Vivian Balakrishnan
Singapore
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not issue advisories on wait times at overseas airports. Travellers may wish to monitor airline and airport websites, as well as news reports for real-time information on wait times and potential disruptions at specific airports.”
“When the conflict in the Middle East deteriorated and commercial flights were halted in March 2026, the Singapore Government mounted four repatriation flights from Muscat, Riyadh and Jeddah to bring stranded Singaporeans home.”
“The Government has stepped up public engagement to explain our foreign policy fundamentals and responses to key international developments to Singaporeans and to hear their views. We do this through dialogue sessions across segments of society, including students, youths, businesses and community leaders.”
“And the larger point during the Committee of Supply was that precisely, because the world is in such a difficult, prickly, volatile and dangerous state, actually, if we keep our wits about ourselves, we maintain unity and we continue to have this clear eye-realistic, but principled, approach, there are many opportunities for Singapore.”
“Well, in short, I completely agree with you. And that is why we have indeed been hosting these events and in your own capacity as a national athlete and also as an official now, you have seen how it works in practice.”
“Since 2022, about half of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) employees are women. The proportion of women in senior appointments has remained stable at about a quarter. We recognise that overseas postings are disruptive for officers with families, especially female officers who bear greater caregiving responsibilities.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,437 lines we hold for Vivian Balakrishnan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 49.
“I have outlined our 10 tranches of humanitarian assistance, whether by airdrop or by supplies delivered over land. I cannot attest to what happens once it gets into Gaza, but I take the following attitude. One, gratitude to Singaporeans for generosity, for expressing compassion in a very real way and the fact that the funds raised were raised in a multi-religious, multiracial effort. It is a very Singaporean expression of compassion, that is first. Two, I am grateful it was the SAF that played a major role in the delivery, and I thank the SAF men and women. We should not take safety for granted. These were operations, they were not exercises. So, gratitude to SAF. Three, I am grateful that over the six decades, we have built close, respectful and constructive ties across all the countries in the Middle East, so we can base our air force in Jordan, we can overfly Israel, we can airdrop in Palestine, we can work with our Egyptian partners, whether to hand over money or humanitarian assistance and, right now, as I outlined just now, work with Egyptian hospitals to look after people who need medical care and I mentioned even community policing. Well, this sort of project, which we are doing together with Japan to train police officers working under the Palestinian Authority to prepare for future statehood. So, there is a lot to be grateful for and to also reflect on the blessings that we have in Singapore. It is a very Singaporean expression of compassion in action. On genocide, as I said earlier in the Statement, I would leave this to be determined by the International Court of Justice. Proceedings are in place, are underway.”
“But on the other hand, we should also be grateful for what we have in Singapore, but also understand it is always at risk, always fragile and we need to jealously protect it and guard it.”
“The Member's question, is there a risk that all these events outside Singapore can radicalise our own people? Of course, they can and they have and we have seen evidence of them. Is this the only source of division, radicalisation and extremism in the world? No, it is not. There are other parts of the world which can also sow division, discord and extremism in the world. Is this something which we can resolve once and for all with a discussion, a Ministerial Statement or a debate in Parliament? No, we cannot. This is always going to be a work-in-progress. And on that note, I just want to make this appeal, also to the Leader of the Opposition – this is one of those times we need to make common cause. The Member and I may differ on the timing of recognition but in the same way, as I describe our position vis-a-vis the other countries, I think we all ultimately want the same thing: we want peace. We do not want terrorism. We want mutual respect between people with complicated histories and identity. And we want to be able to do good where we can, by working with as many parties, as many entities as possible. So, this should be an occasion for unity amidst the difficulty and we should be very mindful in our conversations, not just in this House, but outside this House, that we secure unity, security and peace under international law. It is possible and I still want to hold on to that prospect. When we go to the Middle East, and Members, Mr Gerald Giam was with me, I could tell the Israelis and even the Arabs, "if you want a one-state solution, your delegation, your government must look like mine." Everyone nods and yet, also in their heart of hearts, they know, it is not possible. Well, if it is not possible, that is why you need a two-state solution.”
“And who we are also means we are exposed to external events and external influence, and that is a reality. So, we start with a realistic appreciation of our circumstances. Next, we need to guard jealously our national interest and, I have told you, in this case, our national interest is unity, security and support for international law for what it is worth, despite all the limitations that it has. It is easy to state that, but on every issue, we have to triangulate between these three poles – what is in our national interest for security, what is in our national interest for unity and what is in our national interest to maintain international law. And sometimes, there is tension between these three poles and the way we have to address it and the way the PAP government has addressed it, is that when these tensions are evident, we talk about it constructively, openly, delicately. We do not play it up. We do not use it to score domestic political points or to split our society in order to get short-term political points. So, the larger point I am trying to tell all of us is that the world is messy and the world has become far, far more dangerous and it will be increasingly more and more difficult for Singapore to just jealously guard its national interests while keeping everybody together. And we make our decisions in our own national interest; it means we will not always follow the crowd. Many times, we will be in a minority and we will not be afraid to be in a minority, so long as we understand that we are taking a stand based on principle, we are taking a stand to defend our own people's welfare and security, and that when we deal with thorny issues, we will discuss it openly, respectfully and constructively.”
“On the question of sanctions. This is in fact the first time we are imposing sanctions. I would ask for time to let us sort out the details of the announcements. The larger point behind that, is that, this is an expression of disapproval. This is an expression that is in keeping with our assessment of the situation, that it is wrong and it is inimical to the long-term interests of both Palestinians and Israel. It is a reflection that we continue to believe a two-state solution is the only viable way forward. On international law, I think that is very clear. Because of our own circumstances, we do have to abide by and we do need to comply with international law. But it is also equally important for us all to understand the difference between international law and domestic law is that you can have a court, in this case, the International Court of Justice; in our case, we have our own domestic courts. But domestically, the enforcement mechanisms are there. Internationally, enforcement actually depends on consent from all the states involved. I say this so that, first, we get a realistic appreciation of the limits of international law, but we also understand why, as a small nation, we cannot operate on the basis of "might is right" and give in to that every time someone invokes that, because that is inimical to our own interest. But let me just bring the deliberations today back and also partially refer to what the Leader of the Opposition was asking my colleague. Singapore has to start with a realistic appreciation of who we are, which means, in particular, multiracial, multi-religious, in Southeast Asia, in a part of the world which used to be tumultuous and could be if things unravel further.”
“When you have an equal and mutually respectful partnership, when you differ, you must be prepared to say so, to say so openly, candidly and constructively. And we have that kind of relationship. I will not get into operational details of defence. You know that it is the Government's established long-standing policy not to publicly diverse divulge details on defence cooperation for national security reasons. So, I am not going to go into that area. But I give you this assurance that we are not being held hostage. Singapore will not allow itself to be held hostage. Beyond that, I am not going to get into operational details. As a National Serviceman yourself, I am sure you understand that.”
