Reproduced from NUS News Hub

By Salima Nadira

If Professor Tommy Koh were a genie in a bottle, calling upon him might not quite grant a person three wishes—but he might oblige with his signature three points. And as the winner of the Program on Negotiation’s 2014 Great Negotiator Award and the Ambassador-at-Large at Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, one could reasonably expect his points to be well-balanced and compelling.

At a dialogue session held at NUS’ Tembusu College on 20 January 2014, Prof Koh, the College’s Rector, spoke on his new book, The Tommy Koh Reader: Favourite Essays and Lectures. He responded mostly to questions from two Tembusu students, 2nd-year economics student Rachel Wong Jin Hui and 3rd-year political science student Vinod Ashvin Ravi, whilst College Master Associate Professor Gregory Clancey moderated the session. He also fielded questions from an audience of about 40 people.

Placed in the hot seat, Prof Koh responded to the questions with ease. He was candid and personable, tempering his frankness with humour. At times, he felt compelled to defend a point of view that he did not share, simply for the sake of providing a balanced viewpoint. Yet this never made him seem unclear of his own stance.   

On the topic of freedom of expression in Singapore, he acknowledged the virtually complete freedom offered by the Internet, but noted that Singapore would not want the total freedom enjoyed by some societies in the contemporary West. He said that for one, Singaporeans are “culturally sensitive to the need to respect each other’s faith”, and they also do not indulge in hate speech. In response to another question on the lack of a minimum wage in Singapore, he raised the examples of Denmark and Switzerland, both of which do not have a minimum wage; yet they are egalitarian societies, and their cleaners, gardeners, security guards and bus drivers earn much more than their counterparts in Singapore.

He said that the low wages in Singapore were due to Singapore’s employment policies, rather than the lack of a minimum wage per se. By importing many low-skilled and semi-skilled workers from the region, we have kept the wages low in many sectors of our economy. Though Prof Koh emphasised that he did not agree with the government’s view on the minimum wage, he said that the government recognised that we live in an increasingly unequal society, where people at the bottom third of our social pyramid have a very hard time living in dignity. Unlike the olive that former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew once said was his vision of Singapore’s society, he noted that the society currently looks more like a pear, with a very large number of people in the bottom half.

His own stance on the matter, though, was this: “Every Singaporean worker, no matter what his or her job, has a right to earn a living wage, so as to be able to live in dignity and material sufficiency.” He noted that Singapore had decided not to join the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) group of countries, and did not wish to follow the OECD practice of recognising households which earn below the median income of households as poor. He acknowledged that the local government heavily subsidised education, housing, healthcare and transport, which benefit the majority of Singaporeans. “The government is allergic to the term minimum wage … which is fine, we should respect people’s allergies,” he quipped. “As long as we get the job done,” he added – that is, help low-income workers earn a living wage.

Assoc Prof Clancey (2nd from right) moderating the dialogue session (Photo: Gerald Paul Tan)

Drawing from his wealth of experience negotiating with various trade partners and government officials, Prof Koh chose one lesson to share: Negotiation is easiest when there is trust between the parties. The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiation with the US took two years, and as the leader of the Singapore team, he had emphasised to his colleagues the need to create goodwill, as well as to understand the American way of thinking, their worldview, and how their government works. Personality was also a large factor, he said, citing two examples dealing with the Malaysian government where one Malaysian counterpart was friendly and the other hostile.

He strongly encouraged young people to stay in Singapore. Responding to the first question posed to him by Ms Wong—regarding how globally-mobile Singaporeans can maintain their rootedness in Singapore—he noted that Singapore’s challenges today are less economical and more political and sociological. For example, he raised the question of whether we can remain a united and harmonious society, given the growing inequality in Singapore. He praised young Singaporeans who travel overseas to study or work, but urged them to always come back to Singapore, assuring them that Singapore does have a bright future, and encouraging them to be optimistic that Singapore will always remain competitive and prosperous, as long as it continually reinvents itself. Even during the book signing session at the end of the event, he was encouraging young people to come back to Singapore. As for the economy, however, he mentioned that part of “the ASEAN dream” was for all 10 countries of Southeast Asia to become one economy, like the European Union, by 31 December 2015 – a dream which he says is very much within reach.

