took place in Singapore and in China. The exercise in Zhangjiang, China, involved all 11 countries (the Asean 10 and China) as well as more than 1,000 military personnel. It was successful and a positive contribution to confidence building.

People-to-People Cooperation

The good relations between Asean and China must rest on three pillars: government, business and the people. Tourism is booming between Asean and China. In 2016, close to 20 million Chinese visited the Asean countries and over 10 million Asean nationals visited China. A joint statement between Asean and China on tourism cooperation was adopted by Asean and China last year. Air links between the two sides are growing. At present, there are nearly 50,000 flights per week between 37 cities in Asean and 52 cities in China. The exchange of students is also expanding. It is estimated that there are about 200,000 students from the two sides studying at each other’s universities.

AIIB and BRI

Asean has been a dependable friend of China. Let me cite two examples. In 2013, China proposed setting up the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). It was intended to be a multilateral development bank, focusing on the building of infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region. The AIIB has 87 members and began operation in 2015. All 10 Asean members are founding members of AIIB. In late 2013, President Xi Jinping launched a new initiative called the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. The initiative is now known as the Belt and Road Initiative or BRI. The concept is to rebuild China’s ancient connections to the West, by land and sea. The initiative has been described as one of the largest infrastructure and investment projects in history, involving 68 countries, including 65 per cent of the world’s population and 40 per cent of the global GDP. Asean has supported the BRI from the onset. However, Asean would like the BRI to complement and not supplant the Master Plan on Asean Connectivity 2025.

South China Sea

Asean and China have both convergent and divergent views on the South China Sea. Asean holds the view that the South China Sea is a vital sea line of communications of the world. It is, therefore, a global commons and cannot be appropriated by any state. Asean is also of the view that the South China Sea is governed by international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. All the claimant states and the user states should act strictly in accordance with the law. Asean holds the position that disputes relating to the South China Sea must be settled peacefully, in accordance with international law. If negotiations fail, the parties to a dispute should be willing to refer their cases to a binding dispute settlement procedure, such as, conciliation, arbitration or adjudication. China is a claimant state. Four of the Asean members – Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam – are also claimant states. Asean is not a claimant state and does not take sides regarding the merit of the various claims. But it is a stakeholder. It has a stake in peace in the region, in the freedom of navigation and overflight and in upholding the rule of law. In 2002, China signed the Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. In 2011, the two sides adopted the guidelines for the implementation of the declaration. In 2016, the foreign ministers of the two sides adopted a joint statement to ensure the full and effective implementation of the declaration. In 2017, Asean and China announced the commencement of the negotiations of the Code of Conduct in South China Sea. This year, the two sides arrived at a single negotiating text, which would be the basis of further negotiations. Given goodwill on all sides, it should be possible to make further progress towards resolving outstanding issues of its geographical scope, whether the code will be legally binding and whether to include dispute settlement.

Evolving ties

The relationship between Asean and China has gone through three historical phases. It has transitioned from hostility to amity to uncertainty. Why uncertain? Because China is now a rich and powerful country. The question is whether such a China will continue to pursue a policy of good neighbourliness towards Asean and its member states. I am optimistic. I believe that it is in China’s national interest to have good relations with Asean and with its neighbours in South-east Asia.

Tribute to Prof. John Richardson

Posted on
Click to enlarge

Tembusu College expresses its heartfelt sympathy to our friends at Cinnamon College for the loss of their founding Master, Prof. John Richardson. John was a friend and close colleague of mine, first during the four years we worked together in the FASS Dean’s Office, and later when we became the first Masters of, respectively Cinnamon and Tembusu colleges. Tembusu actually began in an office in the “Old Administrative Building” (now demolished) which then housed the USP Programme, and which John graciously loaned to us during our planning year of 2010. In 2011, John and I walked together across the bridge over the AYE, along with students from our two colleges, to joyously open UTown.

John was a passionate advocate for his programme, and his college. The two colleges were friendly rivals in those first few years, but John and I always respected one another, and cooperated to keep things steady. Once, when a dispute between student leaders at the two colleges threatened to get out of hand, John and I arranged to very publically have dinner together in the middle of the our shared dining hall to cool tensions and demonstrate our friendship. I like to think the current good and easy relations between Cinnamon and Tembusu were forged through such mutual efforts in our early years.

