SPEECH BY MR ZAINUL ABIDIN RASHEED, MINISTER OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS AT THE 12TH CONFERENCE OF THE EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA NETWORK FOR BETTER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS "SECURITY MANAGEMENT IN ESEA CITIES" ORGANISED BY THE KONRAD ADENAUER FOUNDATION, RENDEZVOUS HOTEL, ON 2 DECEMBER 2004 AT 10.15 AM
____________________________________________________________
"Resolving Ethno-Religious Conflicts: The Singapore Experience"
1 Thank you for inviting me to speak here today. It gives me great pleasure to share Singapore's experience on what has become a topic of significant relevance - ethno-religious conflicts and how governments can deal with them. I will not pretend that the Singapore Government has found all the answers to resolve this issue. It has been a tricky learning experience, full of lessons for the future. For us, building a harmonious multi-racial society is an ongoing challenge. By sharing with you some of Singapore's experiences, I hope it will spark, not fresh fireworks, but some useful discussion. This Conference, after all, is also an excellent opportunity to learn from each other's experiences.
2 Singapore had always faced the prospect of ethnic and religious conflict. From the beginning of modern Singapore, our population has been made up of peoples of many ethnicities, religions and languages. Successive waves of migration - from China and India in the 19th century, and now with globalisation from other countries further afield - have brought together 4 million people of diverse backgrounds, cultures, religions, prejudices and aspirations, in this small and crowded island of Singapore. Living with multiple ethnicities and religions has been Singapore's way of life.
3 Let not the relative calm, glitter and prosperity you see today fool you to think as though we were without religious tension and conflicts before. There were several incidents of racial violence even before Singapore became Independent. On 21 July 1964, a Malay procession was held to commemorate the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad. This seemingly innocuous event sparked off quarrels between Chinese and Malay youths, some believe, politically instigated, which in turn led to full-scale riots lasting nearly a week in which 22 people were killed and 460 injured. The riots were most intense in the Chinatown and Geylang areas. These were, at that time, virtual "ethnic ghettoes" of Chinese and Malay people respectively. On 3 Sept of the same year, ethnic riots again broke out in the Geylang area, resulting in 8 deaths and 60 injuries. I was almost killed during the latter riots. Yes, I came out of it with even greater resolve to do all I can to enhance racial harmony.
4 We learnt quickly that managing communal tensions is a delicate task and must be a key preoccupation for Singapore. We recognised the difficult reality that ethnic tensions are never far below the surface of Singapore society. At times, harmony is just skin-deep. All the more the need for us to sink deeper roots. For Singapore to survive and succeed, we needed to forge a workable and integrated society. So we set up strong and vigilant security forces, with "zero tolerance" for individuals or groups who would inflame racial or religious sentiments for their own selfish purposes. We did not want a repeat of the race riots of 1964. But these "hard" measures are necessary but not sufficient. Our experience suggests that what is more important are the "soft" aspects of managing ethno-religious tensions. By this, I mean "winning the hearts and minds".
5 At a very basic level, the relationships between ethnic and religious communities are essentially about emotions - whether a Chinese, Malay, and Indian trust one another, whether a Chinese, Malay and Indian feel comfortable living in a mixed neighbourhood, whether people of different races and religions are willing to interact with one another. Because the effort to maintain ethnic harmony is about winning hearts and minds and influencing the people's emotions, it is not sufficient to rely solely on national policies and national legislation. The core of the effort, the heavy spadework, must be actions taken at the level of local and municipal administration. This is where ordinary individuals interact with the government and with each other. And this is where the battle will be won or lost. Let me explain.
Meritocracy and overlapping circles
6 I will start with an outline of how the Singapore Government's approach to the issue of ethnic and religious harmony. Later, I will try to explain how we translate concepts into practical action.
7 Singapore's starting point is meritocracy, meaning that individuals should advance on the basis of their ability. No one should be discriminated against, in any way, on the basis of his or her ethnic or religious identity. This is enshrined in our Constitution. But meritocracy alone does not guarantee harmony; it only ensures that individuals have the same playing field regardless of their racial or religious background. To truly achieve ethnic and religious harmony, our ethnic communities must mix, interact and understand one another. Otherwise, there will be suspicions and prejudices bubbling under the surface and then boil over at unexpected moments. This was what happened in 1964. What we have consistently done is to promote more interaction and foster a greater degree of cross-cultural understanding.
8 The model we use is that of "overlapping circles". Each ethnic community can be thought of as a circle. What we try to do is to maximise the area where the circles overlap one another. This is the area where all Singaporeans, whatever their race, work and play together. It is an open and meritocratic playing field with English as the common language and equal opportunities for all. Equally important, we do not try to force the different circles to merge together. There are often demands from some vocal segments of Singapore society - perhaps the more idealistic ones - for the Government to try to meld all the different ethnic identities into one single Singaporean identity. We have consistently resisted such demands, because we are practical. We recognise that for most people, ethnicity is primordial and basic. Every ethnic group want to have their unique voice heard and respected. They want to retain their cultural heritage, while building a Singaporean identity.
9 The Singapore Government respects that and believes that it is possible for people to have multiple identities - to be Singaporean and Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian, etc. - at the same time. Outside the common area of overlapping circles, each ethnic and religious community has its own playing field. In these separate areas, each community can retain and speak its own language and practice its own culture and customs. We therefore try to preserve the heritage and identity of each ethnic community, but at the same time, also try to maximise the "common overlapping space" between them. All of them want to live safely and peacefully. They want the best education possible for their children. They want security and stability. We believe the Singapore Government's practical approach of nation-building, whereby every community has two playing fields, has helped to foster racial harmony.
