Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
The Giant of Singapore The Biography of Lee Kuan Yew
2
Contents Preface Early Life Singapore Language Planning and Policy Creating an Economic Center Keeping Singapore Clean Lee Kuan Yew in the Public Eye Notes Bibliography
3
Preface
Lee Kuan Yew was the first prime minister of Singapore, and he remained in power
for nearly five decades. He was not only a brilliant leader in Singapore, but also an intelligent
educator who used bilingualism to integrate four separate races together; an excellent
economist who transformed a poor, corrupt city-state into a modern nation whose citizens
now have higher incomes than those of most Americans;i a “cleaner” who created a clean
and green Singapore; and an insightful thinker who clearly observed the current situation of
the world.
However, Lee Kuan Yew is also regarded as one of the most controversial people in
the world. Some Western scholars regard him as an “emperor”ii in Singapore. He was a
stubborn and determined leader. To make sure Singapore citizens obeyed authority, he
insisted on using the lash to whip people who violated the rule of law. To maintain a good
relationship between laborers and businesspeople, he forbade Singaporean workers to strike.
To keep Singapore’s environment clean and green, he banned chewing gum in Singapore.
These measures seemed incredible to many in the Western world and they incited the
controversy over Lee Kuan Yew.
The actions taken by Lee Kuan Yew had both merits and flaws. In spite of the
controversies, the most important aspect of Lee Kuan Yew’s legacy is what he did to make
Singapore what it is today. Lee Kuan Yew contributed greatly to the prosperity and progress
of today’s Singapore. In the process of reform and development, Lee and his colleagues
actively seized every potential opportunity and faced many challenges and difficulties.
Therefore, the legendary political life of Lee Kuan Yew can be closely tied to the
construction of Singapore.
4
Early Life
Childhood and Young Adult Life of Lee Kuan Yew
Lee Kuan Yew was born in Singapore on September 6, 1923, while Singapore was a
British colony. The given name Kuan Yew means “light and shine” in Chinese.iii Lee Kuan
Yew was of the fourth Chinese Hakka generation (which is one of the subdivisions of
Chinese ethnic minorities) in Singapore. His great-grandfather Lee Bok Boon, who was born
in 1846, emigrated from Dabu country, Guangxi province, to Singapore.iv He married Huan
Nio, a shopkeeper’s daughter, and they had a child, who was Lee’s grandfather, Lee Hon
Leong. Lee Hon Leong was a dispenser who accomplished much in his career. While he was
a steamboat purser, he learned English from the captain and realized that English is a very
useful language to know. Lee’s grandmother was a Malayan who could also speak English.
Lee and his grandfather enjoyed a close relationship. His grandfather always talked to Lee in
English and therefore affected Lee’s thoughts about English. As Lee’s father, Lee Chin Kong,
and his mother, Chua Jin Neo, were both from middle-class families, they spoke fluent
English.
Growing up in this English-speaking family, Lee showed great talent in learning
English. He did well in his English classes and matriculated at Raffle Institute.v During the
Great Depression, Lee’s grandfather went bankrupt, and his father had no choice but to work
as a shopkeeper because of his poor educational background. He suggested that if Lee did not
want to lead a poor life, he must choose a good major such as medicine, engineering, or law.
Lee Kuan Yew chose to major in law. In October 1945, he enrolled at the London School of
Economic and Political Science. Because he could not stand the fog and dust in London, he
transferred to the University of Cambridge. He received excellent grades in law during his
first year. He passed the bar exam in 1950 and returned to Singapore that year.vi
Lee met an intelligent girl in Cambridge and soon fell in love with her. They married
5
on September 30, 1950. The same year, he began to study Chinese. He and his wife had three
children: Lee Hsien Loong, Lee Wei Ling, and Lee Hsien Yang. After realizing the
importance for a person of Chinese lineage to speak Chinese, Lee Kuan Yew sent his three
children to Chinese school in Singapore.vii
After Lee returned to Singapore, he began working at Laycock’s law firm, earning
$500 per month. In February 1951, Lee became a legal advisor at the firm.viii This experience
taught him about the state of the Singaporean government. He dealt with many cases
regarding politics in Singapore. His experience as a lawyer prepared him for his political life.
Singapore Language Planning and Policy
Background
Singapore is a multiracial nation. Officially, its ethnic composition is approximately
78.6% Chinese, 13.9% Malay, 7.9% Indian, and 1.4% other races.ix The official languages in
Singapore are Malay, Chinese, Tamil, and English.x Singapore is indeed a linguistically and
ethnically diverse country.xi A variety of races must work together to ensure that
Singaporean society is stable and secure in order to lay the foundation for economic
development. Although English is not a dialect of a particular Singaporean ethnicity, it is still
recognized as an important official language that helped Singapore attain social stability and
national integration.
In 1963, Lee Kuan Yew moved to merge Singapore with Malaysia in order to develop
Singapore’s economy. At the time of the union, Malay was the official language in Singapore,
and Singapore thus became a part of the Federation of Malaysia. However, on August 9,
1965, Singapore was expelled from the Federation of Malaysia, which soon led the Malay
language to suffer a crisis in Singapore. Singapore separation from Malaysia made Malay
community lagged behind the Chinese and Indian communities in terms of educational
performance level.xii The government of Singapore decided that the basis of the new national
6
identity would continue to be multiracialism, in which all the main ethnic groups would be
regarded as equal before the law and would be provided equal opportunities for
advancement.xiii
In Singapore, language served as a tool to maintain the relationship between different
races, allowing for social development and multiracial integration. It was also the basis for
Singapore’s economic development,xiv providing opportunities for different races to coexist
in the same government without linguistic or communication problems. To set up an official
language was crucial to Singapore’s development. Realizing the importance of establishing
an official language, Lee Kuan Yew introduced a bilingual policy in Singapore.
Bilingual Language Policy
After visiting Malaysia, Lee realized that using a single official ethnic language in
Singapore was not feasible. It would be preferential to one ethnic group and cause discontent
among the others; therefore, using English as the primary language was the best way to
prevent conflict between the three predominant ethnicities. Lee also stated that with the
institution of English as Singapore’s official language, Singapore must still provide equal
chances for citizens to study their native languages. Chinese, Malay, and Tamil then became
the other official languages in Singapore. The use of English along with one’s native
language was the distinguishing feature of Singapore bilingual educational policy.xv
Not wanting to cause a controversy over language, Lee first introduced the teaching
of English in Chinese, Malay, and Tamil schools, which initiated the transition to the
bilingual policy.xvi Most Indian and Malay parents agreed with this policy, but many
Chinese-speaking parents were deeply attached to their language and culture. They could not
understand why their children were allowed to be educated completely in Chinese under
British rule, yet under their own elected government would also have to learn English.
However, in order to attain better job prospects, many parents sent their children to English
7
schools anyway. The conflicts over bilingual language policy provided fertile ground for
contention.xvii
From 1965 to 1975, Singapore actively carried out the bilingual policy. Second
language proficiency increased a great deal in schools; however, the English proficiency
rates in non-English schools were lower. In the 1974 primary school graduation exams, out
of 71,049 students, only 42,512 students passed the English test. That was not a promising
number; 40 percent of six-year primary school students did not graduate. Evidently, the first
phase of bilingual policy was not very successful.xviii
In order to deal with these problems, Lee became the minister of Singapore’s
educational system for four months. Lee keenly understood the poor educational situation in
Singapore and during his time as minister, he made a complete plan for Singapore’s
educational redevelopment. The publication of the Goh Keng Swee report in 1979 was the
basis of an official plan for Singaporean educational reform.xix This solidified the emphasis
of Singaporean bilingual education: using English as the primary language and students’
native language as the second language, which became policy in 1987. However, under the
report, Singapore bilingual policy began to deviate to what Kaplan and Baldauf (2003),
drawing on Riney, called “English Knowing bilingualism.”