It was fitting that as a negotiator himself, Prof Koh wrapped up the session with a tribute to Nelson Mandela, at the request of Mr Ravi. He recalled the question he posed to Nelson Mandela at the end of his Singapore lecture in 1997, namely why he chose forgiveness after 27 years of imprisonment. President Mandela had humbly replied that he had no choice. His forgiveness was a gesture to the white community that they had a place in post-apartheid South Africa. He cited an incident from the recent movie Invictus, which showed Nelson Mandela supporting the mostly-white rugby team as a politically brilliant move to show the whites they could trust him. His only lament was that Nelson Mandela only served one term as president – too brief a period for someone who was, in Prof Koh’s words, “a miracle”.

Prof Koh is usually found playing the role of negotiator, moderator, or director, but while he is comfortable presiding over large conferences and leading sizeable delegations, he becomes less enthusiastic when the spotlight is turned on him. In fact, he had to be persuaded by his publisher to allow his articles to be published in the anthology that is now on sale. Yet his bashfulness was outshone by his enthusiasm and conviction reflected in the responses he gave at the dialogue session, which is also strongly evident in the essays in his book.

Applications to Tembusu College for Semester 1 of the Academic Year 2014/15 will be received from the second half of February. More information on the admissions process is available from the Admissions Page.

This essay is reproduced from the Centre for International Law of the National University of Singapore.

By Professor Tommy Koh

Introduction

               Speaking at the inaugural Straits Times Global Outlook, in November 2012, I made the following predictions for 2013:

·               The US and China will live at peace with each other

·               Chinaand Japan will not escalate their dispute over Senkaku/Diaoyu into a full-scale conflict

·               The Eurozone will begin to recover and the European integration project will not be derailed

·               ASEAN will recover from its setback in 2012 and regain its unity and maintain its centrality in regional institutions.

Sino-American Relations

What was the state of Sino-US relations in 2013?  I would describe it as stable, cooperative and competitive.  President Barack Obama and President Xi Jinping are aware of the weight of history and are determined to avoid a Sino-American war.

               The two leaders met for 3 days of talks at the Annenberg Estate in Sunnylands, California.  The purpose of the summit was for each side to have a better understanding of the core interests and strategic imperatives of the other.  The talks were also intended to reduce their mutual distrust and to increase mutual confidence.  The most important deliverable of the summit is that the two leaders agreed to build a new type of relationship between the two major powers.  I think what is “new” is that the relationship is not confrontational and not a zero sum game.  They agreed that their relationship is not adversarial and that conflict between them is not inevitable.

               However, the reality is that there is a huge deficit of trust between the US and China.  My friends in Beijing continue to believe that the strategic objective of the Obama Administration is to contain the rise of China.  They also believe that the tensions between China and Japan and between China and the Philippines are due to American machinations.

China and Japan

               While I am right that China and Japan have not escalated their dispute over Senkaku/Diaoyu into a full-scale conflict in 2013, the trend is negative. Relations between the two countries have deteriorated.  The two governments seemed determined to provoke each other and to see who will blink first.  This is a dangerous game which could accidently trigger a shooting incident, which might then escalate out of control.

               Since Japan’s Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) includes the disputed islands, China has promulgated its own ADIZ which also includes them.  By doing so, China is sending Tokyo the clear message that it is serious about contesting Japan’s sovereignty claim.  The only way for the competing sovereignty claims to be resolved is through arbitration or adjudication.  Since both China and Japan have nationals who are judges of the International Court of Justice, it would be an act of statesmanship if the two governments would agree to refer their dispute to that court.  In order to do so, Japan will have to acknowledge that there is a dispute and China will have to revise its policy that it will not submit a sovereignty dispute over territory to arbitration or adjudication.

               In this respect, China and Japan should emulate the example of the ASEAN countries.  Although no ASEAN national has ever served as a judge of the International Court of Justice, five of the ten ASEAN countries, namely, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have referred territorial disputes to that court.  In contrast, neither China nor Japan has ever done so. 

Recovery in the Eurozone

               During the Euro crisis, many pundits, especially those from England and America, predicted the collapse of the Euro.  They resurrected their old arguments that there is no economic logic for European Monetary Union and that you cannot have a common currency without a common fiscal policy. 