John was tough-minded, but also self-deprecating, reflective, and possessed of a sense of humor. He did his best at every task, and for that reason was given many responsibilities over the course of his career at NUS. It is no exaggeration to say that John gave his life to this university. His passing was a shock, and came too early. But I’m truly glad to have known and worked with John Richardson, and will cherish his memory.

Gregory Clancey, Master, Tembusu College

By Professor Tommy Koh: Deng Xiaoping and Singapore

Posted on

Deng Xiaoping had visited Singapore twice in his lifetime. In 1920, Deng was 16 years’ old. He was one of the 84 students from Sichuan province going to France to participate in a work cum study programme. His ship, Lebon, stopped over in Singapore for two days. Deng was shocked by the way the British rulers had treated the local people.

The second time he visited Singapore was 58 years later. He was the paramount leader of China but wore the modest titles of vice-chairman of the Communist Party, vice-Premier and vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission.

In November 1978, Deng visited Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. The purpose of his trip was to mobilise the support of the three countries to join China in opposing the Soviet Union and Vietnam.

Deng was in Singapore from Nov 12-14. He and the Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, had not met before. When Lee visited China in 1976, Deng had been dismissed from power by Mao for the second time and was not in Beijing. Lee had received Deng graciously at the airport and had escorted him to the Istana Villa, the State Guest House.

On Nov 12, the two delegations met. Lee invited Deng to speak first. He spoke for 2½ hours outlining China’s position. He warned that, with the support of the Soviet Union, Vietnam was preparing to invade Cambodia.

The next day , Lee responded to Deng’s presentation. He spoke for only half an hour. Lee said that China wanted the ASEAN countries to unite with China to isolate the “Russian bear” but our neighbours wanted us to unite with them to isolate the “Chinese dragon”. Why did they fear China? They feared China because China supported the communist insurgencies in Southeast Asia, appealed to the ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia to help the motherland and made radio broadcasts from Southern China denouncing the regional governments. Two years later, Deng stopped all such practices.

THE DENG-LEE FRIENDSHIP

Although Deng and Lee met for only three days in 1978, the meeting led to a special relationship between the two great men. They admired and respected each other. They established a relationship of mutual trust.

Deng did not visit Singapore again after 1978. However, Lee met Deng again, in China, in 1980, 1985 and 1988.

Deng trusted Lee. He knew that Lee visited Taiwan frequently and was close to President Chiang Ching-Kuo and to the leaders of the United States. On several occasions, Deng had requested Lee to pass on messages to Chiang and to American leaders.

Lee decided that it was in Singapore’s national interest to support Deng’s policy of reform and opening the Chinese economy to the world. As a result, the Singapore government and private sector have been helping China for the past 40 years. Lee also encouraged the Americans and other world leaders to engage China and help China integrate into the global community.

China remembers both its friends and enemies. Lee Kuan Yew was regarded as a friend of China. At the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympic Games, Lee, George H W Bush, Henry Kissinger and a few others were invited to the opening ceremony as “old friends of China”. Because of Lee, Singapore enjoys goodwill and respect in China.

TWO ECONOMIC MIRACLES

In the past 40 years, both China and Singapore have enjoyed an economic miracle. In 1978, China’s per capita income was US$229. Today, it is US$8,836. In 1978, China accounted for only 2 per cent of the world economy. Today, it accounts for 15 per ent and is the second largest economy in the world, after the US.

In 1978, Singapore’s per capita income was US$2,187. Today it is US$55,235. Since 20103, Singapore has become China’s largest foreign investor.

It would not be wrong to say that the two countries have prospered together in the past 40 years. The close relationship between China and Singapore is enjoyed by the two governments and the two peoples. The relationship has become multi-faceted and multi-layered.

BUILDING ON DENG-LEE LEGACY

China and Singapore have sought to build on the legacy bequeathed by Deng and Lee in many ways. Let us review some of the more important ways in which the two countries have cooperated for their mutual benefit.

China is the only country with which the Singapore government has entered into major development projects. The first project was the Suzhou Industrial Park. It had two objectives. First, to revitalise this ancient and beautiful city. Second, to build a new city next to the old city. The new city would be a model city, providing jobs, social amenities and public services in a clean and green environment. The objective of the project was not to make money but to transfer Singapore’s software to China.

