Skip to main content

Misinterpretation or Warning: Lee Hsien Loong Needs Hard Thinking


Just before PM Lee making his official visit to China, the Global Times in China published a controversy piece of news over its website. #1

Is this a misinterpretation as what our Ministry of Foreign Affairs explained? Or, deep in his heart, should PM Lee see this as a warning to himself or worst still, a slap on his face prior to meeting the new leaders of China.

New leaders always come with 3 fires (新官上任三把火).  This is the first time that PM Lee meets President Xi Jin-ping and Prime Minister Li Ke-qiang in their respective new capacities.  As an outsider, it is not our business to know (details) how Chinese choose their leaders.  However, PM Lee’s remark on Diaoyu Islands in Tokyo in May 2013 is a very sensitive issue in China.  A wrong remark or misinterpretation can easily lead to strong emotional reaction.  It is understandable after the publication of the ‘misinterpreted comment’, strong reactions are expected from netizens in China.  

Singapore MFA had no choice but to make the following statement: 
[Using a sensationalist headline, the article took Prime Minister Lee's comments completely out of context and grossly distorted and misreported what he said. Such unprofessional reporting is unhelpful and could harm bilateral relations and affect people-to-people ties. #1]

It blamed the Global Times and the Global Times said they just carried the same piece of news from Ta Kung Pao.  They can blame each other but the timing of the publication looks more like a warning to PM Lee, in Chinese it is 下马威. Before landing in Beijing, let’s warn you over the internet first indirectly and ‘unofficially’.   

Both Ta Kung Pao and the Global Times are mouthpieces of the Chinese Communist Party.  

Ta Kung Pao (大公报) is a pro-communist newspaper in Hong Kong #2, so do the Global Times in China #3.

Just imagine SINGAPOLITICS #4 publishes some bad news about our neighbours, for example, the haze problem or the crimes happening there. What will the foreign governments and their netizens think? How will they interpret it?  Can SINGAPOLITICS claim that they are independent and are just a private identity under Singapore Press Holdings?   

PM Lee and MFA, of course, can claim that this is just an isolated incidence by non-official news website in China. They can even say these are social media in China, like the (mistrusted) social media in Singapore. Deep in the hearts of Chinese and Singaporeans, do (they and) we really interpret in such a way? Is it just simply a ‘completely out of context and grossly distorted and misreported’ news over internet?

Back in Singapore politics, the phrase ‘completely out of context and grossly distorted and misreported’, in fact, looks quite familiar. Can you recall some of the past incidences? It needs no further explanation.

If this can be used as a political excuse to do some things, to serve some purposes, why can’t it be used as a warning or even a slap just before the Beijing visit?  

Besides enjoying his visit in China, PM Lee should think very hard what really his hosts are trying to say? Wrong interpretation or misinterpretation from the Singapore side has to be equally weighted and taken into consideration seriously.

#1
http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/media_centre/press_room/pr/2013/201308/press_20130923.html

#2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ta_Kung_Pao

#3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Times

#4

http://www.singapolitics.sg/
Labels:

Comments

  1. Alan Wan30 August 2013 at 00:33

    In front of the US, they were told we need them to counter China's military might. In front of the Taiwanese, they are advised it is rather stupid to go against the Chinese. In front of the Chinese, they are told their economic influence & power is most vital to us.

    Do we look like we will suck up to whichever party is of use to us ?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...
277 comments
Read more

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...
51 comments
Read more

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...
65 comments
Read more