channelnewsasia online headline screams “PM Lee warns against protectionism” (see
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/298888/1/.html).
While PM Lee was specifically talking about how some foreign countries are resisting govt-linked investments from Singapore Government Investment Corp/Temasek Holdings, I can see lots of parallels, and contradictions, in his statement against protectionism.
In a world of openess, clean money is suppossed to move freely across national borders. Cash-rich SÂ’pore diversifies its savings by spending itÂ’s money not only propping up internal business, but also buying foreign ones. But when one govt wants to buy stakes in what are a foreign govtÂ’s quasi-govt companies or companies that have national impact (like telephony companies), obviously the latter govt would object/not-be-happy for reasons of security/soverign pride etc.
Singapore has now major shares in banks and phone companies (and others) across Asia and Australia, and some of these countries are unhappy about it.
So, PM Lee’s wise words are “
Protectionist policies…will not make things better. Instead, they will choke off growth, and worsen the prospects for the vulnerable segments of society“.
I argue, on another matter, that it is
exactly PeopleÂ’s Action PartyÂ’s protectionist policies in the local politics of Singapore that
has not made things better (i.e. the lack of strong alternative political parties). Instead, PAP may choke off the growth of a viable opposition, and worsen the prospects for smooth political transitions when the PAPÂ’s steam runs out.
You see, PM Lee laments that the global world of business-acquisition is not a level playing field for small-but-rich Singapore, but yet on the local political field, the PAP is just as protectionist and ignorant of the consequences.
An avalance of contradictions?