“That is why I have also caveated that our position is not if, but when. We have also highlighted that if the situation continues to deteriorate or if Israel takes further action to extinguish any prospect for a two-state solution, then we have to reconsider our position. The Member asked whether we are being anachronistic because several, basically, European powers in the last few days have changed their position. In my answer to Mr Vikram Nair, I tried to remind everyone that in the big picture, we all want the same thing. But different countries will have different thresholds, different triggers to decide when they take certain diplomatic moves. We, for now, have shifted since May last year. We said we are prepared, in principle, to recognise the Palestinian state. Today, I am telling you we will recognise the Palestinian state when there is effective government renouncing terrorism, recognising the state of Israel. It is a shift, but it is also a shift, which I want to emphasise, recognises that you have to clear a certain bar – that amongst the Palestinians themselves, they have sorted out themselves politically to be an effective, unified voice that can conduct foreign policy, that can enter into agreements and make agreements stick – and also because of our complete aversion to terrorism. That is why we have taken the current position. I do not think we are being anachronistic. I think we are being realistic, given the circumstances in which Singapore has to operate in our part of the world. On defence, I have already said that yes, it is not a secret that they played a role in our early years, for which we are grateful, and they continue to have an invaluable role. But again, that does not mean that we are locked into giving them a free pass.”
“First question: is our requirement that there be an effective political entity or government on the other side a realistic one? The Leader of the Opposition adds on to say, well, Israel will do its best to make sure that there is no realistic government. Therefore, by insisting on having an effective government, as an objective reality, are we setting the bar too high? Mr Speaker, that is why I took some pains in my Statement to go through the history of the Palestinian Authority and the very difficult journey to get both sides to accept a two-state solution. I reminded you the two-state solution did not begin yesterday. In fact, it goes back to the UN in 1947. Israel took what was on offer, ran and declared independence. The entire constellation of Arab countries said no. Only one state. You had war. It was only in 1988 that the Palestinian Liberation Organization, in its proclamation of a Palestinian state, even then, only implicitly recognised Israel's right to exist and renounced terrorism. We welcomed the proclamation because these two elements, recognising the other exists and renouncing terrorism, are important for our national interest. It is not just a foreign policy. It is in our national interest. I also then went on to describe the events – Oslo, the elections in Gaza, the two decades without election, the violence between Hamas and Fatah – again, to point out the lack of an objective reality is not all on and due to one other party. They have got to get their own house in order. Will we allow, however, Israel, therefore, to have a veto? The answer is we cannot allow them to have a veto because our consistent long-held belief is a two-state solution. If either one or both says no, we cannot go along with them on that ride.”
“The settlement expansion, even their explicit remarks, so both in terms of what they say and what they do, that it is clear that the extremist elements within the Israeli body politic are trying to extinguish prospects for a two-state solution. And surely, we cannot give them cover for that. And that is why today, what you have seen is these two announcements right, not "if", but "when", and we have spelled out the factors of when we will recognise. The other is targeted sanctions to reflect our opposition to these violent extremist attempts to extinguish the two-state solution, and I have also added that the caveat situation is evolving very rapidly, it is unpredictable. And we will have to monitor if the situation continues to deteriorate or if Israel takes further steps to make it well-nigh impossible, we will have to recompute. So, the point is to focus on the similarities that we are all on the same side, but each country will have a different trigger, different threshold and a different appreciation of the situation.”
“Mr Speaker, actually, I think that this is a view which I think other Members in this House will also share. Actually, all of us are on the same side. When I say "all of us", I also include the other countries who have shifted their position. Let me say why I believe so. We all want peace. We all want an immediate release of all the hostages. We all believe that a two-state solution, as difficult and remote as it is, is the only viable way out of this quagmire. Where we differ is that every country has its own national circumstances, its own domestic constituencies, its own outlook on its leverage or lack thereof, on the key players in the Middle East. In the case of Singapore, as I said just now, we pursue foreign policy in a realist mode and we do pay attention to objective reality. And the first problem which I tried to outline just now is, who is in charge in Palestine? Are you dealing with Hamas, dealing with the Palestinian Authority or something in Kuwait that has yet to emerge? So, that is the first point, objective reality. The second point is our zero tolerance for terrorism because of our own circumstances, so for instance, I cannot fathom or imagine trying to have diplomatic ties with an entity that is still holding hostages, that promises that it will repeat what it has done on 7 October 2023 and does not recognise the others' right to exist. So, that is why our position today is, it is not "if", but "when" to recognise, and we are waiting for that appropriate constellation of factors to be, in our view, an appropriate configuration. But having said that, the Member also raised the point, and many others have as well, that the current Israeli government is actually making things worse.”
“As a friend to the people on both sides, we only hope that in time, there will be political will, there will be inspired leadership on both sides to enter into direct negotiations on a two-state solution, consistent with the relevant UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. Mr Speaker, with your permission, may I ask that I respond to clarifications from Members after the Senior Minister of State Sim Ann and the Acting Minister Faishal have made their respective Ministerial Statements? We can then take all clarifications collectively.”
“I told him that Israel's military response had gone on too far, for too long. The scope and the casualties were beyond what could be justified. I added that Israel's actions were inimical to its own long-term strategic and security interests. Our links with both sides are useful, not just to get our point across, but also, in a very real way, for facilitating our humanitarian assistance for Palestinians, especially in Gaza. We have worked with both our Arab regional partners on this as well as with the Israelis, whose concurrence is essential for these efforts on the ground. Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim has asked about our efforts to ensure that Israel abides by international law. When principles are breached, we speak our mind clearly. We will continue to call out actions by all and any side, including by the Israelis or Hamas, that breach international law. Earlier this month, we had to call out Israel's airstrikes on Doha as a blatant violation of Qatar's sovereignty. We have also said that the deliberate and unlawful denial of humanitarian aid to civilians and people reportedly being shot while desperately trying to access food, in our view, is a violation of international humanitarian law. Let me conclude by acknowledging a hard truth, which I hope both sides will grasp, in the spirit in which Singapore makes this point. Territorial and political compromise is essential if this conflict is ever to be resolved. The Israeli people and the Palestinian people both exist as an objective reality. Both have claims to a sovereign state in their ancestral homeland. There can be no "river to the sea" for either side, because if you really try to effect that, some terrible consequences follow from that logically.”
“Singapore's support for a two-state solution means we will oppose any steps by Israel to extinguish or undermine such a solution. Singapore cannot recognise any unilateral annexation of occupied territory because this would be a flagrant breach of international law. We will continue to track developments closely. Events are unfolding quickly and remain unpredictable. If the situation continues to deteriorate or if Israel takes further steps to extinguish a two-state solution, we will reconsider our position on recognising a Palestinian state. In the meantime, Singapore will step up concrete, constructive support for the Palestinians in preparation for their eventual statehood. We will continue to support the Palestinian Authority's capacity-building efforts. Our S$10 million Enhanced Technical Assistance Package has already benefitted more than 800 Palestinian officials. We will offer more scholarships for Palestinian students as well as community policing and leadership programmes. We established a Representative Office in Ramallah in 2022, which has been a focal point for our capacity-building efforts. We have to continue engaging both the Palestinian Authority and Israel. I know there have been calls to cut diplomatic ties, but doing so would diminish our ability to communicate with Israel and, frankly, serve no practical purpose. Diplomacy is not just about engaging when there is agreement. It is arguably even more important when there is disagreement. I recently had candid, open discussions with both my Israeli and Palestinian counterparts. I made it clear to Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar that we see the deliberate and unlawful denial of humanitarian aid to civilians as a breach of international humanitarian law.”