The success of the Suzhou Industrial Park encouraged the two governments to embark on the second project. The second project was to turn a piece of waste and polluted land in Tianjin into an environmentally sustainable city. Today, the Tianjin Eco-City is a vibrant city of more than 80,000 residents. The project has just celebrated its tenth anniversary. Like Suzhou, Tianjin is a path-breaking project.

The third iconic project is the Chongqing Connectivity Initiative (CCI). China asked Singapore to help develop the Western Region of China. Rather than developing another infrastructure project, we proposed to focus on connectivity. It is still early days, but the initiative has got off to a good start. In particular, the Southern Transport Corridor under the CCI has established a more efficient and direct cargo route between Western China and Singapore, thereby establishing a substantive link between the land-based Silk Road’s Economic Belt to the Maritime Silk Road.

SHARING SINGAPORE’S SECRETS

In 1992, Deng was facing considerable opposition to his policies from the conservative leaders of the party. He decided to rally support in the most unusual way. On the pretext of taking a family vacation, he and his family travelled by train to Wuhan, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai and Shanghai. Everywhere he went, he was met with great enthusiasm. It was clear to the party leaders in Beijing that Deng’s policies enjoyed broad support. Subsequently, Deng scored a major victory at the politburo meeting in Beijing in March 1992. The conservatives were defeated.

When in Shenzhen, Deng said that China should learn from Singapore because, “society in Singapore is quite orderly. They managed things very strictly. We ought to use their experience as a model. And we ought to manage things even better than they do.”

Following Deng’s exhortation, hundreds of delegations from China have visited Singapore. They wanted to study every aspect of Singapore’s development. Singapore has responded generously. We have since welcomed tens of thousands of Chinese mayors and other officials to attend customised courses in Singapore.

IS SINGAPORE STILL RELEVANT

I co-chair the annual dialogue with China called the China-Singapore Forum. At one of our meetings, a Chinese scholar asked two provocative questions. First, since China has made so much progress, is Singapore still relevant to China? Second, are there areas in which China can still learn from Singapore?

In my reply, I said that the nature of our relationship has changed. China has made so much progress that, in some areas, China is ahead of Singapore. I said that the new spirit of our relationship is mutual learning or what the Chinese call, “huxiang jiejian” . However, some of Singapore’s experiences may still be relevant to China. I would suggest the following: combating corruption, maintaining social harmony among various segments of society, the rule of law, good governance, food safety, clean environment and sustainable development.

I am an admirer of both Deng Xiaoping and Lee Kuan Yew. I believe that they had changed the course of history of their two countries. In Nov 2010, when I was the Chairman of the National Heritage Board, I invited Mr Lee and the then Vice-President of China, Mr Xi Jinping, to unveil a marker and bust of Deng, under the programme, Visitors To Our Shores.

The marker and bust are located by the side of the Singapore River, in front of the Asian Civilizations Museum. Chinese Vice-Premier Han Zheng visited the site recently to offer flowers as a mark of respect. On Nov 12., on the occasion of the 40th Anniversary of Deng’s historic visit to Singapore, I will go to the marker to pay my respect to this great Chinese leader and friend of Singapore.

By Professor Tommy Koh: ASEAN and New Zealand

Posted on
In Praise of New Zealand

New Zealand is a small country.  It has a population of only 4.6 million.  It is, however, a country which punches above its weight in many respects.  It has been ranked by Transparency International as the least corrupt country in the world. It is also ranked first by the World Bank for ease of doing business.

It is a highly creative society.  Sir Peter Jackson has won several Oscars for his directing work on the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit.  Other famous directors include Jane Campion and Taika Waititi.  Authors Keri Hulme and Eleanor Catton are both Man Booker prize winners.  Singer song-writer Lorde hails from Auckland.

New Zealand also excels in as a world-class sporting nation.  The national rugby team, the All Blacks, has won the World Cup three times.  Its Haka chant, performed before each match, strikes fear in the hearts of the opponents.  At the 2016 Summer Olympics, New Zealand won 18 medals (including 4 gold).  That would have placed it 3rd on the medal table on a per capita basis.  By comparison, the 10 ASEAN countries won 15 medals, with 3 gold.

I can also say from my experience at the United Nations, that New Zealand has a world class foreign service.  The New Zealand diplomats I worked with were intelligent, knowledgeable and honourable.