               The critics lack an understanding of European history.  After two devastating world wars, the leaders of Europe were determined to banish war from their continent.  They sought to achieve this objective by integrating their economies and pooling their sovereignty.  Step by step, they have moved towards this goal.  After achieving a single market, they decided to move towards a common currency.  There is both economic and political logic for monetary union.  The European integration project is ultimately a peace project.  For this reason, the European leaders are prepared to do whatever it takes to ensure the success of the Euro.  The European story is a story of overcoming one crisis after another.  With each crisis, Europe has emerged stronger and more unified.  This is also true of the recent crisis.  The crisis has brought about a new fiscal compact treaty, tighter regulation and supervision of the banking industry, etc.

               The good news is that the Eurozone has emerged from recession.  It is on the road to recovery.  No one today is talking about the breakup the Eurozone or the collapse of the Euro.  In 2014, the Eurozone should start to consolidate and is likely to register positive but moderate growth.

ASEAN United Again

               2012 was a very bad year for ASEAN.  For the first time in 45 years, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers were unable to agree on the text of their joint communiqué, at their annual meeting in July 2012.  The reason for the failure was due primarily to the decision by the ASEAN chair, Cambodia, to please China at the expense of ASEAN unity.

               The setback was a wake-up call for ASEAN.  It was awakened to the danger of ASEAN disunity in the face of a rising China and a more intense rivalry between China and the United States.  The lesson learned was that ASEAN must remain united, independent and neutral.  Only such an ASEAN can play the role of convener and facilitator of the various regional institutions and processes.

               We were right in predicting that, in 2013, under the able and astute chairmanship of Brunei, ASEAN will recover its unity and credibility.  Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah, Foreign Minister, Prince Mohamed Bolkiah and Second Foreign Minister, Lim Jock Seng, should be complimented for their outstanding chairmanship of ASEAN in 2013.  Next year, Myanmar will occupy the chair.  I am confident that it too will rise to the occasion and maintain the family’s unity and focus on the important task of completing ASEAN’s transition from association to community by the deadline of 2015.

A Preview of 2014

What can we expect of the new year?

Economically 2014 will be a better year than 2013.  The US recovery is picking up steam.  The Eurozone crisis is over and Europe is on the road to recovery.  Asia will continue to be buoyant.  World trade and growth will be boosted by the successful conclusion of WTO’s Doha Round and APEC’s TPP.

Politically, the picture is generally positive.  ASEAN is likely remain united.  Relations between the US and China are likely to remain stable.  Sino-India relations are trending in an optimistic direction.  The only potential flashpoint is the increasily hostile relationship between China and Japan.  It makes no sense for these two neighbours, whose economies are complementary and interdependent, to view each other as enemies.  It is time for them to leave their historical baggages behind them and to join ASEAN and the rest of the region in forging a new vision of a united, peaceful and prosperous future for Asia.

The timetable for Tembusu College modules for next semester (Semester 2) is now available from:

https://tembusu.nus.edu.sg/education/docs/timetable_sem2_2013.pdf

Note that this year there are two different Module Preference Exercise (MPE) dates: one for Ideas & Exposition modules and another for Seminar modules:

Lotus Culture (www.lotusculture.com) is holding a sale of its ONE Edition products on 7 & 8 Dec.  These beautiful products are sewn by survivors of human trafficking in Cambodia who are employees of a Social Enterprise in Phnom Penh developed and run by Lotus Culture.  ALL proceeds go to the social enterprise whose mission is to rebuild the lives of these 6 girls.   

Please bring your friends. BUY CHRISTMAS PRESENTS, SUPPORT A SOCIAL CAUSE.

Venue : 108 Cairnhill Road

Date : 7 & 8 Dec (sat & sun)
Time : 10 am to 5 :30 pm

We accept cheque and cash only.

Nearest MRT is Newton.  

Speech by Prof. Tommy Koh

Mr Chairman, colleagues, friends, ladies and gentlemen,

                   I would like to begin by thanking my good friend, Mr Ong Yew Huat, for his kind introduction.  I would also like to thank Mrs Rosa Daniel, the CEO of NHB, for inviting me to deliver this lecture.