“We have voted in support of UN resolutions that reject Israeli settlement activities and we have called on Israel to rescind all unilateral measures seeking to change the status of Jerusalem. We call on the Israeli government to cease settlement construction and expansion. We oppose ongoing attempts to create new facts on the ground which undermine the prospects for a two-state solution. Consequently, Singapore will impose targeted sanctions on the leaders of radical right-wing settler groups or organisations that have been responsible for acts of violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. Details will be announced at a later date. But this is a significant change. Mr Speaker, Singapore’s approach to foreign policy is grounded on objective realities. In the case of Palestine, this is what we meant when we said that there is a need for an effective Palestinian government that accepts Israel's right to exist and categorically renounces terrorism. This has also been the prevailing view amongst many countries that see recognition as a meaningful step towards the ultimate goal of a negotiated two-state solution. But yesterday and today, a few countries have chosen to change their position and to formally recognise the Palestinian state now, even as the prospects of a functioning state have in fact become more remote. They do so precisely to express their grave concern at the status quo and they hope that this will make it harder for Israel to extinguish a two-state solution altogether. Singapore, so far, has maintained our position while doing as much as we can to help the Palestinian Authority strengthen their capabilities for future statehood.”
“As difficult and distant as it may now seem, nevertheless, we believe this is still the only viable pathway to a lasting peace. Singapore will continue to support any initiative to resume negotiations between the parties involved towards this ultimate goal. Our position should not come as a surprise to people within this House and to our citizens outside Parliament. Singapore has consistently affirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and their own state. Our voting record at the United Nations (UN) consistently reflects this. Last year, we voted in favour of several resolutions which expressed support for the admission of Palestine as a UN member and affirmed the Palestinians' right to self-determination. We have also supported Palestine's right to be a "non-member observer state" in various international organisations, including the International Labour Organization and the Universal Postal Union, just to cite some examples. So, what are the prospects for a two-state solution? Regrettably, extremist elements on both sides continue to actively undermine the prospects for a two-state solution. Hamas has consistently said, "No." At the same time, there are Israeli settlers who continue to displace Palestinians in the West Bank. Some Israeli politicians have spoken explicitly about annexing parts of the West Bank or Gaza. Recently, the Israeli government signed an agreement to proceed with the so-called E1 settlement project in the West Bank. This will fragment the West Bank and threaten the contiguity of Arab towns in the Occupied Palestinian Territories even further. Let me be clear. Singapore has consistently held that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.”
“In June 2007, Hamas violently seized Gaza from the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority and has ruled in Gaza by force ever since then and there have been no elections in the Occupied Palestinian Territories for two decades. So, two points are evident. First, whilst the Palestinian Authority administers the Occupied Palestinian Territories in the West Bank, it does not de facto control Gaza. Gaza is ruled by Hamas. For the last 18 years at least, there has not been a unified Palestinian government that exercises effective control in Palestinian Territories, including the West Bank and Gaza. What will happen in Gaza after the ceasefire remains unclear. Second point, Hamas has consistently rejected Israel's right to exist. It has yet to renounce terrorism or agree to disarm. In fact, Hamas has vowed to repeat the terrorist attacks of 7 October, if given the opportunity again. On the other hand, Singapore enjoys good relations with the Palestinian Authority. We welcome its commitment to renounce terrorism, to carry out reforms and to disarm Hamas, as President Mahmoud Abbas stated in his letter to French President Emmanuel Macron in June this year. However, it remains to be seen whether the Palestinian Authority can really disarm and displace Hamas from Gaza. We can hope, but hope, on its own, is not a reality. So, we will closely monitor the fulfilment of these commitments made by the Palestinian Authority. Ultimately, to resolve this longstanding conflict in a comprehensive, just and durable manner, there needs to be a negotiated settlement which results in two states, one Israeli, one Palestinian, with their peoples living alongside each other in peace, security and dignity. It seems like an impossible dream.”
“We will recognise the State of Palestine when it has an effective government that accepts Israel's right to exist and categorically renounces terrorism. Allow me to take you through a brief review of history to put this position in context. The two-state solution arose in 1947, when the UN General Assembly recommended the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states. Jerusalem, under this same resolution, was supposed to be a separate, internationally administered entity. Unfortunately, the decades since then, have been littered with missed opportunities by both sides. For instance, the two-state formulation was accepted by the Jewish leadership in 1947 but rejected by the Arabs. The Jewish leadership took what was on the table, declared Independence, war broke out in 1948. In fact, it is only in November 1988 did the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) implicitly accept Israel's right to exist. This is back in 1988 and they proclaimed the State of Israel. And Singapore welcomed this Proclamation is because we viewed it as significant progress towards a two-state solution. Unfortunately, notwithstanding the Oslo Accords in 1993 and 1995, none of the subsequent attempts to reach a final status agreement succeeded. In January 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian Legislative Council elections and its leader, Ismail Haniyeh, formed the government on the basis of a majority. But this was largely rejected by the international community, given Hamas' refusal to recognise Israel's right to exist, its rejection of peaceful co-existence and its propagation of terrorism.”
“In fact, right now, a team of Singaporean doctors and clinicians are currently in Cairo to support the Nasser Institute in case consultations, for the more complicated cases. The SAF has deployed two liaison officers, based in Cairo, to coordinate Singapore's assistance in-theatre. We are working to deploy another medical team to Egypt to help treat even more patients from Gaza, when the conditions are conducive. Second, Jordan's Restoring Hope Initiative for Gaza. We will provide prosthetics supplies for about 100 Palestinian amputees who are being treated in Jordan and in Jordanian field hospitals in Gaza. Third, the World Food Programme's efforts to fight hunger in Gaza. We will contribute US$500,000. All these efforts will bring our total humanitarian assistance for Gaza to more than $24 million. Singapore will continue to support international efforts in the day-after scenarios, including through the Arab Reconstruction Plan. It is too early for specifics, but we will contribute financially and in-kind. But there needs, first, to be a permanent ceasefire and the hostages must be released unconditionally. Only then can physical reconstruction and healing begin. On the issue of peacekeeping, which Mr Saktiandi Supaat has asked about, whilst the idea of a UN stabilisation mission in Gaza is being discussed informally, there is currently no formal proposal for a UN peacekeeping force in Gaza at the UN Security Council (UNSC). Singapore will study any UNSC resolution on this issue carefully and we will assess how we can support its implementation if it comes to pass in future. Let me now turn to the issue of recognition. Singapore has made our position clear. In fact, we had changed our position in May last year. Let me state our position as of today.”