Many educators in Chinese schools felt a strong resentment toward English and
showed their loyalty to and dependence on Chinese. For example, in October 1966, when
Lee declared an English library open at Nan Yang University, 200 students protested.xx
Although the number of students who attended English schools dramatically increased from
1965 to 1987, some Chinese schools were reluctant to introduce English courses. In order to
carry out bilingual policy, Lee Kuan Yew announced that beginning in 1987, with the
exception of some special schools, all Singaporean schools should use English as the first
language and their own language as the second language.xxi The last school that used Chinese
8
as the first instructional language closed in 1987. Lee’s decision greatly increased the number
of Singaporeans who spoke fluent English, but it nearly led Singapore to “English Knowing
Bilingualism.”
Gradually, English became the primary household language of Chinese citizens in
Singapore, especially of young people. The 2000 government census showed a gradual
language shift from Mandarin Chinese to English as a main household language: 21.5 percent
of Chinese youth ages 15 to 24 reported English as their home language, compared with 35.8
percent of youths ages 5 to 14. A similar significant language shift toward English as the
home language is currently taking place in the Indian community. Although English,
standard Chinese, standard Malay, and standard Tamil were all official languages in
Singapore, English was regarded as the main language in Singapore throughout much of its
territory. Since 1987, all the schools in Singapore taught English and their native language.
Chinese, Malay, and Tamil schools taught English and gave English tests. However, different
ethnic groups had different cultural backgrounds, and the quality of education in their native
language was not the same.xxii Because English was used throughout Singapore, racial
tensions declined gradually. On the other hand, language was an important component of
culture, but language was not equivalent to culture. While many Chinese people in Singapore
can now speak Chinese fluently, some Malays can also speak Chinese.xxiii Even if Chinese
was passed from generation to generation in Singapore, no one can guarantee that Chinese
culture was transmitted in the same way. Chinese language is only one portion of Chinese
culture, so as Lee Kuan Yew implemented the bilingual policy in Singapore, Chinese culture
would decay gradually and be assimilated by English and Western culture.
The purpose of bilingual policy in Singapore was to prepare for its economic growth.
Without a unified official language, it is difficult for different ethnic groups to communicate
with each other. English is a common language in the workplace in Singapore, and a fluent
9
English speaker will have better job opportunities than someone who does not speak fluently.
Job opportunities influenced Chinese, Malay, and Tamil people to study English to get better
jobs. If there were no official language in a multiracial nation like Singapore, people living in
Singapore would have trouble communicating with each other and it would be impossible for
Singapore to have developed so fast. Having English as the official language of Singapore
provided chances for Singapore to open up to the entire world. Although the decline of
traditional culture under bilingual policy was unavoidable in Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew
never thought to abandon Chinese culture and pursue Western culture. Though Lee Kuan
Yew emphasized the importance of English and opposed the chauvinism of Chinese culture
and language in Singapore, he was indeed of Chinese descent. He had experienced the
distress of being ignorant of his own culture and he determined to send all of his children to
Chinese school to receive a Chinese-language education. He sought to help Chinese
educators find employment, but their ignorance of English made it difficult to find suitable
placement. While English became more acceptable and popular in Singapore, the role of
native languages unavoidably weakened. Chinese gradually became the Singaporean Chinese
language, which combined elements of English, Malay, and other languages.xxiv
Although Singapore bilingual policy caused a decline in traditional culture, it succeeded in its
goals. First, although Singapore bilingualism was called “English Knowing Bilingualism,”
the integration of language in Singapore provided a pretext for multiracial integration.
Citizens were given equal chances to study English, so they had equal chances to compete for
jobs. Bilingualism in Singapore guaranteed a united multiracial nation. Second, Singapore
was indeed a small country of approximately 5 million people.xxv The small size of the
country allowed bilingualism to be implemented effectively. Third, bilingualism in Singapore
provided the basis for Singapore’s development. Making English its primary language helped
Singapore allow people from multiple ethnic groups to work for the Singaporean government.
10
Without its bilingual policy, Singapore would not be what it is today.
Creating an Economic Center
On the map, Singapore seems miniscule, but it is also one of the most globalized
nations due to its trade-intensive economy.xxvi From 1965 to 2000, Singapore transformed
itself from a small, impoverished country to one of the most important economic centers in
the world. In only 35 years, Singapore underwent industrialization, created a financial center,
and successfully survived an economic crisis under the leadership of Lee Kuan Yew.
The development of Singapore was not an easy task. Without enough land, clean
water, and natural resources, Singapore might have been destined to poverty and dependence
on Western countries. Lee Kuan Yew thought otherwise; his version was of a state that
would not simply survive, but excel. He envisioned that superior intelligence, discipline, and
ingenuity would substitute for resources.xxvii
Singaporean Development Strategy
Although Singapore lacks natural resources and cultivated land, it has an excellent
geographical location and convenient access to trade routes, as it is located to the east of the
Strait of Malacca. Lee Kuan Yew made full use of Singapore’s advantageous location and
amassed large profits through shipping and trading.
In 1961, the Dutch economist Albert Winsemius led a United Nations team to
research Singapore’s industrialization. Winsemius played an important role in Singaporean
economic strategy and industrialization. In 1961, he delivered his first report to Lee Kuan
Yew on the economic circumstances in Singapore. He proposed two conditions for
Singapore’s economic development. First, he insisted that Singapore rid its government of
communists; he argued that communists were stunting Singapore’s growth. Second, he
advised that Singapore keep the sculpture of Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles. an important
11
leader in Singapore during the early nineteenth century, who made Singapore an important
commercial port.xxviii During that time, communists held significant power. The growing
power of communists impeded the economic growth of Singapore. The power of communists
soon expanded to many countries in Southeast Asia. They always seemed to pose political
issues for Lee Kuan Yew and Tunku Abdul Rahman (the first prime minister in Malaysia).
Lee Kuan Yew once said: “Singapore cannot develop with communists.”xxix In an effort to
weaken the communists, Lee Kuan Yew engineered the merger with the Federation of
Malaysia in 1963, but was then forced to separate from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965.xxx
Keeping the sculpture of Raffles seemed straightforward. For Lee Kuan Yew, if there were
no Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles in Singapore, his great grandfather would not have
been able to visit Singapore. Keeping the sculpture of Raffles signified that Singapore would
depend on European and American markets’ business techniques and management styles.xxxi
Lee stated that the first step for Singaporean economic growth would be to deal with
the increasing unemployment rate.xxxii In response, he used Singapore’s beautiful natural
scenery to develop tourism to create more jobs for unemployed people because tourism is a
labor-intensive industry requiring numerous workers such as sightseeing guides, chefs,
custodians, and waiters; repast was very crucial to tourism and Singapore’s food diversity
including traditional Chinese food, Malay food, Indian food and western food attracted a lot
of visitors. Although the investment in tourism was small, it could potentially generate
sizable profits during tourist season.
Unfortunately, the development of a country is not as easy as the development of
tourism. Although the government spent a lot of money constructing basic facilities for
industry in addition to its investment in tourism, the Jurong industrial estate (which was
picked as a prime industrial area in the 1950s) not only made few improvements in the
construction of basic facilities, but it also extensively polluted the environment.xxxiii In efforts
12
to revive development, Singapore began to manufacture recycled paper and pottery, but these
two industries eventually collapsed.
After analyzing the reasons for Singapore’s unsuccessful economic development, Lee
realized that the main impediments were its poor infrastructure, small territory, and lack of
natural resources. To mitigate these problems, Lee decided to seek assistance from Britain.