ASEAN-NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand made an early commitment to ASEAN, becoming a Dialogue Partner in 1975, second only to Australia.  Over the past 43 years, the relationship has matured, growing in breadth and in depth.  The relationship is trouble-free, with leaders on both sides enjoying a high comfort level.  Let me briefly review the different areas in which they cooperate.

Economic Cooperation

In 2009, ASEAN’s first free trade agreement outside of Asia was concluded with Australia and New Zealand.  The ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement entered into force in 2010.

Two-way trade between ASEAN and New Zealand reached US$12 billion in 2017.  New Zealand’s cumulative investment in ASEAN was NZ$4.6 billion in 2017.  ASEAN’s investment in New Zealand, in the same year, amounted to NZ$8.1 billion.

New Zealand is participating actively and constructively in the ongoing negotiations on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).  The RCEP involves the 10 ASEAN countries and 6 others (Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea).  When concluded, it will be the world’s largest free trade area.  The collective ambition is to conclude substantively the negotiations before the end of this year.

Political and Security Cooperation

In the political-security sector, New Zealand cooperates with ASEAN, bilaterally, as well as through the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Regional Forum and the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus).

Areas of cooperation include counter-terrorism, transnational crime, preventive diplomacy, cyber security and maritime security.

New Zealand shares ASEAN’s objective in promoting peace and security in the region, through dialogue and cooperation.  New Zealand is a strong supporter of ASEAN’s vision to build a rules-based, inclusive regional order, with ASEAN at the centre.

New Zealand has appointed a dedicated ambassador to ASEAN, based in Jakarta.

Social, Cultural and Development Cooperation

New Zealand has excellent universities.  Education and training are very important areas in which New Zealand has helped and continues to help ASEAN.

New Zealand’s development assistance programme to ASEAN is its second largest in the world, after the Pacific.  This year, the government announced a 12% increase in funding, totalling NZ$224 million over three years.

This funding includes more than 500 scholarships each year to ASEAN students and officials, including 225 places for Master’s and Doctoral degrees at NZ universities.  There are scholarships focused on advanced English language training for officials from Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam.  Short-term training scholarships for officials cover public sector leadership, agriculture, renewable energy and disaster risk management.

New Zealand is no stranger to major earthquakes.  It therefore has experience in dealing with natural disasters and risk management.  That expertise is shared with the ASEAN Committee on Disaster Management and the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management.

In the field of Human Rights, New Zealand has focused its efforts on helping the ASEAN Committee on Women and Children.

New Zealand is helping ASEAN to achieve the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.  It has allocated the sum of $200 million for this purpose for the period, 2016 to 2018.

A particular priority is supporting ASEAN’s efforts to narrow the gap between the newer and older members.  Singapore had taken the lead to initiate a programme to assist Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam to catch up with the rest.  The programme is called the ASEAN Integration Initiative.  New Zealand provides NZ$100 million to assist those four countries in capacity building.

As a champion of renewable energy, New Zealand provides technical assistance to Indonesia, Laos and Myanmar in this sector.

New Zealand has a world class agricultural industry.  It is famous for its high quality and safe food.  It is assisting rural communities in several ASEAN states in animal husbandry and food safety.  There are specific support programme involving the 5 Mekong riverine countries in horticulture and safe food.

Focusing on the Young

New Zealand has launched two programmes targeted at the young leaders of ASEAN.  One brings promising young ASEAN diplomats to visit and learn about New Zealand’s governance and other systems.  The other involves young business leaders from ASEAN visiting New Zealand and reciprocating with young Kiwi entrepreneurs visiting ASEAN states.

Conclusion

We live in a dangerous moment in the history of the world.  The liberal world order which we have enjoyed for the past 70 years is under assault.  Free trade, globalisation and multilateralism are being undermined.  The US and China appear to be heading towards a confrontation.

In such uncertain times, ASEAN needs reliable friends.  New Zealand is such a friend.  Its long history with ASEAN and willingness to work closely with ASEAN in practical ways demonstrates its commitment to our region.  Together, we will continue to support free trade and oppose protectionism.  We will defend open economies and regional economic integration and oppose economic autarchy.  We will defend multilateralism and multilateral institutions, such as, the WTO and oppose unilateralism.  We will defend the rule of law and oppose the rule that might is right.  We will work for a transparent, inclusive and rules-based regional order with ASEAN at the Centre.