“We have all seen the heart wrenching pictures of Gazans, including young children scavenging for food. The deliberate and unlawful denial of humanitarian aid to a civilian population is completely unacceptable. In our view, these excessive actions by the Israel government may even be a breach of international humanitarian law. The UN's Independent International Commission of Inquiry recently concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. This matter is currently before the International Court of Justice, which is the appropriate forum to adjudicate such grave concerns. In recent weeks, more aid, including from Singapore, has entered Gaza, but this is still woefully inadequate. Much more humanitarian supplies are urgently needed. Israel has a responsibility to facilitate this. It must lift all restrictions on its delivery and to allow the full and unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid. Palestinians must be enabled to access this aid safely and with dignity. Singapore will continue to do what we can to contribute to international efforts to alleviate civilian suffering in Gaza. So far, the Government and Singaporeans have contributed 10 tranches of humanitarian aid. This includes the latest contribution by the Singapore Red Cross of about $1.2 million through the Egyptian Red Crescent, which was just announced during President Tharman Shanmugaratnam's State Visit to Egypt. Last month, SAF air-dropped urgent humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. In fact, this was the second air-drop operation conducted by SAF. We are grateful to our SAF Servicemen and women for stepping up to do this, to express our compassion. Singapore will do more. And under our tenth tranche, we will support the following. First, Egyptian hospitals in treating injured Palestinians.”
“The third is promoting respect for and compliance with international law. Singapore relies on clear rules and norms to safeguard our sovereignty as a tiny city state. A world based on "might is right" is fundamentally inimical to small states like us. So, it means Singapore must abide by and uphold international law consistently. These three priorities surrounding our national interests have shaped our approach to the conflict in Gaza. On 7 October 2023 itself, Singapore immediately condemned the terrorist attack on Israel by Hamas and we recognised Israel's right of self-defence, in accordance with international law and the United Nations (UN) Charter. We have always and repeatedly called for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. But in exercising its right to defend itself, Israel must comply with international humanitarian law. That includes the principle of proportionality in warfare. And our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza have gone too far, for too long. Israel's military operations, which have recently intensified in Gaza City, have exacerbated the prolonged, desperate suffering of innocent civilians. This is unconscionable. The scale of civilian death is harrowing. More than 60,000 people have been reportedly killed and a third of them children. Singapore condemns the killing of innocent civilians. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is shocking. An estimated 90% of homes have been destroyed or damaged. Schools, hospitals, places of worship have been struck. Around 1.9 million or 90% of Gazans have been internally displaced. Medical services are incapacitated and overwhelmed. Gaza is dangerously close to famine levels and this was entirely preventable.”
“We cannot allow external events or actors to cause fissures in our society. National policies and especially, foreign policy positions, must be based on Singapore's national interests and not on communal or religious perspectives; and we must never allow outsiders to exploit potential domestic fissures within our own society. The second is protecting Singapore's security. We must never be complacent about the threat of terrorism and military conflict. As a small and open nation, we cannot condone terrorism in any form. We must never accept any excuse or any justification for the wanton killing of innocent civilians and the taking of hostages. Actually, whenever a terrorist incident occurs overseas, the questions that go through my mind are the following: "What if this had happened in Singapore? How would Singapore respond? What actions would our military and security agencies have to undertake? What would our diplomats say the next day at the United Nations?" This is why we supported Israel's right of self-defence after the 7 October terrorist attacks, because if anything similar were to ever happen in Singapore, have no doubt, we would assert the same right of self-defence. We also, for the sake of our security, need to maintain cooperation with international partners. This is to enhance our defence and our security capabilities and to keep Singapore safe. We all know that Israel helped us to build up the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) in our earliest years of Independence, when we were most vulnerable. This unique security relationship remains invaluable to us. But this does not stop us from conveying our views directly to the Israeli government, clearly and constructively, when we do not agree with their actions. We have done so and we will continue to do so.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to make a Ministerial Statement on the situation in the Middle East. Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann and the Acting Minister-in-Charge of Muslim Affairs Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal will subsequently deliver their Ministerial Statements addressing related issues. Let me start by sketching the international context. The Israeli conduct of the war in Gaza and the other actions they have taken in the West Bank has sparked renewed efforts by the international community to press Israel to change course. Recently, Singapore and a large majority of the member states at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly voted in favour of a resolution endorsing the New York Declaration to support the two-state solution. This resolution reflected widespread concern that the two-state solution is being eroded by Israel’s actions. Around 10 countries may announce recognition of Palestine later today at the UN. For some of them, the recognition will be conditional, predicated on the Palestinian Authority's commitment to renounce terrorism and to conduct administrative reform. They also expect, perhaps wishfully, for Hamas to disarm and to release all the hostages. I will now lay out Singapore’s position on the recognition of Palestinian statehood. Allow me to start by setting out Singapore's national interests. Singapore is a multiracial, multi-religious city state in the heart of Southeast Asia. Given our circumstances, that means we have three priorities. The first is maintaining national unity. The long-standing complicated tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict elicits strong and diverse reactions amongst Singaporeans. This is completely understandable. But we must express these different perspectives respectfully.”
“Mr Speaker, I will be making a Ministerial Statement later on the situation in the Middle East. I seek your approval to answer all 13 Parliamentary Questions which have been filed on the same subject. These would be Question Nos 1 to 6 for oral answer and Question Nos 26 to 32 for written answer.”
“We will proactively support effective rules-based multilateralism at the United Nations (UN) and the World Trade Organization, while playing a constructive role in plurilateral arrangements. By advancing a positive agenda in areas like artificial intelligence, climate change, and pandemic preparedness, MFA will continue to demonstrate our commitment to being a responsible steward of the global commons. Despite the challenges of global governance, patient and skilful diplomacy can produce consensus outcomes. Singapore’s recent Chairmanship of the UN Open-Ended Working Group on Cybersecurity established a new UN Global Mechanism on Cybersecurity. Singapore contributes to the development of global norms through our participation in the Councils of the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization. We have put forward Ambassador for International Law Rena Lee to serve as a Judge in the International Court of Justice and Mr Daren Tang for re-election as Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization. The safety of Singaporeans abroad remains a priority. MFA will strengthen consular capabilities, expand diplomatic networks and enhance emergency response coordination, including through digital tools like the eRegister platform. National unity is essential in navigating a more contested geopolitical climate and withstanding external pressures. MFA will continue engaging Singaporeans on our core foreign policy considerations and Singapore’s role on the global stage, building the domestic support needed to act in our long-term national interests.”