From January to March 1968, Lee Kuan Yew and Hon Sui Sen (the fourth minister of
finance in Singapore) negotiated with British leaders to maintain a strong alliance and secure
financial help from Britain. Eventually, in March of 1968, Britain agreed to offer £50 million
to support Singapore, but Singapore was forbidden from importing goods from any countries
other than Britain. Of the money offered to Singapore, 25 percent was granted without
obligations, and 75 percent was loaned to Singapore. Lee decided to use half of the money to
begin basic infrastructure construction in Singapore and the other half to buy civil and
national defense facilities from the British. The British government decided to offer the
Sembawang Naval Dockyard to Singapore for five years in exchange for the Hunter
Company Agency in Singapore.xxxiv
Luckily, the use of the naval dockyard appealed to many American people. John
Hunter, an American who was anxious to keep the naval dockyard viable, sent army and
navy teams in January and February to inspect the facilities. In April 1968, the United States
decided to use Sembawang’s ship-repair facilities for a trial period from April to June 1968,
and allowed 4 to 5 million businesses development during that time.xxxv Naval dockyards
developed rapidly in Singapore and gradually became a civil industry. After five years,
Virgin Watson, a manager at Hunter Company, decided to live in Singapore and organize the
Sembawang Shipyard Company, which was eventually listed on the Stock Exchange of
Singapore.xxxvi
From 1968 to 1972, Lee Kuan Yew seized the opportunity that the British offered and
13
made use of British techniques, market knowledge, and funds to further support Singapore’s
industrial development. Although Singapore is still not regarded as a major industrial power
today, at that time, for a small, poor Southeast Asian country, industrialization and
infrastructure construction were crucial to the country’s survival. Singapore indeed had many
disadvantages in industrialization, such as insufficient natural resources, small territory, and a
lack of skilled laborers. To mitigate the former two conditions, Lee sought help from both
Britain and the United States. He signed a five-year contract with Britain and collaborated
with the United States to set up a transnational electronic power company.
Besides industrialization, the relationship between laborers and businesspeople was
another crucial factor for Singapore’s development. Several questions arise when considering
this subject: How did Singapore cultivate a supply of skilled workers and talented laborers?
How did Lee Kuan Yew impel multicultural integration in Singapore? The National Trades
Union Congress (NTUC) played an important role in Singapore’s industrialization and
multicultural integration.
Negotiating the Union’s Place in Society and the Economy
The formation of unions was the foundation for the construction of all of Singapore.
When Lee initially gained power in Singapore, he realized “for Singapore only just getting
industrialized, it will be disastrous if we think we can get more and more pay for less and less
work. No one owes us [a] living. Nothing is for free.”xxxvii In 1968, Lee stated that the
relationship between capitalists and laborers was more important than the wages of
workers.xxxviii According to Lee, “one good management team gives 10,000 men their
jobs.”xxxix Activating workers’ enthusiasm for their jobs was the main goal in setting up
Singapore’s National Trades Union Congress. Lee felt that Singaporeans’ group interests
would be advanced if workers strove to achieve their best, and thus encouraged their peers to
do better by example.xl
14
Initially, the main official union federation in Singapore was the Singapore General
Labor Union (SGLU). The SGLU was an initiative of the Malay communist party and the
first unit of the Malay General Union, which expanded throughout the Malay community.xli
The SGLU was reestablished as the Singapore Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) in August
1946 as part of the division of the Malay General Labor Union into the SFTU and the Pan-
Malay Federation of Trade Unions.xlii Although the SFTU was politically tied to the Malay
communist party, it was not exclusive to the Indian community. The SFTU had virtually no
presence in the Malay community.xliii The SFTU initiated some strikes in 1948, but these
measures largely backfired. After a call for mobilization on May 1, 1948, the British
authorities declared an emergency and forcefully suppressed the SFTU.xliv Eventually, British
authorities deregistered the SFTU in December 1948.xlv
Having witnessed the failure of the SFTU, Lee considered that the first step to
improve unions in Singapore was to rid workers of bad habits and the tendency to press
employers for more pay and benefits regardless of consequences to the company. For
example, triple pay on public vacations had led to workers deliberately allowing garbage to
accumulate before public holidays to ensure that they would have to work on the holidays. In
response, Lee asked the union leader to revise their trade practices.xlvi
Lee also introduced a policy making strikes in Singapore illegal. In the years just after
the code’s implementation, some strikes did occur under the leadership of Suppiah, an Indian
labor leader considered to be stubborn and determined. Lee once advised Suppiah that he
would consider a wage increase in 1968 and warned that if Suppiah’s federations went on
strike, they would have to return to India. However, Suppiah was not impressed.xlvii The
Public Daily Rated Cleansing Workers’ Union, part of Suppiah’s federation, had 2,400
members. Suppiah warned that if their workers’ grievance was not settled within one week,
all 14,000 workers in his other federations would go on strike against the government. Lee
15
then sent police to suppress the strikes and arrested Suppiah and 14 other leaders of the
Cleansing Workers’ Union. After the strike leaders were arrested, some strikers who had lost
their job wished to be reemployed. Lee Kuan Yew called this strike a turning point of
Singapore’s industrialization. The government’s method of dealing with the strikes won
public support. Afterward, strikes rarely took place in Singapore.
Recounting Britain’s prodigal years of crippling dock strikes, which led to the
devaluation of the pound sterling in 1967, Lee warned that “if that happened here at our
harbor, I will declare this high treason. I will move against the strike leaders. Charges will be
brought in court later. I will get port going straight away. The Singapore dollar will never [be]
devalued and I think people of Singapore expect this of their government.”xlviii As a result, the
amount of cargo handled by the port of Singapore increased by over ten percent in 1967, but
the number of workers employed did not rise. Lee told the union leaders to do their best to
provide equal rights to homes, health, education, and social benefits for workers to ensure
workers’ maximum effectiveness. Lee also made it illegal for trade unions to strike or take
industrial action without a secret ballot. This provision halted the practice of open voting and
protected workers from being intimidated to acquiescence.
During Lee’s visit to Japan in 1979,xlix the Japanese labor system thoroughly
impressed him. Unlike Japanese companies, Singaporean companies were small, most with
less than a thousand workers. Moreover, Singapore’s house unions did not have many highly
educated and skilled workers. Lee returned to Singapore not only with his own enthusiasm
for Japan, but also with a promise of help. The Japanese government undertook to establish a
department of Japanese study at the National University of Singapore to improve engineering
faculty at the computer training facility.l Lee endeavored to enhance Singapore’s labor force
by improving citizens’ academic qualifications. He also showed great interest in Japanese
long-range economic planning and wanted Singapore to emulate Japanese economic
16
principles. He sent the top Singaporean economic officials to Tokyo in 1980 to study
Japanese formulated policy. In an effort to imitate Japan’s success, house unions increased
their membership. They encouraged openness and trust and improved labor–management
relations.
Later, in 1990, to find a solution to deal with lack of elites in Singapore, Lee
encouraged promising students returning from abroad to take up full-time careers in the
National Trade Union Congress to augment research and negotiation capabilities.li With
universal education in Singapore, poor students would have the opportunity to go to college,
so the education of the populace would be strengthened.
In connection, the so-called Second Industrial Revolution shifted Singapore from
labor-intensive industries toward capital- and knowledge-intensive industries. In part, this
was possible due to the National Wage Council raising wages about 20 percent each year in
1979, 1980, and 1981; the stated intention was to make labor-intensive industries in
Singapore uncompetitive in the international market, thus forcing domestic workers or
businesses to invest in more skilled workers, capital, equipment, and technology.lii Initially,
workers in Singapore could better their wages through a positive attitude and high
productivity. However, this policy caused workers to concentrate on the quantity of items
produced instead of their quality. Encouraging the growth of knowledge-intensive industries
would require workers to improve their skills, so Singapore gradually abandoned the “more
work, more wage” policy. The encouragement of innovation and Japanese practices allowed
Singapore to seize the opportunity to turn toward knowledge-intensive industries.