My life has been greatly enriched by the many opportunities which the Singapore Government has given me to work in the domain of art, culture and heritage.  I would like to use this opportunity to thank the Ministers of MITA and MICA, namely, Mr George Yeo, Mr Lee Yock Suan, Mr David Lim, Dr Lee Boon Yang and Mr Lui Tuck Yew, for the confidence they had in me.

NAC:  A Happy Period of My Life

 In 1991, I was asked by Mr George Yeo to be the founding Chairman of the National Arts Council (NAC).  I look back on the five years at NAC as a happy period of my life.  As a result of my monthly tea parties, I got to know many of our artists and to appreciate their struggles and successes.  I made every effort to attend their exhibitions and performances.  Several have become close personal friends.  I am very pleased that my good friend, Professor Chan Heng Chee is the new Chairman and another old friend, Kathy Lai, is the new CEO of NAC.  Under their able leadership, I am confident that NAC will have a bright future.

Censorship Review Committee

I cannot use the word, “happy”, to describe the challenging experience of chairing the Censorship Review Committee, in 1991 and 1992.  It was, however, a very satisfying experience as it gave my colleagues and me an opportunity to persuade the Goh Chok Tong government to gradually liberalise our censorship policies and rules and to devolve the power of decision-making from the bureaucracy to the people.  It also taught me the important lesson that, in Singapore, we have to manage with sensitivity, the tension between artistic freedom, on the one hand and, on the other, the importance of maintaining our racial and religious harmony as well as the tension between the aspiration of our older citizens, to keep Singapore as a morally wholesome society and the aspiration of our younger citizens to embrace the contemporary world, in all its diversities and colours.

Empress Place Museum

In 1993, I was asked to take on another cultural assignment.  The building which houses the Asian Civilizations Museum today has had several previous incarnations.  In one incarnation, it housed the Empress Place Museum.  That museum was established to showcase a series of exhibitions on the artistic and cultural achievements of the different dynasties of China.  The chairman of the museum, who was a good friend, got into trouble with the law and was removed.  I was asked to take over and to clean up the mess.  Mr Leong Weng Kee helped me to do that.  The Museum was closed in 1995 after it had completed the planned series of exhibitions. In the foreword I wrote to the catalogue of the final exhibition, I paid a tribute to my predecessor.  I presented a copy of the catalogue to him when I went to visit  him in Changi Prison.   The big lesson I learned from that episode is the importance of good governance.

Building the Esplanade

During my tenure as Chairman of NAC, the government decided to build the centre for performing arts envisaged by the Ong Teng Cheong report.  I was a Member of the Steering Committee which was established to turn that vision into reality.  A company was incorporated, under the umbrella of NAC, to drive the project.  I was therefore intimately involved in the visioning, planning, design and building of the Esplanade.  I also served subsequently as a Director of the Esplanade for seven years.  My reflection is that building the Esplanade is one of the best investments we have ever made.  It has transformed Singapore’s cultural life so much that we simply cannot imagine Singapore without the Esplanade.  MCCY’s predecessor, MITA, had asked me to be the “bad guy” to announce that the Esplanade would be built in two phases.  The concert hall and theatre would be built in phase one and the two smaller venues would be built in phase two.  Although I was only the messenger, the arts community accused me of having betrayed them because they were more interested in the two smaller venues than the two big ones.  I think they were not sure whether there would be a phase two.  I hope that MCCY will announce, in the not too distant future, that phase two will be implemented.  This will help to restore my credibility with our arts community. 

The Esplanade is celebrating its tenth anniversary.  It is therefore a good moment to think about its future.  I should add that in the past decade, Benson Phua and his team have made the Esplanade one of the best centres of performing arts in the world.  Going forward, I would like to see the Esplanade play a stronger role as strategic investor, entrepreneur and impresario.  I would like to see more world premieres of great Asian epics, such as, I La Galigo.  I will never forget the sweet torture of watching the Chinese opera, the Peony Pavilion, over several days.  I would like to see an ASEAN or Asian choral competition at the Esplanade.  I would like to be inspired by the orchestras of Palestine and Venezuela and other path-breaking orchestras.