“We will increase intra-ASEAN linkages and build a more sustainable future by upgrading and fully implementing our trade agreements, deepening cross-border digital frameworks, developing the ASEAN Power Grid and advancing green economy standards. We will also expand ASEAN’s network of partnerships, ensure key international players have a stake in the region’s success and work towards an open, inclusive and ASEAN-centred region. MFA will strengthen ties with both the United States and China – important partners across many domains. MFA will also expand our circles of friends, which include middle powers in emerging regions of growth such as Africa, Central Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. We will build on the Comprehensive Strategic Partnerships (CSPs) and Strategic Partnerships (SPs) we have with countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Vietnam, and launch a CSP with New Zealand and a SP with the Republic of Korea. We will open new diplomatic missions in Africa and Latin America in the coming years. Through our new Development Partnerships Directorate, MFA will strengthen the Singapore Cooperation Programme to share our experience with others and coordinate Singapore’s development partnerships in areas where we have relevant strengths. Our growing network of free trade agreements are avenues to work with like-minded partners. We are exploring partnerships between the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the European Union and ASEAN to preserve open flows of trade and investment and build economic resilience. We are also expanding collaboration in Digital Economy and Green Economy to create opportunities for Singaporeans in forward-looking areas.”
“The world is in transition from the post-Cold War order to a more uncertain era, marked by disruptions to global trade, the weaponisation of economic tools, rising risks of conflicts, weakening multilateralism, sharper major power rivalry and rapid technological change. These shifts pose serious challenges for Singapore, whose survival and prosperity depend on free trade, access to global supply chains, and our role as a business and logistics hub. Singapore’s foreign policy must adapt swiftly to these realities. Our strength lies in our reputation for stability and reliability, and in our national unity and resilience. To remain relevant and trusted, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) will: first, maintain consistent and pragmatic engagement with all countries, be it our immediate neighbours, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), or major and middle powers; second, reinforce our role as a credible and reliable partner; and third, look after Singaporeans overseas and build domestic support for our foreign policy. Constructive cooperation with our immediate neighbours is vital. With Malaysia, we will support the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone and the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link. These projects will enhance connectivity and strengthen economic and people-to-people ties. With Indonesia, the Expanded Framework Agreements on airspace management, defence and law enforcement marked a milestone in our bilateral relations and provide a strong foundation for cooperation in new areas like renewable energy and human capital development. ASEAN remains a cornerstone of our foreign policy. ASEAN holds tremendous potential to be unlocked through deeper regional integration.”
“At the emergency meeting of ASEAN Foreign Ministers on 30 March 2025, Singapore pledged to support ASEAN's efforts to expand humanitarian support coordinated by the AHA Centre. I called for an immediate and effective ceasefire in Myanmar, which would facilitate the efforts to deliver humanitarian assistance and longer-term national reconciliation, peace and reconstruction. ASEAN will consider how our assistance can be augmented. In the longer term, the reality is that the humanitarian situation can only be adequately addressed through genuine national reconciliation and constructive dialogue among all the key stakeholders, to help the people of Myanmar to achieve an inclusive, comprehensive and durable peaceful resolution that is Myanmar-owned and -led, as envisaged in the Five-Point Consensus.”
“The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Leaders review the situation in Myanmar regularly. In their latest review last October, they expressed deep concern over the escalation of the conflict and the humanitarian situation there. They urged all stakeholders and parties in Myanmar, in particular, the armed forces and security forces concerned, to de-escalate violence and stop attacks on civilians and public facilities. The safe, effective and transparent delivery of humanitarian assistance without discrimination remains a priority under ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus. The ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (AHA Centre), with support from ASEAN member states, external partners, the United Nations and the private sector, has delivered several tranches of aid so far. The 7.7 magnitude earthquake that struck central Myanmar on 28 March 2025 has worsened the already dire humanitarian situation. Singapore responded quickly and was one of the first foreign countries to provide assistance through our 80-member strong Operation Lionheart Urban Search and Rescue contingent. We have also deployed the Singapore Emergency Medical Team (SGEMT), comprising a team of over 30 medical, technical and administrative personnel, to provide emergency services and medical care in the field. The Singapore Government has contributed $150,000 to match the Singapore Red Cross' (SRC's) seed money for the SRC’s fundraising efforts for quake victims as well as humanitarian supplies, like food, water filters and medical supplies, delivered by the Republic of Singapore Air Force aircraft to Myanmar.”
“In our region, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Member States have been aligned on the core issues. Specifically, ASEAN has consistently supported the call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, immediate release of hostages, provision of humanitarian assistance and a negotiated two-state solution. Earlier this year, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers issued a statement reaffirming our longstanding support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to their homeland. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in touch with the Mercy Relief team that visited the West Bank in March 2025. They are professionals with long experience operating and implementing humanitarian assistance projects in challenging environments. I commend them for their efforts to help Palestinians on behalf of Singapore. Singaporeans have responded to the Gaza conflict with a deep sense of empathy and compassion. I thank Singaporeans for contributing to humanitarian aid efforts for Gaza. We encourage everyone to continue supporting local fundraising efforts by reputable organisations, such as the Singapore Red Cross and Rahmatan Lil Alamin Foundation, which have extensive experience in working with a wide network of credible and reliable partners to effectively deliver critical aid on the ground. Donors can check via the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's Charity Portal if the fundraiser is a registered charity in Singapore; and possesses a valid fundraising permit for foreign charitable purposes from the Commissioner of Charities.”
“The Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen has stated in his speech at the Committee of Supply last month that the Singapore Armed Forces is also making plans to provide further medical assistance to the people in Gaza. We are assessing the possibility of such deployments in close coordination with our regional partners, taking into account the ground conditions, including safety. We have not received any requests on transporting Palestinian patients who may need more complex care to Singapore to date, but such requests would have to be carefully assessed, taking into account the relevant medical risk factors especially those associated with long distance transport of patients needing complex care and treatment options. Both the Israelis and Palestinians are well aware of our long-standing position that the only viable path for achieving a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a negotiated two-state solution, consistent with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Our positions on the need to adhere to international law, including international humanitarian law, the need to refrain from unilateral actions which hinder or delay progress on a peace process, and the need to ensure the protection of civilians, are also clear. We will continue to vote in support of relevant UN General Assembly resolutions that are consistent with our principled positions. At the same time, we need to be circumspect and recognise our limitations in influencing the outcome of this war and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It falls ultimately on the leaders on both sides to find the political will, courage and imagination to resume negotiations to resolve this long-standing conflict, difficult as it may be.”
“My response will address questions raised by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, as well as questions set for written answer by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Dr Wan Rizal. My response will also cover questions raised by Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim scheduled for subsequent Sittings. Singapore remains gravely concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza, which has resulted in a further loss of civilian life and internal displacement of the Palestinians. The dire humanitarian situation in Gaza has worsened as aid has not been allowed in since 2 March 2025. Singapore has consistently called for all parties in the conflict to comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, and ensure that all civilians are kept out of harm's way. Civilian infrastructure, including medical facilities as well as medical workers, must be accorded due protection. We call on Israel to facilitate the resumption of critical life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza. Such aid must not be used as a bargaining chip. We also call on Hamas to release all remaining hostages immediately and unconditionally. We urge all parties to resume negotiations and make progress towards a permanent ceasefire. Singapore is committed to supporting international relief efforts for Gaza. While Israeli restrictions on the entry of aid into Gaza are in place, we have continued to explore ways to provide humanitarian assistance with our partners in the Middle East. We will also look to contribute towards supporting post-conflict recovery efforts in partnership with the United Nations (UN) and others in the region. The needs in Gaza will be significant and Singapore will do our part to help.”