In summary, Lee Kuan Yew’s main accomplishment in managing unions was to
implement a fair framework to govern industrial labor relations by balancing union demands
with consultative and arbitration procedures and ensuring that unions protect the basic rights
and interests of workers. “The key to peace and harmony in society is that everyone has a
17
share in the fruits of our progress.”liii
Managing a Financial Center
Today Singapore is one of the largest financial centers in the world.liv Gleaming
modern offices in the city center hold banks of computers connected to London, New York,
Tokyo, Frankfurt, and other major financial centers.lv Singapore’s current prosperity can be
partly explained by the influence and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew. For example, Singapore has
demonstrated a unique ability to successfully overcome financial crises. Lee suggested that
Singapore’s ability to weather economic downturns was due to “prudent budget[s] for many
years with no deficits for our currency expenditure, and a balance of payment in surplus, not
in deficit. We do not need to borrow vast sums of money, because we have not overspent. A
reliable Singapore dollar has helped us to develop our banking and financial institution[s], for
money seeks security without impediment to its free flow.”lvi
Prior to 1967, Singapore pursued export promotion measures because of its
geographically advantageous location.lvii However, when Singapore became an independent
nation, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew suggested promoting industry rather than exporting.
The promotion policy in Singapore aimed to directly stimulate private industry
manufacturing rather than export-promotion schemes.lviii However, Singapore had a limited
domestic market, and industrialization unavoidably involves export incentive
industrialization. Economic growth in Singapore depended on private investment. The
government’s approach to making Singapore attractive to foreign investors encompassed
three strategies: (1) creation of industrial institutions and the development of industrial
estates; (2) provision of tax incentives, financial assistance schemes, and specific export
incentives; and (3) accelerated workforce development and enforcement of labor discipline.lix
After Singapore’s separation from Malaysia, its economy was still restricted to the
sterling area. Former finance minister Hon Sui Sen and Lee Kuan Yew sought to organize a
18
foreign currency pool like that in Hong Kong, which would allow Singapore to have an
Asian dollar market.lx Lee determined that it was worth the risk to leave the sterling area,
although Singapore could lose the economic assistance offered by Britain. At the same time,
Lee restricted foreign companies from entering Singapore.lxi Lee Kuan Yew closed
Singapore to the world market. Singapore had many partners in the world, but unlike many
other countries, it seldom borrowed from other countries. Singapore would depend on itself
to create its prosperity.
At first, Singapore made a modest start in the foreign currency pool with its offshore
Asian Dollar Market. This was mainly an interbank market in Singapore that obtained
foreign currency funds from banks abroad for lending to banks in the region, and vice
versa.lxii In 1997, the Asian Dollar Market exceeded US $200 billion, amounting to nearly
three times as much capital as the Singapore domestic bank system. Thus, Singapore
gradually became a key player in the international market.
Lee strongly emphasized the importance of an honest and transparent financial center.
Singapore would not allow any illegal or dishonest financial institutions to operate there. In
1975, Hon Sui Sen told Lee Kuan Yew that Slater Walker Securities had engaged in
manipulating shares in Haw Par Brothers International, a public-listed company in Singapore.
They had been siphoning off the assets of Haw Par and its subsidiaries illegally for the
benefit of certain directors and themselves.lxiii The swindle of Haw Par Brothers
International extended from Singapore to Malaysia, Hong Kong, and London. Lee ordered
the restraint of Jam Slater, the perpetrator of the Haw Par Brothers Institution’s illegal
activity. Subsequently, Lee Kuan Yew tightened the regulations of Singapore financial
institutions.
Strict monitoring and regulation of foreign financial institutions were necessary to
enter the Singapore market. Lee Kuan Yew refused to allow the Bank of Credit and
19
Commerce International (BCCI) to join because the bank was too new and low in
capitalization.lxiv Although the BCCI tried more than once to invite Singapore to become a
member, Lee never changed his mind. Eventually the BCCI went bankrupt because of
dishonest practices, but Singapore was not endangered because it declined to join this
institution. Thanks to its vigilance, Singapore successfully avoided many problems.
From 1968 to 1985, Lee decided to open the Singapore market to the international
market and attracted foreign financial institutions by abolishing the withholding tax on
interest income earned by nonresident deposits. By the 1990s, Singapore became one of the
largest financial centers in the world. The foundation of Singapore’s financial system was
rule of law, stability, and independence, with budget surpluses almost every year. These
qualities ensured the Singapore dollar’s strength, with exchange rates that dampened import
inflation.lxv
Surviving Financial Crises
In July 1997, speculator George Soros undersold Thai baht and created an economic
bubble in the Thai economy fueled by hot money. Inflation surged as the bubble became
larger. A similar situation occurred in Malaysia and Indonesia, which had the added
complication of “crony capitalism” The short-term capital flow was expensive and often
highly conditioned for quick profit. Development money went in a largely uncontrolled
manner to certain people only, not particularly the best suited or most efficient, but those
closest to the centers of power.lxvi Thailand, Indonesia, and South Korea had large deficits,
and the maintenance of fixed change rates encouraged external borrowing and led to
excessive exposure to foreign exchange risk in both the financial and corporate sectors.
As the crisis spread, most of Southeast Asia and Japan saw slumping currency,lxvii
devalued stock and other asset prices, and a precipitous rise in private debt. However,
compared to Thai, Malaysian, and South Korean currencies, the Singapore dollar’s interest
20
rates did not decrease significantly, and the financial crisis did not cause serious problems in
Singapore. Singapore dollars were not tied to the US dollar. Because it was unattractive for
Singapore to borrow US dollars, Singapore companies had small dollar debts, so the
Singapore dollar was not seriously endangered in this financial crisis. In less than a year, the
Singaporean economy fully recovered and continued expanding.lxviii
Another important reason that Singapore could weather crises better than some other
countries was that there was little corruption or cronyism to distort the allocation of resources.
Singapore had a series of strict provisions for foreign companies and speculators to enter into
the Singapore stock exchange. Lee said during the 1997 crisis, “too many trouble countries
and political leaders have exercised power and responsibility not as a trust for public good,
but as an opportunity for private gain.”lxix In other countries, corruption and cronyism quickly
spread throughout the crisis and caused recessions in many Asian countries. However, unlike
those countries (such as Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia) with a lot of cronyism and nepotism,
Singapore has a transparent government and no relationship of cronyism with those countries.
Singapore’s transparent government allowed the nation to survive this crisis and avoid capital
deficiency. Singapore closely followed the steps of the international market in this crisis and
offered rescue for many struggling countries.
Keeping Singapore’s Environment Clean
When asked how Singapore rose from the Third World to the First World, Lee
identified Singapore’s cleanliness as the reason. His understanding of Singapore’s cleanliness
has three aspects: the environment, the government, and Singaporean citizens. Lee Kuan
Yew concentrated on cleaning the streets and transforming Singapore into a green garden
city. He strictly punished corruption and nepotism and made the People’s Action Party (PAP)
government free from corruption. He educated and encouraged Singaporean people, but
strictly punished those who broke the law. Under his leadership, the sky of Singapore became
21
bluer; the city became greener; the government became more upright and honest; and the
citizens of Singapore became more educated.
Despite its unrelenting industrialization, breakneck growth, and rapid urbanization
over its relatively short forty-year history, Singapore has managed to turn itself into a clean
and green city with a high-quality living environment.lxx Lee Kuan Yew once stated,
“Without the greening effort, Singapore would have been a barren, ugly city. There would
have been few trees, planted haphazardly here and there, but there would have been none of
the planning or the care and maintenance that sustain our greenery today.”lxxi
To achieve First World standards in a Third World region, Lee and his colleagues
decided to transform Singapore into a green garden city. First, Lee ordered trees to be planted
at the opening of the community center, but only a small group of trees survived. This failure
made Lee realize the need not only to plant trees but also to carefully tend them. As millions
of trees, shrubs, and palm trees were planted in the streets, the greenery raised citizens’
morale and inspired pride in their surroundings.lxxii Lee told his citizens not to vandalize trees,
but to inculcate a desire to preserve the environment requires eliminating some old habits.
Lee suggested that schools educate children on how to plant trees and take care of them and
grow gardens, letting children bring the message they had been taught in school home to their
parents.lxxiii
At Lee Kuan Yew’s request, an Australian botanist and a New Zealand soil scientist
came to Singapore in 1978. After carefully analyzing the soil property and environment of
Singapore, they suggested that Lee apply fertilizer regularly, preferably compost, which
would not be so easily washed away, and lime, because Singaporean soil was too acidic.lxxiv
Lee acted on their advice. Gradually the whole city seemed to become an oasis.