Internship Opportunity with Future Cities Laboratory (FCL)

Posted on

Project Title: Understanding Walking Behaviours in Tropical Cities

FCL Project Team

1. Prof Christoph Hölscher, Panos Mavros
Cognition Perception and Behaviour in Urban Environments, Future Cities; Laboratory, Singapore ETH Centre

Chair of Cognitive Science, ETH Zurich

2. Prof John Zacharias, Wang Bin

School of Architecture, Peking University

Tembusu College Coordinator

1. Dr Margaret Tan

Fellow & Director of Programmes, Tembusu College, National University of Singapore

1. Project summary

This research project will investigate the environmental factors which influence pedestrian mobility patterns in tropical cities, taking Singapore as a case-study. The project aims to inform our understanding of walking habits of commuters in Singapore, the role of different urban design features in increasing pedestrian trips and encouraging active mobility, and has implications for the design of urban environments in Singapore as well as tropical cities at large.

The study will involve observing the walking behaviour of volunteer participants in different areas of Singapore, and evaluating how the design of the pedestrian environment, climate and other parameters influence people’s experience and motivation to walk.

2. Number of positions

The project is looking for up to ten (10) research assistants, with each intern working 2 weeks (10 working days) for 16 hours per week (5 days X 3.2 hours). Please note that the number of working hours per week may increase or decrease based on the total number of interns and their schedules.

3. Remuneration

Student interns will be paid an hourly remuneration of S$12.00, and will be reimbursed their transport cost for the field work.

4. Project Timeline

The project involves data collection for two consecutive weeks (10 days) any time between 16 Nov 2018 and 13 Jan 2019.

The final timeline will be decided based on consultation between the Coordinator and all student interns.

5. Requirements

Student interns are expected to work closely with the study coordinators to conduct a large-scale behavioural experiment study.

The research will involve on-site fieldwork in a major pedestrian precinct in Singapore for 3 hours per day (between 9AM – 8PM), repeated for 10 working days (two consecutive weeks).

Student interns will conduct an ‘intercept survey’, that is, asking people to voluntarily participate in a brief walking experiment and filling in surveys about their experience.

Prior to the beginning of the study, student interns will have to attend a mandatory half-day paid research seminar, where they will be briefed on the following:

1. Motivation and aims of the research

2. Training on the research methods and tools used for the data collection

Post internship, students will have to write a short report of their experience working with FCL on the project, including their learning journey. This report should be submitted to Dr Margaret at a time convenient for students, but before the end of the academic year.

6. Learning outcomes

Through their participation in this study as research assistants, students will gain valuable experience in the following:

Comprehension of how scientists conduct large-scale studies on walkability and human behaviour in cities;

Involvement in an interdisciplinary research drawing from Behavioural Geography, Psychology and Planning;

Understanding of spatial and environmental factors that influence pedestrian experience and movement patterns in cities, in the context of making cities more liveable and sustainable;

Insights on the importance of human behaviour and preferences in the design of different systems;

Data-collection methods through field-surveys with members of the public, and the gathering and coding of behavioural data using a mobile application (tablet computer);

Contributing to a novel research on how to improve walkability in Singapore and tropical cities, and through which students’ contributions will be acknowledged in the main report of this research study.

Interested students, please contact Dr Margaret Tan @ marge@nus.edu.sg by 5th November 2018.

Jeremy Fernando at the Bienal de la Imagen en Movimiento in Buenos Aires

Posted on
Click to enlarge

In November 2018 — at the invitation of Gabriela Golder, director of the Bienal de la Imagen en Movimiento, and Mariela Yeregui, founder and director of the Masters in Technology and Aesthetics of Electronic Arts programme at the Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero  — Jeremy Fernando will be presenting his works as part of the BIM (Biennial of Moving Image) in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

In his first piece — resisting art — he will attempt to respond to the question of the relationship between art and resistance, to the possibility of art as resistance — that is, it is an attempt to meditate on the possible relationship between resisting and art. In short, the possibility of art as an encounter.

His second piece — take a walk on the wild(e) side, which will take place at L’Alliance Française de Buenos Aires in conjuction with the UNTREF  — is an attempt to respond to the question of writing, is an endeavour to open the relationship between walking and thinking, movement and thought. It will be followed, the next day, by a walk through the San Telmo district, in which the question of the relationship between the body and thought will be foregrounded; where the materiality of words, of bodies — in writing — will be explored alongside participants whilst strolling through the city.