Dreaming in Washington

I had spent more than twenty years of my life in the United States of America:  one year in Boston, thirteen in New York and six in Washington, DC, as well as shorter periods in Buffalo, New York and Palo Alto, California.  As a museum-loving person, I had enjoyed visiting the museums in those cities as well as other museums.  When I was in Washington DC, I had a wild dream that one day I would be put in charge of the museums of Singapore.  I promised myself that if that dream were ever to come true, I would try to make our museums as attractive, as loved, and as frequently visited as those in America.  I told myself that one day we will also have blockbusting exhibitions at our museums.

NHB:  From 0.5 million to 2.7 million visitors

My dream came true in 2002, when I was appointed as the Chairman of the National Heritage Board.  In that first year, we had only 500,000 visitors to our museums. I was determined to make a paradigm change.  I wanted 1 million visitors in 3 years, 2 million in 6 years and 3 million in 9 years.  Nine years later, in 2011, we had 2.7 million visitors.  I hope that Yew Huat will set an even more ambitious target.  We did put on a few blockbusting exhibitions.  The sight of visitors, queuing around the block, to see the exhibition from the Vatican Museums, at ACM, brought great joy to my heart.  I am happy to say that, today, our museums are capable of mounting world class exhibitions, in terms of their content, curatorship, design and presentation.  Our museums have gained international recognition and have been embraced by our citizens, residents and visitors.  This happy state of affairs was due to the collective efforts of many colleagues, such as, Michael Koh, Kenson Kwok, Kwok Kian Chow, Lee Chor Lin, Loh Heng Noi, Pitt Kuan Wah, Tres Prihadi, Jean Wee, Tan Boon Hui, Thangam Karthigasu, Gauri Parimoo Krishnan, Huism Tan, Heidi Tan, Soo Hui Wah and others. In his years as CEO, Michael Koh has transformed the museum scene in Singapore.  I should also mention the indispensable contributions of the Friends of the Museum (FOM) and other volunteers.  The FOM is one of our best and most valued non-governmental organisations.

NAGA

The last major assignment I was given was to chair the international jury tasked with selecting an architect or architectural practice to undertake the historic endeavour of transforming two of our national monuments, the City Hall and Supreme Court, into our new National Art Gallery (NAGA).  It was a very interesting assignment and I learned a great deal from my colleagues on the jury, who were either eminent architects or renown museum directors from France, UK and the US.  After deciding on the winner, we had to persuade the Cabinet to endorse the selection and to back the project.  Confidentiality prevents me from telling you about the Cabinet meeting which was held at the City Hall.

The Twin Peaks

As I look forward to the opening of NAGA in 2015, I am both optimistic and enthusiastic.  I believe that NAGA will become a world class museum.  Anyone, anywhere in the world, who is interested in Southeast Asian art, will have to visit NAGA.  I also believe that the people of Singapore will embrace NAGA in much the same way as they have embraced the Esplanade.  They will become the twin peaks of our cultural landscape.

The Vision

What is my vision?  My vision is that in the years to come, we will develop the art, culture and heritage sector and raise it to the same level as our economy and infrastructure.  To achieve this vision, we must nurture a new generation of Singaporeans who are highly educated, professionally competent, globally minded and culture loving.  We want to motivate Singaporeans to love books and to develop reading as a life-long habit.  We want to encourage Singaporeans to appreciate art, music, theatre, dance, film, etc, both as consumers and producers.  We want to harness the energy of Singaporeans who wish to remember and conserve our past while, at the same time, embracing the future.  I regard the enthusiasm shown by Singaporeans to conserve the Tanjong Pagar Railway Station and the Bukit Brown Cemetery as positive developments.  My vision is a culturally vibrant Singapore which is the cultural hub of ASEAN and the cross roads among the great civilizations of the East and the West.  There is no other city or country in Asia which can play this role as well as Singapore.

The Agenda

Mr Ong Yew Huat is a very lucky man.  My plea for free admission to our museums has been granted during his tenure.  So has my plea for the government to match private donations to arts and heritage groups.  Minister Lawrence Wong recently announced that the government has agreed to establish a $200 million Culture Matching Fund.  I would like, this afternoon, to share with you a few thoughts about the future of art, culture and heritage in Singapore.