On the first Sunday of November 1971, the Singaporean government launched an
annual Tree Planting Day that involved all members of parliament, as well as community
22
centers and their leaders.lxxv Since then, Singapore has never missed a single Tree Planting
Day. Because Singapore’s own varieties of trees are limited, Lee sent research teams to visit
botanical gardens, public parks, and arboreta in tropical and subtropical regions to select new
species of trees.
Considering that Singapore is part of the equatorial rainforest belt, with strong
sunshine and heavy rainfall throughout the years,lxxvi Singapore’s government spent a
substantial amount of money to bring the river and water sources under control. It spent S$2
billion on drainage development projects over thirty years; S$1.8 billion on sewerage and
used water treatment infrastructure in the 1970s and 1980s; another S$3.65 billion on the
construction of the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System (DTSS); and over $300 million on
cleaning up the Singapore River from 1977 to 1989.lxxvii
To increase the water supply, Lee Kuan Yew decided to collect as much rainfall as
possible in Singapore. He put Lee Ek Tieng in charge of a plan to dam up all streams and
rivers.lxxviii This plan was implemented in 10 years. By the 1980s, Singapore was able to
provide 63 million gallons of water per day, about half of Singapore’s daily water
consumption. As the rainfall was successively recycled in Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew decided
to clean up Singapore River and Kallang Basin and restock the rivers with fish, though many
people opposed his plan. Because of the scale of this engineering plan, people were moved
from some 3,000 backyard and cottage industries and resettled in an industrial estate with
sullage traps for oil and other waste.lxxix Lee phased out the rearing of 900,000 pigs and the
operation of 8,000 farms because the waste from the pigs polluted streams and rivers. Lee
also shut down many fisheries, leaving only 14 agrotechnology parks and a few ponds for
leisure fishing in order to maintain the fish population in rivers. In the 1990s, Lee Kuan
Yew’s clean river plan was basically accomplished.
Lee also took measures to deal with air pollution in Singapore. In 1970, to promote
23
environmental responsibility and give full political backing to the initiative, Lee established
the first environmental agency, the Anti-pollution Unit (APU).lxxx Although this decision
was unpopular at the time, it has given Singapore the gift of good air quality alongside rapid
industrial growth.lxxxi Under this agency, Lee enacted the Clean Air Act in 1971, and
Singapore’s air quality largely improved as a result. This legislation gave more discretionary
power to members of APU to restrain the amount of chemical toxins and polluted air emitted
from industrial areas (especially the Jurong industrial estate). For example, Lee built a bird
park in Jurong Town in 1971 and required Jurong Town to make sure that these birds could
survive in the town. He also ordered Jurong to landscape its grounds and plant trees to
alleviate the air pollution. According to a 2003 Joint Bank study of twenty Asian countries,
Singapore is the only one among them whose air quality falls within the safety limit for key
pollutants.lxxxii
In order to ensure that Singapore’s streets were kept clean, Lee Kuan Yew banned
spitting and chewing gum in Singapore. Although some Western countries considered the
ban of chewing gum ridiculous, Lee was determined to enact this ban because gum spit on
the ground, floor, and common corridors was very difficult to clean up. In 1992, Singapore
banned the import and sale of gum and began to seriously punish people who smuggled
gum.lxxxiii
Over time, people’s attitude toward green Singapore has changed. Recycling was
slowly enacted in Singapore. Most stores still give out plastic bags (though some global
retailers, such as Ikea, are weaning their use), and Singapore appears largely reluctant to give
up plastic bags.lxxxiv Singapore would also be a prime location to test green vehicles, but the
government was reluctant to introduce green vehicles because of Singapore’s status as the
third largest oil refiner. While new emission standards have been introduced, congestion on
city roads has dramatically worsened.lxxxv
24
However, Singapore is still regarded as the garden city.lxxxvi Strict environmental laws
prevent people from doing things that have negative effects on the environment (except for
using plastic bags and driving cars). Whereas many Asian countries strove to industrialize
regardless of environmental concerns, Lee Kuan Yew invested funds and manpower to tackle
environmental problems, creating a green oasis in Southeast Asia.
Keeping the Government Clean
Many people may mistakenly believe that the reason Singapore became the least
corrupt country in Asia and the third least corrupt country in the worldlxxxvii is that
Singaporean officials’ salaries were large enough that they did not need to accumulate
private gain in illegal ways. However, this thought is not accurate. First, only the salaries of
the president, prime minister, and minister were higher than those of ordinary officials.
Officials’ salaries depended completely on the market; they sometimes rose and sometimes
fell.lxxxviii Second, Singapore’s high salary policy (to keep the salary of government officials
consistent with the market) started in the 1980s. Before that time, Singapore had generally
already rid the government of corruption. One might ask, then, how the Singaporean
government became so clean, and what purpose the high salary policy served.
The high salary policy was initiated when Lee Kuan Yew gained power in the
Singaporean government as a representative of the PAP. Lee Kuan Yew was determined to
establish a clean and effective government. In 1959, when Singapore attained self-
government, corruption was rife throughout all sectors of public service. Syndicated
corruption was especially common among law enforcement officials; payment for their
services was mandatory and bribery was the norm.lxxxix Lee took legislative measures to
ensure that the Prevention of Corruption Act, an anti-corruption law, awarded executive
power in the censuring of corruption in Singapore.xc The law was amended in 1969 to give
more power to the Corruption Practices Investigating Bureau (CPIB; including arrest, search,
25
and investigation of the bank accounts and bankbooks of suspects and their families and
agents) to enforce punishment. Then, in 1973, Lee founded the anticorruption advisory
committee (ACAC). Its main functions included establishing guidelines for various
government departments and statutory bodies to deal with corruption cases, ensuring that
firm and consistent action was taken, monitoring through the CPIB the action taken in all
corruption cases by heads of departments and statutory bodies, and helping to expedite
departmental or court proceedings against corrupt public officials. The ACAC was dissolved
at the end of 1975 after it had fulfilled its function.xci
Lee introduced as a precondition of honest government that candidates do not need a
large amount of money to get elected.xcii Spending a large amount of money to “buy” an
election indicates corruption. Unlike many other Asian countries, Singapore has avoided
spending money in election campaigns. Moreover, Lee persuaded Chief Minister Lim Yew
Hock to prohibit the practice of using cars to take voters to the polls to avoid corruption in
voting process. Singapore has shown that a system of clean elections not influenced by
campaign money helps preserve an honest government.
In order to effectively avoid corruption, Lee felt that government officials should be
paid a wage commensurate with what people of their ability and integrity are earning in
business, legal, or other professional practice.xciii Their salaries must also be guaranteed. Lee
proposed in Parliament in 1994 that the government settle a formula so that salary revisions
for ministers, judges, and top civil servants were automatic and were linked to the income tax
return of the private sector.xciv The ministers’ and officials’ salaries were equivalent to two-
thirds of the earning statement of private sector income tax. This policy bestowed Singapore
officials with higher salaries than other Western countries’ officials. However, not everyone
believed that this policy was enacted to discourage corruption. The main reason Lee
implemented this formula was to attract more honest and able people to work for Singapore’s
26
government. This policy prevented corruption to some degree, but the main reason officials
avoided corrupt activity was that dishonest officials could lose their entire annuity. For a
Singapore official, a salary of S$1,000 could be converted into S$116,000 in annuities.
Consequently, there was a saying that the cost for corruption was too high to corrupt money.
The story of Cheng Wan, a minister of national development, provides one example. Because
he received two cash payments of S$400,000, he committed suicide to avoid the serious
punishment he faced.
Government transparency benefited Singapore in many areas. During the
anticorruption campaign, Singaporean people also became aware that to ensure a safe society,
policies and officials must work on behalf of the people instead of for personal gain. The lack
of corruption and nepotism in government helped Singapore to weather the economic crisis
of 1997 with few economic losses.
