Skip to main content

WHO IS TO DEFEND THE 10M POPULATION IN SINGAPORE?



This question looks remote. Then how about who are the defenders of the more than 5 million people in Singapore? The automatic and natural answer is the national service personnels, and in a more inclusive way, all under the Total Defence.    

There is no official denial of the 10 million population. It looks like the PAP-led Singapore is getting serious to be a future super city. With a weak or softening property market, it seems to be a good idea to come out with this suggestion.  It will help to push or sustain the property price and stabilize the market.   

We currently have more than 5.3 million residents in Singapore. Of which, more than 1 million are foreign workers and maids. When the population reaches 10 million, we will have 2 million foreign workers and maids. However, citizens serving the National Service is not expected to increase due to low birth rate.  

The citizen army of NSmen will then have to protect 10 million population as well as a bigger economy, several times larger than the current size. This, of course, is a happy picture if the projection is correct: bigger population, bigger economy,  and higher GNP per capita (but necessary a fairer distribution of income).   With such a richness and wealth, who is going to protect Singapore? Foreign talents, foreign workers or maids?

Foreign talents can find opportunities elsewhere. Perhaps, foreign workers and maids will have less choice, either to return to their home countries or move to other places. What if they decide to fight along side with Singaporeans against foreign invasions, will we grant them and reward them with a citizenship for their sacrifice?    

It is easy to increase population by just importing foreigners. Not only for Singapore, people from lower income countries or developing economies are willing to risk their lives to find ways to go to USA, Europe and Australia. If USA is to announce a free entry of 10 million people from any place in world, it can easily reach this target within a few days provided logistics and transportation problem can be solved.

The harder question is who is going to protect Singapore in time of crisis. Who is going to protect the USA, Europe and Australia? Imported foreigners?

Total Defence

www.mindef.gov.sg

In the total defence concept, economic defence is just one of  the five pillars. As explained above, the military defence, even equipped with modern weaponry, is not capable to defend a population of 10 million, perhaps not even 6.9 million.  

In addition, in a state of low public trust and divided Singapore, it is equally challenging to maintain a high level of readiness for civil defence, social defence and psychological defence. What can the PAP promise or assure Singaporeans a bright future with this constraint and without transparency and accountability?

Social media and opposition politics have enlightened Singaporeans. Singaporeans now demands more information, open debates, and don’t believe ‘the PAP is always right’. Even if there is no objection of the Total Defence concept, people will question the rational, the connections, and the effects of the increased population.     

Psychologically, socially, politically and economically are we ready for a 6.9 or 10 million population even if this is a so-called long-term planning? When the Total Defence 2014 Short Film - “Hands” (see below) was released on 1 February 2014, did they have the total population in mind? Is the video projecting a scenario of 6.9 or 10 million population?




Fewer than 9000 people watch this video as at 4 August 2014, what does it mean?  


Defending Singapore, our home?

Who are we defending in a Singapore of 10 million people?  When about half of the population are not Singapore citizens, how do we define ‘our home’?  We really need a re-framing, re-definition of Singapore, our home?

We will have to re-examine the Total Defence in a wider and broader way too.

[Total Defence involves every Singaporean playing a part, individually and collectively, to build a strong, secure and cohesive nation that is prepared and able to deal with any crisis. It is our approach to dealing with threats and challenges that arise.] www.mindef.gov.sg

What is the meaning of 'every Singaporean' in a future city of 10 million people? Will there still be a PAP government in future where this Total Defence is based?

Comments

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 ...

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...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...