Thought No. 1:  Focus on our Human Resource and Intellectual Capital

In recent decades, the government has prioritized the development of our hard infrastructure.  The Esplanade, the extension to the National Museum, NAGA, the renewal of the Victoria Theatre and Victoria Concert Hall are some of the big ticket items.  The time has come for us to focus more on the development of our soft infrastructure.  The development of our human resource and our intellectual and cultural capital should be given a higher priority.

My vision cannot be achieved if Singaporeans are uncultured and are not culture-loving.  The uncouth behaviour of some of our students at concerts is one indication of the problem.  The low level of musical knowledge of Singaporeans often lead them to applaud the orchestra when it is not appropriate to do so.  We need the help of the Ministry of Education to raise the cultural literacy of our students.  NAC should review it’s successful “Arts In Education” initiative to see how it can be taken to the next level. 

The School of the Arts (SOTA) and the Yong Siew Toh Conservatory at NUS are doing very well and appear to be adequately funded.  The same cannot be said about our two arts colleges, the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA) and the Lasalle College of the Arts.  They are underfunded.  They also have many needy students and there are not enough financial resources to help these students.  I know this because I have been helping both colleges to raise bursaries for their needy students.  I hope the government will do a comprehensive review of the two arts colleges with a view to giving them a higher level of financial support.  We need well educated and well trained graduates to power our cultural and heritage industries and to grow this sector.

In addition to developing our human resource, we should also focus on developing our intellectual and cultural capital.  We should give higher recognition to and better support for our authors, composers, choreographers, film makers, curators, etc.  We should raise the psychic income for these content creators.  My takeaway from the successful museums in America is that they had great collections, beautiful premises and outstanding curators. All three factors are important.  However, if I have to pick only one, I would pick the people factor.  At the end of the day, it is the quality of the people which determines the success or failure of an institution.  This is why my No. 1 agenda is to focus on developing our human resource and on raising our intellectual and cultural capital. 

Thought No. 2:  Focus on Southeast Asia

My second thought is that we should focus on the region of Southeast Asia.  Singapore’s karma, as the late Dr Michael Sullivan had written, is to be the hub surrounded by the rich civilizations of Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc.  Singapore’s destiny is draw inspiration from this ring of civilizations as well as from the ancestral civilizations of China, India and Islam, in forging our own cultural identity.

Singapore’s strength is therefore in Southeast Asia.  This is why I support this as the focus of NAGA.  This is also the reason which had led the NHB to convene the biannual conference of the museum directors of ASEAN and to celebrate the culture and heritage of a different ASEAN country each year.

I believe that one of the reasons for the success of the Biennale this year, as compared to previous years, is its focus on Southeast Asia.  Singaporeans feel more connected to the artists of our region than to artists from other parts of the world.  Culturally, an ASEAN community already exists both among the artists and the people of the region.

Thought No. 3:  The Secret is Balance

There is an ongoing debate in Singapore between those who want our cultural policy to focus on community or popular culture and others who want to focus on high culture.  There is also a debate about the future direction of the Singapore International Arts Festival (SIAF).  Should it focus on the mainstream or on the avant garde or cutting edge?

I believe that the answer is both not either.  We want to bring culture and the arts to the people, in their community centres and regional libraries.  This is consistent with our vision because we want all Singaporeans, and not just the elite, to be culture-loving.  At the same time, we want to grow our high culture.  To be politically sustainable, we must do both.  In the same way, the SIAF cannot have a single focus.  It must cater to its different stakeholders, who want diversity and balance.  For example, we need a balance between big name orchestras and modern music, between classical ballet and modern dance and between Kuo Pao Kun and experimental theatre.  The magic word is balance.  We need and want a balance between high art and popular art and between the mainstream and the sidestream.

CONCLUSION:

I shall conclude.  Twenty four years after the publication of the Ong Teng Cheong report, I think I can safely say that many of the aspirations contained in that report have been fulfilled. We have ascended to a higher peak.  There is agreement that we should support art, culture and heritage.  We should do so because they help to bring meaning and beauty into our lives.  We should do so because they bond us as a people and remind us of where we came from.  We should do so because they make us a more self-confident, thoughtful and gracious people. 

Thank you very much.

. . . . . .