The Singaporean government dealt harshly with political corruption, and its
anticorruption action was executive force. Lee Kuan Yew and his colleagues tried their best
to prevent any opportunity for corruption. For Singaporean government officials, borrowing
money from other government officials was illegal. Singapore’s comparatively high
government salaries may not have been widely accepted by other countries, but this policy
suited Singapore’s development, encouraged government transparency, and facilitated
Singapore’s rise from the Third World to the First. On the other hand, honesty in government
also helped Singapore to avoid nepotism and was a key factor in Singapore’s survival of the
1997 economic crisis and avoidance of substantial economic damage.
Keeping People Clean
In Singapore, it is rare to see people litter, spit, chew gum, or even talk loudly in
public. What other countries considered moral issues, Lee Kuan Yew brought into the legal
domain. He considered the task of keeping Singaporean people “clean” to be no less
27
important than keeping the government and environment clean. Lee Kuan Yew helped create
a rule of law in Singapore and a fair society in which citizens’ moral qualities would be
rewarded.xcv Many people have heard about the strict laws of Singapore, including fines,
whipping, and capital punishment. Lee Kuan Yew once said, “As for caning, I will give you
a simple change we had to make. An illegal immigrant did not have to be canned. He was
just sent to prison and fined. We found the prison was a paradise compared to what he came
from and the jails were being filled up. We canned. It has not completely deterred although it
has reduce the illegals because even the caning plus the prison sentence in worth their trying
to get Singapore wages. We are not punishing because we are sadists and masochists. It gives
us no pleasure. ” Singapore’s strict laws discouraged people from committing crime, but this
policy also became very controversial around the world.xcvi
Lee believed the principle of equality of all before the law was necessary to the
proper functioning of a society.xcvii Having worked as a lawyer and studied law at the
University of Cambridge, Lee Kuan Yew had a breadth of knowledge about law, and he
keenly understood its importance. But Lee could not accept the idea that a criminal is a
victim of society. He stated that Singaporean law must be severe enough to ensure the
society’s security. Lee found that caning was more effective than long prison terms in
deterring crime, and he imposed it for crimes related to drugs, arms trafficking, rape, illegal
entry into Singapore, and vandalizing public property.xcviii This policy alarmed many Western
countries, where whipping people is considered a violation of human rights.
The Singaporean welfare state also constitutes an advanced and extended form of
social safety or security by means of a provident fund that has grown continuously since the
early 1960s. The Central Provident Fund (CPF) grew out of the political, economic, and
social necessities of the young Singapore nation, and it was the product of Lee Kuan Yew’s
long-term strategy, that is, the maintenance of a robust work ethic and thus, the evasion of
28
intergenerational redistribution of wealth.xcix The Singapore welfare system was actually
based on self-financed social security plans. The Singapore welfare plan contains retirement,
housing, health care, and other provisions.
Lee Kuan Yew believed that social justice was essential for social stability. When he
first came into power in Singapore, he saw the contrast between the blocks of low-cost rental
apartments, badly misused and poorly maintained, and those of proud homeowners. Lee
thought that in order to ensure the security of the society, every worker must have a home to
live in, so he decided to set up the Housing and Development Board (HDB) to build low-cost
housing for workers.c Beginning in 1964, the HDB offered buyers housing loans at a lower
interest rate with repayment periods of up to 15 years.
Some people believe that free health care is a sign of a prosperous state. However,
Lee Kuan Yew opposed free health care in Singapore. He thought that the ideal of free
medical services collided with the reality of human behavior.ci Lee once mentioned that if
patients take their medication for two days and do not feel any improvement, they might
throw away the remaining pills. However, if they spend money and consult private doctors,
pay for their antibiotics, and complete the course of treatment, they will recover. Following
this line of reasoning, Lee decided to impose a charge of 50 cents for each outpatient
appointment, with an increased fee for extended appointment lengths.cii
In 1984, Lee Kuan Yew implemented the Madisave program, which could be used to
pay medical costs of a member’s immediate familyciii in order to reinforce family solidarity
and responsibility. Each CPF special account had accumulated a tidy sum. Lee increased the
monthly contributions for Madisave accounts to 6 percent of wages, with an upper limit of
S$15,000 in 1986. Savings above this limit was transferred to a member’s general CPF
account, which could be used for personal investment. Lee stated, “We wanted our people to
hold shares in a major Singapore company and have a tangible stake in [the] country’s
29
success.”
Although some critics believe that his provisions were too strict, Lee Kuan Yew was
a very determined and somewhat imperial leader of Singapore. There is no doubt that under
his severe law, Singapore’s workforce became competitive with those of major industrialized
powers. Lee’s desire for clean people, a clean environment, and clean government created a
clean Singapore, helping bring Singapore into the First World. Lee Kuan Yew was
instrumental in creating a prosperous Singapore that could stand proudly in the world.
Lee Kuan Yew in the Public Eye
Asian View of Lee Kuan Yew
Xi Jinping, president of China, 2011.5.23
Lee is “our senior who has our respect”; “To this day, you are still working tirelessly to
advance our bilateral relationship, and you have full admiration. We will never forget the
important contribution you have made to our bilateral relationship.”
Western View of Lee Kuan Yew
Barack Obama, president of the United States, 2009.10.29
Lee “is one of the legendary figures in Asia in [the] 20th and 21st century. He is somebody
who helped to trigger the Asian economic miracle.”
Bill Clinton, 43rd president of the United States, 2009.10.27
“Lee’s life of public service is both unique and remarkable…. His work as prime minister and
now as Minister Mentor has helped literally millions of people in Singapore and all across
Southeast Asia to live better, more prosperous lives. I hope the leader of ASEAN [The
Association of Southeast Asian Nations] will continue to build upon Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s
outstanding legendary…. I thank you [the U.S.-ASEAN Business Council] for honoring a
man I admired so very much.”
Jacques Chirac, president of France (1995–2007)
30
“Lee Kuan Yew has gathered around himself the most brilliant minds, transforming the most
exciting standards into a system of government. Under his leadership, the primacy of the
general interest, the cult of education, working and saving, and the capacity to foresee the
needs of the city have enabled Singapore to take what I call shortcuts of progress.”
Tony Blair, prime minister of the United Kingdom, 2010 Lee is “the smartest leader I think I ever met.” Helmut Schmidt, chancellor of Germany
“Ever since I met my friend Lee Kuan Yew, I was highly impressed by his brilliant intellect
and his straight overview. His lifetime achievements as a political leader and statesman are
outstanding. The economic and social advancement of modern Singapore is deeply rooted in
his capacity to establish an adequate political framework for Singapore’s ethnical
heterogeneity.”
African View of Lee Kuan Yew
F. W. Klerk, president of South Africa, 2012.03.30
“The leader who perhaps impressed me most was Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore… He was an
individual who changed the course of history… Lee Kuan Yew took the right decision for his
country; he chose the right values and the right economic policies to ensure the development
of successful society. In this he was an artist painting on the largest canvas that society can
provide. He was also a very astute judge of the world and provided a very canny and realistic
assessment of our situation in South Africa when I met him during the early nineties.”
Negative Criticism of Lee Kuan Yew
Many politicians in the world regarded Lee Kuan Yew as the “founding father of
Singapore.”civ However, he was also a very controversial person. Some Western scholars
regarded him as the dictator of Singapore.cv They believed that some of Lee Kuan Yew’s
policies, such as lashing and banning chewing gum, violated democracy. The newspaper
31
company Bloomberg LP also accused Lee Kuan Yew of nepotism for giving his son Lee
Hsien Loong the position of hereditary prime minister of Singapore. Lee angrily decried
Bloomberg, but criticism still spread in Singapore until Lee Hsien Loong received tenure as
prime minister in Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew threatened legal action against Bloomberg LP.