“In our region, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states have been aligned on the core issues. Specifically, ASEAN has consistently supported the call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, immediate release of hostages, provision of humanitarian assistance and a negotiated two-state solution. Earlier this year, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers issued a statement reaffirming our longstanding support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to their homeland. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in touch with the Mercy Relief team that visited the West Bank in March 2025. They are professionals with long experience operating and implementing humanitarian assistance projects in challenging environments. I commend them for their efforts to help Palestinians on behalf of Singapore. Singaporeans have responded to the Gaza conflict with a deep sense of empathy and compassion. I thank Singaporeans for contributing to humanitarian aid efforts for Gaza. We encourage everyone to continue supporting local fundraising efforts by reputable organisations, such as the Singapore Red Cross and Rahmatan Lil Alamin Foundation, which have extensive experience in working with a wide network of credible and reliable partners to effectively deliver critical aid on the ground. Donors can check via the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's Charity Portal if the fundraiser is a registered charity in Singapore and possesses a valid fund-raising permit for foreign charitable purposes from the Commissioner of Charities.”
“Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen has stated in his speech at the Committee of Supply last month that the Singapore Armed Forces is also making plans to provide further medical assistance to the people in Gaza. We are assessing the possibility of such deployments in close coordination with our regional partners, taking into account the ground conditions, including safety. We have not received any requests on transporting Palestinian patients who may need more complex care to Singapore to-date, but such requests would have to be carefully assessed, taking into account the relevant medical risk factors, especially those associated with long-distance transport of patients needing complex care and treatment options. Both the Israelis and Palestinians are well aware of our longstanding position, that the only viable path for achieving a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a negotiated two-state solution, consistent with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Our positions on the need to adhere to international law, including international humanitarian law, the need to refrain from unilateral actions which hinder or delay progress on a peace process and the need to ensure the protection of civilians, are also clear. We will continue to vote in support of relevant UN General Assembly resolutions that are consistent with our principled positions. At the same time, we need to be circumspect and recognise our limitations in influencing the outcome of this war and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It falls, ultimately, on the leaders on both sides to find the political will, courage and imagination to resume negotiations to resolving this longstanding conflict, difficult as it may be.”
“My response will address questions raised by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap; as well as questions set for written answer by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Dr Wan Rizal. My response will also cover questions raised by Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim scheduled for subsequent Sittings. Singapore remains gravely concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza which has resulted in a further loss of civilian life and internal displacement of the Palestinians. The dire humanitarian situation in Gaza has worsened as aid has not been allowed in since 2 March 2025. Singapore has consistently called for all parties in the conflict to comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, and ensure that all civilians are kept out of harm's way. Civilian infrastructure, including medical facilities as well as medical workers, must be accorded due protection. We call on Israel to facilitate the resumption of critical life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza. Such aid must not be used as a bargaining chip. We also call on Hamas to release all remaining hostages immediately and unconditionally. We urge all parties to resume negotiations and make progress towards a permanent ceasefire. Singapore is committed to supporting international relief efforts for Gaza. While Israeli restrictions on the entry of aid into Gaza are in place, we have continued to explore ways to provide humanitarian assistance with our partners in the Middle East. We will also look to contribute towards supporting post-conflict recovery efforts in partnership with the United Nations (UN) and others in the region. The needs in Gaza will be significant and Singapore will do our part to help.”
“The short answer is no. There are far more proximate partners and stakeholders in the dispute, in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, than Southeast Asia. So, the short answer is no. Having said that, let me give a Southeast Asian perspective. If you look at the votes of the 10 ASEAN member states, you will find that all of us, in our votes and in our explanation of votes at the UN, have emphasised the importance of the UN Charter and the principles of sovereign equality, political independence and territorial integrity. ASEAN, perhaps also because of our past experience in the Cold War, has absolutely no intention of allowing ourselves to be a future arena for proxy wars and we will certainly have no intention to allow ourselves to be caught in the strategic contestations between superpowers in the future. So, bear in mind ASEAN's history. Bear in mind, ASEAN's prospects for the future. Bear in mind, our adherence to international law in the UN Charter. And just as importantly, bear in mind, our prospects for the future. And that is why I began my answer to you just now that the short answer is no. And if I may add, I had I had an introductory telephone conversation with the Secretary of State Mr Marco Rubio last night. Both of us emphasised economics – so trade, investments, energy.”
“It is worth reminding this House that in fact if you add, cumulatively, all the economies of the members of ASEAN, we already constitute the world's fifth largest economy and we expect to be on track to become the fourth largest economy by 2030. The trade and investments from the US into our region support hundreds and thousands of jobs in Southeast Asia but similarly, it also supports over 600,000 jobs in America itself. So, the point here is that this is a mutually beneficial relationship. ASEAN's rapidly developing economies present significant opportunities for American companies including areas like critical minerals, energy, manufacturing, technology, including digital and AI. Another point worth emphasising is that one-third of global trade passes through the critical maritime shipping lanes in Southeast Asia, including the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, and beyond that, into the South China Sea. The US' presence in the region, both economically and therefore also having interests to protect from a defence perspective, has been crucial to maintaining stability and opportunities in our part of the world. From an ASEAN perspective, the primacy of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), which sets out maritime entitlements, and avenues for peaceful resolutions of disputes, and sets out as a right freedom of navigation and overflight, is crucial for ASEAN, both from a stability point of view as well as economic prospects for the future. So, Mr Speaker, we will continue to work with our partners in ASEAN to seek opportunities for high-level engagement with the new US administration on this basis.”
“Mr Speaker, the short answer to Mr Neil Parekh's question is economics – trade, investment, energy. The United States (US) remains a critical partner for Singapore and for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The US' presence in our region has in fact underpinned our peace, stability and prosperity in Southeast Asia for many decades. The US is, by a significant margin, the largest foreign investor in ASEAN. And the US is also ASEAN's second largest trading partner. The US has been an active supporter of ASEAN and this includes strengthening collaboration in new growth areas, for instance artificial intelligence (AI), cyber security and energy transition. The omni-directional engagement on the part of ASEAN towards the US, to China, to the EU, to India, to Australia and indeed all the middle powers, and our emerging links with Africa and South America, is an essential element of ASEAN's vision for an open, inclusive and rules-based regional architecture in our region. We believe this is the way to secure peace and prosperity, and also based on the appreciation of the fact that in contrast to many parts of the world, Southeast Asia remains at peace and has good prospects for significant growth in the decades to come. In this respect, the US' commitment to the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific, which they have expressed on previous occasions, is reaffirmation of this point. We will keep emphasising the mutually beneficial nature of ASEAN's interactions and engagement with the US. This engagement will continue to contribute in fact for mutual benefit of both ASEAN and America, and create an area in this part of the world which is safer, stronger and more prosperous.”