In both performance-talks, he will be showing works of, and from, Singaporean artists including Yanyun Chen, Sara Chong, SKLO, Margaret Tan, PANYK, Charles Lim, Ng Joon Kiat, Eugene Soh, and Ruben Pang, amongst others.

***

The Bienal de la Imagen en Movimiento is a singular activity: a combination between a film festival and a contemporary art exhibition. Alongside exhibitions and screenings in museums and cinemas, there is a wide offer of other activities such as workshops, conferences, seminars, and lectures with artists — all in the hopes of broadening the conversation. In short, the BIM is a meeting space for thought brought forth, and through, a multiplicity of media.

The BIM is a CONTINENTE project produced by the Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero (National University of Tres de Febrero) that takes place every two years in the city of Buenos Aires.

To read more about the BIM, please go to : http://bim.com.ar/#

By Professor Tommy Koh: Section 377A

Posted on

Singapore was part of the British Empire. It was once administered by the British from Calcutta (Kolkata). Many of our laws, including the Penal Code, were imported from India. The Indian Penal Code, in Section 377, criminalises “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.” Sodomy was considered a crime under Section 377.

Section 377A of the Singapore Penal Code makes it a crime for two consenting male adults to have sex with each other in private. It does not penalise sex between two consenting female adults. The first question is whether Section 377A should be repealed. The second question is whether 377A is consistent with our constitution.

The Scientific Evidence

Singaporeans are a rational people. We make our policies and laws based on facts, science and reason.

What is the scientific evidence on homosexuality? Is it a form of mental disorder which can be cured? Or is it a normal aspect of human sexuality?

In 1973, the World Health Organization (WHO) deleted homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders. This decision was endorsed by the General Assembly of WHO in 1990 when it agreed to delete homosexuality from their list of mental disorders. In WHO’s view, being LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) is not a disease.

Scientists do not know what determines a person’s sexual orientation, but they theorise that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal and environmental influences and do not view it as a choice. They favour biologically-based theories, which point to genetic factors.

Scientific research has shown that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation in human sexuality and is not in itself a source of negative psychological effects. They also believe that there is insufficient evidence to support psychological interventions to change sexual orientation.

Sodomy and the World

The United Nations has 196 member states. The majority, 124 states, do not criminalise sodomy. However, the minority of 72 states, including Singapore, do.

Which societies  belong to the majority? All the countries of Europe, North America and South America do not criminalise sodomy. It is of interest to point out that China, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Philippines and Thailand also belong to the majority. It is therefore not the case of a liberal West versus a conservative East.

Which countries make up the 72 which criminalise sodomy? They are the Arab countries, the Muslim-majority countries and, surprisingly, the former British colonies of Asia, Africa and the Caribbean.

Singapore is part of the minority mainly because we inherited from the British a penal code which criminalises sodomy. For a country which embraces science and technology, it is surprising that, on this one aspect, the law has not been updated in the light of the scientific evidence.

Sin and crime

The National Council of Churches of Singapore, the Catholic Archbishop, and the Islamic authorities have issued statements against the repeal of Section 337A. They regard homosexuality as a violation of their religious dogmas and therefore a sin.

My good friend, former attorney- general Professor Walter Woon, has pointed out that there is a fundamental difference a sin and a crime. He said that many regard adultery and fornication as sinful but they are not criminal behavior.

He concluded that sodomy may be a sin but it should not be made a crime. He is also unhappy with the compromise of retaining 377A and not enforcing it because it brings the law into disrepute.

There is an important point which I wish to make to the Christian and Islamic authorities. I would respectfully remind them that Singapore is a secular state. It is not a Christian country or a Muslim country. It is not the business of the state to enforce the dogmas of those religions. In Singapore, there is a separation between religion and the state. Church leaders and Islamic leaders should respect that separation.

Role of Courts

In most cases, the antiquated sodomy laws were repealed by the legislatures of the respective states or countries. However, in a few cases, the laws were declared unconstitutional by the courts.

In 1960, every State of the United States had a law criminalising sodomy. By 2003, only 14 states, including Texas, had such laws.