Eventually, this newspaper company published a public apology to Lee Kuan Yew and paid
indemnities. cvi
Lee Kuan Yew was also accused of elitism. He adheres to the almost mechanistic
logic of eugenics and negative eugenics the way the “scientific” baseball manager relies on
statistics of home runs and strikeouts to make game decisions.cvii According to these theories,
smart couples are more likely to produce smart children than couples that are less smart. But
in reality, the problem is that more and more smart couples are having fewer and fewer
children. Under the dis-eugenics hypothesis, this means that successive generations become
less intelligent. Lee’s solution to the problem was to open Singapore’s doors to foreigners,
but only educated professionals and elites. He once wanted to introduce a policy that women
who graduated from college must marry a man of similar intellect. Although this policy was
rejected because of too many objections in Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew adhered to his elitist
views.
Lee was also criticized for severely cracking down on communists to gain power as a
member of PAP.cviii He ordered the government to detain any person who violated the
security of Singapore. He illegally detained many communists, including Lim Chin Siong
(the communist open front leader)cix , for an extended period of time. He used his executive
authority to crack down on communists and force them to leave Singapore. Ridiculously, he
depicted this history as communist self-destruction in his book From the Third to the First,
the Singapore Story, 1965–2000.
Lee Kuan Yew in My Eyes
32
Lee Kuan Yew was an intellectual chairman in Singapore. Under his domain,
Singapore rose from the Third World to the First World with a clean environment, a clean
government, and citizens of high moral quality. He spent most of his career in the
Singaporean government to establish a prosperous Singapore. His contribution to Singapore
is undeniable, and he has received international praise from figures such as Margaret
Thatcher and Henry Kissinger, who praised Lee Kuan Yew’s ability to maintain such a
highly effective and ethical government. However, Lee Kuan Yew was also a determined and
stubborn leader. Many Western people even viewed him as an imperial dogmatist. He used
his executive authority as prime minister of Singapore to destroy communist power in the
nation. Some of his policies were unreasonable for a democratic country, such as corporal
punishment and the ban of chewing gum. Although they largely decreased the crime rate in
Singapore and kept Singapore’s environment clean, policies like these indeed violate human
rights.
Lee Kuan Yew is worthy of admiration for his contributions. If there were no Lee
Kuan Yew, Singapore would not be what it is today. We can also criticize his “imperial”
politics, but his “imperial” politics also contributed to Singapore, making it one of the
developed countries in Asia. For this reason, he was the giant of Singapore.
33
Notes i � Lee Kuan Yew, The Grand Minister Insights on China, the United States, and the World (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012), 15. ii �Kevin Tan, Marshall of Singapore: A Biography (Singapore, Institute of Southeast Studies, 2008),
409. iii � Frank N. Magill, “Lee Kuan’s Early Life,” in The 20th Century GO-N: Dictionary of World Biography (Abingdon: Routledge, 1999), 2150. iv � Alex Josey, Lee Kuan Yew: The Crucial Years (Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Edition, 2012). 39 v � Justin Corfield, Historical Dictionary of Singapore (Plymouth: Scarecrow Press, 2011), 145. vi � Lee Kuan Yew, The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore: Times Edition, 1998), 137. vii � Lee Kuan Yew, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew: My Lifelong Challenge, The Road of Singapore Bilingual Policy, simplified Chinese ed. (Nanjing: Yiling Press, 2013), 10. viii � Lee, The Singapore Story, 139. ix �Lee Kuan Yew, From the Third to the First: The Singapore Story, 1965–2000 (New York: HarperCollins, 2000), 147. x � Peter P. W. Tan and Rani Rubdy, eds., Language as Commodity: Global Structures, Local Marketplaces (New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2008), 46. xi � Saw Swee-Hock, The Population of Singapore (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Studies, 2012). xii � Jason Tan, “Joint Government-Malay Efforts to Improve Malay Education System in Singapore,”
Comparative Education 31, no. 3 (1995): 340. xiii � ibid. xiv � Ibid., 339. xv � Richard B. Baldauf, Robert B. Kaplan, Knonko Kamwangamalu, and Pauline Bryant, eds., Language Planning in Primary Schools in Asia ( Routledge, 2013). xvi � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew: My Lifelong Challenge, 39. xvii 16 Lee, From the Third to the First, 148. xviii � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew: My Lifelong Challenge, 41. xix � Diane K. Mauzy and Robert Stephen Milne, Singapore Politics Under the People’s Action Party (Singapore: Psychology Press, 2002). xx � Zhang Qing and Guo Jiguang, Understanding Singapore, 2nd ed., traditional Chinese ed. (Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong, 2010), 73. xxi � Ellen Bialystok, ed., Language Processing in Bilingual Children (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 146. xxii � Angel Lin and Evelyn Y.F. Man, Bilingual Education: Southeast Asia Perspective (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2009), 107.
34
xxiii � Chen Jian, Conquering Chinese Comprehension in Informative Text P6, simplified Chinese ed。 (Beijing: Pearson Education South Asia, ), 41. xxiv � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965–2000) (Singapore: Beijing Foreign Press, 2001), 141. xxv � Norbert Konrad, Birgit Völlm, and David N. Weisstub, eds., Ethical Issues in Prison Psychiatry (Dordrecht: Springer, 2013), 94. xxvi � Lee Hsien Loong, interviewed by Cherian George, The FP interview of Lee Hsien Loong FP May/June 2002. xxvii � Lee Kuan Yew, Lee Kuan Yew: The Grand Master’s Insights on China, the United States, and the World, vii. xxviii � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965–2000), 53. xxix � Lee , Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965-2000) (Singapore: Beijing Foreign Press, 2001) 51.
xxx � Robin Ramcharan, Forging a Singapore Statehood, 1965–1995: The Contribution of Japan (Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2002), 109. xxxi � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965-2000), 54. xxxii � Kenneth Bercuson, ed., Singapore: A Case Study in Rapid Development (Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund, 1995), ii. xxxiii � Kernial Singh Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, eds., Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Studies, 1990), 813. xxxiv � Neil Humphreys, Complete Notes from Singapore (Singapore: The Omnibus Edition, 2012), 374. xxxv �Lee Kuan Yew From the Third World to the First 54 xxxvi �Lee Kuan Yew, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965-2000) 59 xxxvii � Lee Kuan Yew, The Wit and Wisdom of Lee Kuan Yew, ed. Lindsay Davis (Singapore: Editions Didier Millet Pte Ltd, 2013). xxxviii � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965–2000), 98. xxxix � Lee, Wit and Wisdom, 187. xl � Lee, The Grand Master, 91. xli � Sandhu and Wheatley, eds., Management of Success, 144–45. xlii � Kim Wah Yeo, Political Development of Singapore, 1945–1955 (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1973), 2. xliii � Kelvin Y. L. Tan, Marshall of Singapore: A Biography (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2008), 269. xliv � Sandhu and Wheatley, eds., Management of Success, 144–45. xlv � Michael D. Barr and Carl A. Trocki, Paths Not Taken: Political Pluralism in Post-War Singapore
35