“And I am confident that the strengths of a city state with fiscal reserves, and that a Prime Minister or a Foreign Minister of Singapore, at least in the next 10 years, does not have to go to any other capital or any other office with his hands asking for help. Anything which we want we buy, we pay full market price. So, we say we are your partner. We are not your vassal state or your tributary. And therefore, hopefully, no one treats us shabbily. They treat us with some reasonable respect, because we are a partner or we are a customer, a high value customer. That is to me, an enormous advantage. And then we continue to invest in our people and our infrastructure, future-proof them, and we continue to remain an open city. That openness is also critical to the long-term survival of a city state. History has shown that. Even if you go back to the early states of Venice and all that. The thing about a city is that it must always act as a magnet for ideas, for talent, for opportunity. So, therefore, I still, I am very tempted to say the best is yet to be. But I believe that. [Applause.]”
“So, understand how blessed we have been by the Pioneer leaders and the hardworking and disciplined Singaporeans and the global environment which was very kind to us. Now I am saying, the rules have changed. We are going to a more hostile, more difficult environment. But I am also saying, please do not be pessimistic and do not lose hope because we have strengths. Having those reserves, having the fiscal strength, the debate which we are having now about the Budget is, I think, unique in the world. No one else is facing this luxury, where the Finance Minister, the Prime Minister, can put significant sums in long-term funds to invest in our people, in our infrastructure and to make ourselves future ready. So, I cannot look 600 years, but let us just settle for 10 years. What are the opportunities in the next 10 years? I have said, maybe I am biased, as a doctor, as a surgeon, but I happen to believe digital technologies and AI, biotechnology, because in fact healthcare and biology have now become an extension of digital technologies. It is digital technologies that have enabled the acceleration of the human genome project, it is digital technologies that has enabled us now to solve the issue of protein folding and to create designer molecules, designer drugs. There is so much there and we have not even started about editing the human genome. And green energy, sustainable energy, because guess what? AI requires a lot of energy. But in fact, the challenge of climate change can be solved with current technologies if we get our legislative and our policy structures right. So, my point is, I am actually excited because I see a world in which there are revolutions with great opportunities.”
“And then, we also benefited not just because of the rule of law and common law and the fact that our bureaucracy and our legislation fitted quite easily into the British common law, and therefore by extension, even American systems. We had all these companies coming in. Can you see my point that yes, of course, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, once when I was sailing in with him in Marina Bay before it became closed, actually we were looking for where to place the Integrated Resorts. But as we were sailing in one sunset, I saw this beautiful landscape, I turned to him and Mr Lim Kim San was beside. I said, "How do you feel, Mr Lee, seeing this wonderful city?" He just looked at me gruffly and said, "Hardworking and disciplined people built all this." No fancy theory. Hardworking and disciplined people built all this. So, yes, hardworking and disciplined people called Singaporeans built all this. Today, now, 60 years later, I know, I am trying not to be too partisan and too politically, but seriously, I remember Mr Neil Parekh saying last week, if our biggest criticism is that we have been lucky and we got unanticipated high corporate tax revenues because companies have come here and their activities have been successful and we are being criticised for having large, fiscal reserves, well, I appeal to the Opposition. Given the state of the world today, even the US is wondering how to pay off its national debt. Do you want to be a net debtor, paying off your debts? Or are we better off with a significant reserve; and between the return on reserves or corporate tax competing to see which one is bigger, can you see there is great reason to be grateful?”
“This is a prime ministerial question. But more seriously, I think historically, Venice as a city-state survived for several centuries. But actually, in the long run of history, it has not been kind for tiny city-states. Let us just take that first point. Historical. Second point, as it relates to Singapore. Sixty years ago, for the sake of a belief in an ideal that we will be a multiracial society, a Singaporean Singapore, not based on being an Indian, Malay or Chinese nation, we were evicted from Malaysia. We lost a hinterland. As a consequence of that, we should be grateful Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Dr Goh Keng Swee, Mr S Rajaratnam decided that the loss of our immediate hinterland does not have to mean that we are cut off from our supplies and economic opportunities. If you read the speeches in the 1960s, the concept of being a global city, of leapfrogging even our immediate neighbourhood came about. That was brilliant. But in my speech, what I was also trying to say, that concept worked at a very unusual time in global history. Unusual, because it was Pax Americana characterised by free trade, global supply chains, expansions of multinational enterprises, multilateral organisations, international law. Can you see how that global environment was so conducive to this fledging, unlikely city-state trying to forge and make a living as a global city? 6.45 pm Fast forward to today, I think our Pioneer leaders managed to capture every gust of wind that was available. We were an entreport. You look at PSA, airports, our trade volume more than three times our GDP. No other political entity has that ratio in the world. Out of just imagination and gumption, we became a global financial centre. We became a major logistics centre. We became a repository for intellectual property.”
“At the end of the day, these fractured countries, their leaders need to arrive at the appropriate political compromise and to create a nation out of very disparate segments who, unfortunately, because so much blood has been shed, have a lot of stored grievances. Again, I caution patience. As a doctor, first, do no harm. Our heart bleeds for them. We have people from Myanmar in Singapore. I am sure the Member is also speaking from direct experience. It is heartbreaking for them and their relatives. But be very, very careful not to make things worse. I am sorry I do not have a quick solution for Myanmar, except that to the extent that they are willing to compromise. Any ASEAN country, all ASEAN countries will be most happy to support them. That was the formula behind the Five-Point Consensus, if we look at the points in there. They arose out of a speech which Senior Minister Lee made at that special meeting that was convened in April 2021 in Jakarta where all the ASEAN countries were represented, including the military leader in Myanmar. But I am sorry to say, there has been no progress.”
“I think these are all ideas which can be considered. But again, in the spirit of being realistic, Myanmar is a very, very difficult challenge. And the problems do not just go back to 2021, when the coup was launched. It goes back to the fact that they have never yet been able to truly constitute a single nation out of the diversity that encompasses the totality of Myanmar. They have not yet been able to work out the political formula to bring people together, to bring all the different elements of state together into a balance which is constructive and positive. I say all this to illustrate that they have not even got past the fundamental nation building exercise. The coup is just one more symptom of that fundamental problem. The other point you also need to realise is that we must understand by now, I have seen no historical example of an external interference riding in, conquering even and building a nation. Having elections does not solve any political problem if you have not got the values and that spirit to achieve workable compromises. From my interactions in the past – I have not gone there since 2021, but certainly, from my past interactions with Myanmar leaders across the spectrum, I found it is very difficult to get them together. So, the problem is, we can change envoys; we can have special envoys; we can have permanent envoys. That is not the red limiting factor. I have consistently urged at ASEAN meetings that we need strategic patience. Because if we get impatient, what are our alternatives? To mount an external operation? It will not work. I guarantee the Member, it will not work. It will not work militarily. It will not work politically.”