In 2003, the United States Supreme Court made a landmark decision in Lawrence versus Texas. The court held, by a majority of six to three,  that the Texas  law criminalising sodomy was unconstitutional. Speaking for the majority, Justice Kennedy said: “The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.”

The ruling in effect invalidated anti-sodomy law in the other 13 states as well. But today, 15 years later, most of these states have not repealed the anti-sodomy law. However, it is considered unenforceable as the Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional.

India

In September 2018, the Indian Supreme Court overturned its earlier decision of 2013, and ruled that Section 377 of the Indian Code was unconstitutional. This was the unanimous decision of a panel of five  judges.

Chief Justice Dipak Misra said, “criminalising homosexual sex is irrational, arbitrary and manifestly unconstitutional.”
Another judge, Indu Malhotra, said: “History owes an apology to the LGBT people for ostracising them.”

Singapore

In 2014, the issue of the constitutionality of Section 377A was considered by the Court of Appeal in the case of Lim Meng Suang versus Attorney-General. The court ruled that the law was not unconstitutional.
I believe that the court’s judgment was wrong. I hope that the Court of Appeal will overturn its 2014 decision if it is presented with an opportunity to do so.

I will conclude with the following four propositions.

First, the scientific evidence is that homosexuality is a normal and natural variation of human sexuality. It is not a mental disorder.
Second, Section 377A is an antiquated law, not supported by science, and should be repealed.
Third, Singapore is a secular state. It is not a Christian or Muslim country. The leaders of those religions should respect the separation of state and religion and refrain from pressuring the Government to criminalise conduct which they consider sinful.
Fourth, the Court of Appeal should overturn its 2014 decision and declare 377A to be unconstitutional.

Eileen Feng, on being Miss Singapore International 2018

Posted on
Click to enlarge

What started out as a fun way to kill time in summer became one of the most pivotal journeys I’ve embarked on: my on-a-whim decision to participate in this year’s edition of Miss Singapore Pageant International (our longest running local charity pageant that is the Singapore charter for international titles Miss International, Miss Supranational, and Miss Asia Pacific International, organised by the non-profit  Singapore Womens’ Association), with a close friend that I met in Tembusu, became (pardon the cliché) the journey of self-discovery I never knew I needed. Other than being afforded a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to represent Singapore on an international stage, competing and winning in a beauty pageant also made me question a lot of assumptions I had about my perceptions of beauty, my notion of purpose, and about myself.

I’m not going to extol beauty pageants, and it’s definitely not for everyone. What I do know is that pageantry isn’t big in Singapore, and for good reason. The way beauty pageants are organised perpetuates the idea that beauty and confidence should be reserved for those blessed with physical features that align with the conventional ideals of beauty, leaving little room for diversity and inclusion. Pageants are quickly being left behind in our pursuit of progressive and liberal values, but I believe they have the authority as platforms to celebrate the very values they are currently knocking-heads with. Ultimately, I do hope that my yearlong stint as a beauty queen would be a meaningful one not just for myself, and I do hope to take up the mantle in instigating relevant and meaningful conversations about my experience and what it can mean to others.

By Professor Tommy Koh: Asean and Canada

Posted on

I want to begin my essay by stating that I have a very positive attitude towards Canada. I served twice as Singapore’s high commissioner to Canada when I was based at the United Nations in New York. During those 13 years, I met many Canadian leaders, including Canada’s most famous and charismatic prime minister, Mr Pierre Trudeau, the father of the current Prime Minister.

Mr Trudeau and Mr Lee Kuan Yew were good friends and mutual admirers.

As a UN man, I admire the Canadian statesman, Mr Lester Pearson, who proposed the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) during the 1956 Suez Crisis. UNEF gave birth to the UN Peacekeeping Force. I also admire the contributions Canada has made to help the developing countries, through the Canadian International Development Agency (Cida) and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC).

My good friend, Mr Maurice Strong, was the founding president of Cida. Two of my other friends, Mr Ivan Head and Mr David Malone, were also presidents of IDRC. Canada provides annually C$5 billion (S$5.3 billion) of assistance to the developing world.

In short, Canada is a force for good in the world.

Canada became a dialogue partner of Asean in 1977. It has established a diplomatic presence in all 10 Asean member states and has a dedicated ambassador to the regional grouping. The relationship between Canada and Asean is substantive and multi-dimensional. Let us look more closely at the relationship.