(Singapore: NUS Press, 2008), 210. xlvi � Lee, From Third World to First, 84. xlvii � Peter H. M. Lim, Chronicle of Singapore, 1959–2009: Fifty Years of Headline News (Singapore: Edition Didier Millet, 2009), 85. xlviii � Lee, From Third World to First, 86. xlix � Paul Morris, Naoko Shimazu, and Edward Vickers, eds., Imaging Japan in Postwar East Asia: Identity Politics, Schooling and Popular Culture (Abingdon: Routledge, 2013), 29. l � John Clammer, Japanese in Singapore: Culture Occurrence and Culture Flows (Surrey: Curzon Press, 2000), 67. li � Ibid. lii � Ibid. liii � Lee, Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (1965-2000), 92. liv � International Monetary Fund, Singapore: Financial System Stability Assessment (Singapore: International Monetary Fund, 2013), 9. lv � Lee, From Third World to First, 71. lvi � Lee, Wit and Wisdom, 170. lvii � Hans Linnemann, Export-oriented Industrialization in Developing Countries (Manila: Council for Asian Manpower Study, 1987), 383. lviii � Ibid. lix � Ibid. lx � Holger Henke and Ian Boxill, The End of ‘Asian Model’? (Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing, 2000), 95. lxi � United States International Trade Commission, General Agreement on Trade in Services of Commitments Submitted by Asia/Pacific Trading Partner (Washington, D.C.: DIANE Publishing, 1997), 11-‐9. lxii � Lee, From Third World to First, 73. lxiii � Lee, From the Third World to First, 74 lxiv � Ranjana Kumar, A New Beginning: The Turnaround Story of Indian Bank (New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, 2008), 273. lxv � Lee, From Third World to First, 73. lxvi � David Levinson, Karen Christensen ed., Encyclopedia of modern Asia volume one (New York: Berkshire Publishing Group, 2002), 164. lxvii � Suresh Goel, Crisis Management: Master the Skills to Prevent Disaster (New Delhi: Global Indian Publication, 2009), 98. lxviii
36
�Dianqing Xu, Tzong-‐Shian Yu, ed., From Financial Crisis to Recovery, East Asia Rising Again? (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2003), 141. lxix � Lee, From Third World to First, 348. lxx � Yong Soon Tan, Tung Jean Lee, and Karen Tan, Clean, Green and Blue: Singapore Journey towards Environment and Water Sustainability (Singapore: ISEAS Publishing Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2009), 35. lxxi � Lee, Wit and Wisdom, 48–49. lxxii � Timothy Auger, Living in a Garden: The Greening of Singapore (Singapore: Didier Millet Editions, 2013), 66. lxxiii � Lee, From the Third World to First, 178. lxxiv � Ibid., 176. lxxv � Yong Soon Tan, Tung Jean Lee, and Tan, Clean, Green and Blue, 57. lxxvi � Marianne Rogerson, In Singapore: 60 Fabulous Adventures in the City, ed. Crystal Chan (Singapore: Marshall Cavendish, 2009), 37 lxxvii � Yong Soon Tan, Tung Jean Lee, and Tan, Clean, Green and Blue, 36. lxxviii � Cecilia Tortajada, Yugal Joshi, and Asit K. Biswas, The Singapore Water Story: Sustainable Development in an Urban City State (Abingdon: Routledge, 2013), 114. lxxix � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 179. lxxx � Cecilia Tortajada Yugal Joshi Asit K. Biswas The Singapore Water Story: Sustainable Development in Urban City State (Abingdon: Routledge, 2013), 39. lxxxi �Peter K. L. Ng Richard Corlett Hugh T. W. Tan Singapore Biodiversity: An Encyclopedia of Natrual Environment and Sustainable Development (Singapore: Didier Millet Edison, 2013), 209. lxxxii � Huey D. Johnson, Green Plans: Blueprint of Sustainable Earth (Curtis: University of Nebraska Press, 2008) 159. lxxxiii � Douglas Coupland, Worst Person. Ever (New York: Penguin, 2014), 35 lxxxiv � Mat Oakley and Joshua Samuel Brown, Singapore (Singapore: Lonely Planet, 2010), 38. lxxxv � Ibid. lxxxvi � Susan Tsang, Discover Singapore: The City’s History and Culture Redefined, ed. Melvin Neo (Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Edition, 2007), 80. lxxxvii � Jon S. T. Quah, Curbing Corruption in Asian Countries: An impossible Dream? (Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, 2011) lxxxviii � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 169. lxxxix � Rick Stapenhurst and Sahr John Kpundeh, eds., Curbing Corruption: Toward a Model of Building National Integrity (Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publication, 1999), 60.
37
xc � Jon S. T. Quah, Public Administration in Singapore-Style (Bingley: Emerald Group, 2010), 191. xci � Stapenhurst and Kpundeh, Curbing Corruption, 61. xcii � Godfrey Mitch Sseruwagi, Our Greatest Fear is the Transition of Power: An Open Letter to the President (Bloomington: Author House, 2013), xlvii. xciii � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 166. xciv � Christopher Hood and B. Guy Peters, eds., Reward for High Public Office: Asian and Pacific Rim States (London: Routledge, 2003), 290. xcv � Sabrina Ching Yuen Luk, Health Insurance Reform in Asia (Abingdon: Routledge, 2014), 97. xcvi � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 213. xcvii � Ibid. xcviii � Ibid. xcix � Christian Aspalter, ed., Discovering the Welfare State in East Asia (Westport: Praeger, 2002), 183. c � IBP USA, Singapore Recent Economic and Political Developments Yearbook (Washington, D.C.: International Business Publication, 2008), 35. ci � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 100. cii � Lee, From the Third World to the First, 102. ciii � Ibid., 101. civ � Guan Heng Tan, 100 Inspiring Rafflesians, (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2003), 97. cv � Moorthy S. Muthuswamy, Defeating Political Islam: The New Cold War, (New York: Prometheus
Books, 2009), 44. cvi � Wayne Arnold, “Bloomberg News Apologizes To Top Singapore Officials”, Archive, accessed August 27, 2002 http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/27/business/bloomberg-news-apologizes-to-top-singapore-officials.html cvii � Tom Plate, Conversion with Lee Kuan Yew, ed. Lee Mei Lin (Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Editions, 2013), 119. cviii � Robert L. Rotberg, Transformative Political Leadership: Making a Difference in the Developing World
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2012), 97. cix � Christopher Alan Bayly, Timothy Jorman Harper, Forgotten Wars: Freedom and Revolution in Southeast Asia (Boston: Harvard University Press, 2007), 508.
38
Bibliography
Balakrishna, V. R. A Brief History of the Singapore Trade Union Movement. Singapore: Natural Trades Union Congress, 1976.
Eng Feng Pong. Education, Manpower, and Development in Singapore. Singapore:
Singapore University Press, 1982. Global Newsstand. “Singapore’s Security Complex.” April. 2001 Goldstein, Morris. The Asian Financial Crisis: Cause, Cures and Systematic Actions.
Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute, 1998.
Josey, Alex. Lee Kuan Yew: The Critical Years, 1971–1978. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Editions, 2013.
Larmour, Peter, and Nick Wolanin. Corruption and Anti-corruption. Canberra:
Australia National University Press, 2013. Lee, Edwin. Singapore: The Unexpected Nation. Singapore: Institute of Southeast
Studies, 2008. Lee Lai To. Singapore in 1998: The Most Serious Challenge since Independence.
Washington D. C.: Regents of the University of California, 1999. Anthony Liddicoat ed., Language Planning and Policy: Issues in Language Planning
and Literacy. New York: Multilingual Matters, 2007 Mutalib, Hussin. “Constitutional-Electoral Reforms and Politics in Singapore.”
Legislative Studies Quarterly (November 2002): 659–72. Paulston, Christina Bratt. International Handbook of Bilingualism and Bilingual
Education. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1998. Rodan, Garry. Singapore in 1996: Extended Election Fever. Washington D. C.:
Regents of the University of California, 1997. ———. Singapore in 2004: Long Awaited Leadership Transition. Washington D.C.:
Regents of the University of California, 2005. Schedler, Andreas, Larry Jay Diamond, and Marc F. Plattner, eds. The Self-
restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1999.
Sikorski, Douglas. Effective Government in Singapore: Perspective of a Concerned
American. London: Regents of the University of California, 1996. Sopiee, Mohamed Noordin. From Malayan Union to Singapore Separation: Political
39
Unification in the Malaysian Region, 1945–65. Kuala Lumpur: University Malayan Press, 2005.
Scaros, Constantinos E Understanding The Constitution ed., Meagan R. Turner, Sean
Connelly Washington D. C.: Higher education: Cathleen Sether, 2011 Lee, Kuan Yew. Socialist solution for Asia: a report in 1965 Asian Socialists
Conference in Bombay. Singapore: Government Printing office, 1965 Goldstein, Morris. The Asian Financial Crisis: Cause, Cures and Systematic
Implication United States International Trade Comission. General Agreement on Trade in Service:
Examination of the Schedules of Commitments of the Schedules of Commitments Submitted bt Asia/Pacific Trading Partners. Washington D. C.: DIANE Publishing, 1997
Uslaner, Eric M. Corruption, Inequality, and the Rule of Law. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 2008