“What we can do is to continue to impress on Israelis that it is in their own interest to facilitate aid deliveries. But I am afraid they have prioritised their security and other considerations over that. I note that even in the last few days, there has been further hurdles to delivery of assistance. To the extent that our voice is heard, we will add to that chorus that says, it is in Israel's interest to make sure aid flows to the people who need help.”
“But even in the aftermath of World War I, the Treaty of Versailles, the reparations; the territorial boundary redrawing in Germany; the Great Depression in the 1929 onwards, you had a world with beggar-thy-neighbour policies, depression, grievance and the domestic rise of Nazism and Fascism – all the isms. That really set the stage for World War II. The unique blessing after World War II was that there was a very benevolent victor in the United States of America, which rebuilt the countries it vanquished: Japan, Germany, Europe, through the Marshall Plan, which I had mentioned just now, because it constituted 40% of global GDP. Every additional dollar generated in the world, 40 cents came back to America. It was worth its while to underwrite that liberal world order that we have enjoyed for the past 80 years. So, be realistic. We are no longer in that kind of climate. As I said, this is a geo-strategic climate change. It is not just a change of weather. So, be realistic. Be careful. To the maximum extent, continue to hold fast to our principles. Make common cause wherever possible. But understand that it is not business as usual. I think the Member had the other question on Israel. It has been difficult for aid to reach the people in Gaza, a combination of reasons. Firstly, the Israelis have been very, very strict, because they want to make sure that there is no dual-use equipment getting through the convoys. Secondly, you would have seen the videos. The convoys get mobbed the moment they cross over because there is chaos and no security. It is very dangerous. We ourselves, as Minister Ng Eng Hen has emphasised, we ourselves have considered how can we even deploy medical or humanitarian facilities, but it is not possible to do so safely.”
“Mr Vikram Nair is right. There are still many countries which realise that it is in our enlightened long-term interest to support multilateralism and international law, and the Member has just mentioned the list would include Europe, it will include Southeast Asia, and even in the longer run, certainly South America and Africa. But we also need to be realistic that if the big powers, with a lack of strategic trust and trying to stay ahead, are willing to take liberties with multilateralism, or maybe the other way I would express it is that they are not willing to be restricted and tied down by the restraints of multilateralism or international law, and given their current imperative to stay ahead of one another, it will be very difficult to operate. Because they will say, no, I have not. I mean, for instance, there are major powers that have not signed on to UNCLOS. There are major powers which are not signed on to the Paris Agreement. And it is very hard to make these agreements enforceable and implementable without the participation of major powers. And that is the point I am making. So, it does not mean we give up. In fact, it means the rest of us need to double down, need to do our best to support the WTO and WHO and to support the UN and to continue to make the point that the UN Charter is essential, and that if the UN goes the way of the League of Nations, then we are in very, very dangerous territory. 6.30 pm You can take your favourite historical allusion. Are we in a pre-World War I phase? Which was characterised by empires reaching their limits, globalisation in an empire way was coming to an end. Then, you had World War I, at least four empires were destroyed by it.”
“But I believe there are still many countries out there, like us, who want that system to work, and even though we no longer have the patronage or the support or the underwriting of major powers that used to do it, we can still make common cause. One regional grouping who has been quite enthusiastic to keep the system of multilateralism and international law going is the EU. I have had extensive discussions with them. And that is why I have said to the extent that the EU and ASEAN, and maybe parts of Africa and South America, are still capable of signing Free Trade Agreements, still binding ourselves to international law, because we still believe that in the long run this provides for peace, prosperity and the peaceful resolution of disputes. So, I am not giving up on that. Basically, the fundamental point is great danger, but once in a lifetime opportunities are opening. Do not panic. Do not give up our brand and the way we do things openly, transparently, competently, reliably and with trust and openness. If we can do that, I am confident we can seize the opportunities ahead.”
“Everyone will say they are not trying to force us to make choices, but they would rather that we lean more towards one way or the other. I would say from experience, so far, we have been able to maintain this very careful balancing act, and it calls for credibility and it calls for unity. 5.15 pm I will give you a recent example. I explained in Parliament, I think was two weeks ago, that not only are tariffs being applied but export controls are being applied, unilateral export controls that we are not obliged to enforce. Nevertheless, because we have national interest to have access to these technologies, it is important for us to maintain that reputation, and not just reputation, but in actual operation – probity, transparency and reliability. So, if a foreign company subject to rules which prevail outside Singapore operates here, it must not use its association with us to engage in subterfuge deception or backdoor channels for commercial advantage. So, it calls for a very delicate, agile but at the same time consistent, approach. If we can do this, we will continue to have access to frontier technologies where we will have an advantage. Maybe it is a dream, but the best place in the world where you can create a team of Russians and Ukrainians and Chinese and South Americans and Africans and Singaporeans – an effective team to take frontier technologies to the markets across the world – the most amenable, safe, conducive place should be Singapore. That is an example. Having said that, I also went through in my speech to say do not give up on multilateralism and international law. Yes, it is in recession. Yes, there is a geo-strategic climate change.”
“The last supplementary question we will handle later, because my colleague, Second Minister Maliki, has not spoken yet. But let me focus on the first part of the Member's question. What are the opportunities? As I said just now, I spent a lot of time making the point that this is a period of great change and great danger. But I hope you also glean from my speech that this is not a call for pessimism, because there are opportunities. So, what are these opportunities? The first thing is that the world is confronting a technological revolution on several fronts: AI and digital technologies, biotechnology and sustainable energy. And it just so happens that these three revolutions interlock with one another. In fact, they are feeding and accelerating with one another. And the frontier technologies are actually an area of great opportunity for us. Then, I also took pains to explain, however, that if we are going to seize these opportunities, we must remain open – open to people, ideas, technology, business models. I made the plea that even as we protect Team Singapore, we take a longer-term view to supplement Team Singapore so that we can exploit the full opportunities in frontier technologies. I have also explained that because of the lack of trust and the contestation and the desperate need for each big power to get ahead of the other, because they are worried that these leads will be exponential, making sure that our paradigm in which we operate Singapore, open to all powers, big, medium and small, that this paradigm is under pressure. And I also tried to explain the way we make it work is to be open, transparent, fair and to play it straight with all parties. I am acknowledging that it is more difficult.”
“But the point is, we do have strengths and there are opportunities ahead. We must stay principled, calm, confident and continue to be relevant, useful, to be an honest broker. We need the support and unity of all Singaporeans – all of the Members inside this House and Singaporeans outside the Parliament – to forge an unbreakable unity in the midst of great tumult and volatility. And if we can do so, then we can face the future with confidence and Singapore will emerge stronger. I want to end by thanking all Members for their unstinting support for the work of all our diplomats who have been working so hard all over the world. [Applause.]”