ECONOMIC BRIDGE

Let us start with the economic links between Asean and Canada. Last year, the two-way trade between Asean and Canada was C$23.3 billion. Asean was Canada’s sixth-largest trading partner. Canada was Asean’s 15th-largest trading partner.

The two sides recognise that there is room to increase trade and investment between them. They also recognise that it is important for them to defend free trade at a time when it is under attack by protectionist forces. In 2011, they adopted the Canada-Asean Joint Declaration on Trade and Investment (JDTI).

In 2015, they adopted a five-year work plan to implement JDTI. The plan has four focal areas: small and medium enterprises, education, innovation and corporate social responsibility.

Asean has concluded many free trade agreements (FTAs) and comprehensive economic partnership agreements with its dialogue partners. Isn’t it time to negotiate one between Asean and Canada?

Last year, the two sides agreed to explore the benefits and feasibility of such an agreement. The Canada-Asean Business Council (CABC), based in Singapore, has estimated that an FTA could increase trade by C$11 billion by 2027.

The CABC is strongly in favour of such an agreement. The president of the CABC, Mr Wayne C. Farmer, has written that “Asean and Canada are two trade-dependent regions with complementary economies and deep people-to-people ties… There has never been a more important time for Asean and Canada to seize the moment… CABC urges Asean and Canada to accelerate their partnership at this crucial juncture”.

Since September last year, Canada has been engaging with its Asean partners in FTA exploratory discussions, towards a potential Asean-Canada FTA. Canada, along with Asean members Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei, is also a signatory to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

It is strategically important for Canada to enhance its economic links with South-east Asia at a time when the North American Free Trade Agreement is unstable and is being renegotiated.

EDUCATION BRIDGE

Canada has very good universities.

One of the most important contributions which Canada can make to Asean is to help educate and train our talented young people. There are currently 23,000 Asean students studying at Canadian universities. A generation ago, the Colombo Plan enabled many students from this region to study at Canadian universities. Most of them returned to their home countries and contributed significantly to nation-building.

I am therefore very pleased that, in 2017, Canada launched a new scholarship programme, for five years with C$10 million. The scholarships would enable Asean students to spend one academic year studying or researching in Canada. I hope this programme will be enhanced and made permanent.

I would urge Canada to expand the programme to enable Canadian scholars and students to teach, research, study or intern in Asean. Knowledge is a two-way street. We need young Asean citizens who are knowledgeable about Canada and young Canadians who are knowledgeable about Asean.

OTHER BRIDGES OF COOPERATION

Asean and Canada cooperate in many other areas. Canada supports Asean through concrete initiatives totalling over C$90 million in funding. For example, in the realm of security, Canada currently provides more than C$40 million in support of programmes that combat terrorism, human smuggling, and proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons. Canada also supports programmes on disaster risk management, and has increased humanitarian assistance to South-east Asia.

I referred earlier to the fact that, annually, Canada provides C$5 billion of official development assistance to the developing countries. Most Asean countries have become either middle-income or high-income countries. However, a few members of our family are still in the low-income category and need help. In the period 2000 to last year, Canada provided C$2.7 billion to these countries.

Asean and Canada share a common commitment to protecting the earth’s oceans, biological diversity and atmosphere. We support the Paris Agreement on climate change. We want to grow in harmony with nature. Canada has much to share with Asean in those areas.

Canada is helping Asean’s environmental agenda, through the Asean Institute of Forest Management, the Asean-Canada Forest Tree Seed Centre and the Asean Canada Fisheries Post Harvest Technology Project. Canada is also helping Asean’s firefighters with its expertise in fighting forest fires.

PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP

Canada is both an Atlantic and Pacific country. Canada, as a Pacific power, and Asean share many common values and a commitment to promote peace, stability and prosperity. Canada is seeking to reduce its dependence on the US market and to increase its linkages with other Pacific countries. It will find Asean a good and willing partner.

Asean is already the world’s seventh-largest economy and is projected to be the fourth largest by mid-century. Canada should participate actively in Asean’s growth story.

In Canada, Asean will find an advanced country with world-class universities and Canada companies with a comparative advantage in oil and gas, infrastructure, clean energy, clean technology and water management. I am confident that given political will on both sides, the Asean-Canada partnership will have a bright future.