Singapore's efforts - Legislative
10 That is how we think about the issue. What about action? In practical terms, we try to translate the concepts of meritocracy and overlapping circles into 3 levels of policy - legislation, national institutions, and community efforts at the national and grassroots levels.
11 First, let me touch on legislation. In 1973, we set up a Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR), whose function is to scrutinise legislation passed by the Parliament in order to make sure that proposed laws do not discriminate against any ethnic or religious community. The PCMR therefore acts as an extra layer of protection against racial discrimination. Members of the PCMR are eminent citizens who are both well-qualified to undertake this responsibility and independent from the Government or the various political parties. This is to ensure that the PCMR's advice and recommendations are weighty and credible. For example, the PCMR is currently headed by the Chief Justice.
12 We also have the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (1990). This Act gives the Government powers to issue restraining orders and take other stern measures against individuals who stir up hatred between our ethnic and religious communities. It is a critical part of the Government's array of tools which can be used to maintain racial and religious harmony.
13 But it is not only this single piece of legislation that safeguards ethnic harmony in Singapore. What Singapore has learnt is that we must have a "consciousness" of racial and religious harmony in all the laws that govern public behaviour. To convince Singaporeans that the Government is serious about maintaining racial harmony, all pieces of legislation need to be consistent. Our legislation is thus "permeated" with the key principle that no ethnic or religious community in Singapore should be allowed to infringe on the rights of other communities. For example, the Singapore Broadcasting Authority, under the obligations of the Singapore Broadcasting Authority Act, has banned Internet and other media content that "glorifies, incites or endorses ethnic, racial or religious hatred, strife or intolerance".
Singapore's efforts - Institutional
14 Apart from legislation, we also need to find ways to bring people of different religious and ethnic backgrounds together. Throughout the years, the Singapore Government has created many different institutions to achieve this common objective. Let me outline 3 which, in my view, have the most impact.
15 The first is our housing policy. More than 80 percent of Singaporeans live in public housing. Since 1989, we have implemented an ethnic quota scheme. The Government specifies the cap for ethnic minorities that could occupy each block and neighbourhood in our public housing estates. In this way, we make sure that members of the same ethnic and religious group do not live exclusively with one another. Rather, they will have the opportunity to interact and make friends with fellow Singaporeans of different races in their daily routines. We know, from our experience of the 1964 racial riots, the importance of avoiding ethnic ghettoes and their host of associated problems.
16 The second is National Service (NS), or the compulsory military draft of all young Singaporean men at age 18. NS remains, first and foremost, a policy aimed at national and military defence. But we have tried to make a virtue out of necessity. The military training over the approximately 2 years of NS is undertaken by our young men, of different races and religions, equally and without discrimination. I still remember the years of "enforced togetherness" when I was doing my NS, although part-time, and suffering through the same rigorous and tough civil defence training. That was also when I made new and close Chinese and Indian friends. Any Singaporean male will tell you that many years after NS, he will still occasionally get together on weekends with his friends, of different races, to complain about their drill sergeant who had put them through so much pain.
17 The third is our electoral system, specifically the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) scheme. Most of the seats in Singapore's Parliament are elected in groups, or GRCs, where ethnic minorities must be included in any given slate of candidates in a GRC. This ensures equitable minority representation in Parliament. It also forces political parties to practise multi-racial politics rather than to take political advantage based on race or religion. Ethnic ghettoes also encourage political or racial polarisation, something Singapore religiously avoid.
Singapore's efforts - Community
18 Let me now turn to efforts that are oriented towards the community. Through a variety of grassroots organisations such as the People's Association (PA), ethnic self-help groups (Mendaki, Sinda, CDAC), Community Development Councils (CDCs) and Town Councils, the Government keeps in close touch with local community leaders to ensure harmonious community relations.
19 A core function of our CDCs is to promote interaction between individuals from different ethnic communities, by organising local events in which local residents from all backgrounds can participate, such as district meetings, cross-cultural art exhibitions, health promotion activities, racial harmony bonding programmes, and so on. The CDCs also support new grassroots initiatives which they feel will promote cross-cultural understanding and interactions between the races. For example, they are given the resources to subsidise on a $ for $ cost of each initiative. Through creative and extensive programmes, these inclusive community events give practical expression to a broad concept I mentioned earlier - enlarging the "overlapping space" between our ethnic communities.
Post-911
20 I have outlined the approach that Singapore has taken over the years. But with the threat of terrorism becoming more salient in recent years, the need for all ethnic groups to unite and fight an extremist ideological battle has become all the more urgent. There is a tiny group that is bent on using violence to achieve their religious and/or political objectives. This 'new' terrorism has complicated governments' efforts to forge and maintain ethnic and religious harmony. In this context, 2 strategies have now become more important than ever before.
21 The first is a sustained community effort to "win the hearts and minds". New York's Twin Towers were attacked on September 11, 2001. In December of the same year, the Singapore Internal Security Department (ISD) arrested 15 members of a radical Islamic group called the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). Even before 911, the JI were plotting to attack key targets such as government buildings and Western embassies in Singapore. In August 2002, Singapore ISD arrested another 21 members of this group.
22 The JI arrests were an important challenge for us. The 15 percent of Singapore's population who are Muslim are well-integrated in our schools, housing estates and workplaces. Nevertheless, misunderstandings could easily arise in the wake of the JI arrests. The Government had to act, and act quickly, to ensure that our Muslims understood that the JI arrests were about terrorism and not about anti-Islam. Equally important was "winning the hearts and minds" of the majority of our non-Muslims. We needed to hold them steadfast in their belief that their fellow Muslim Singaporeans were still normal, loyal citizens and that the JI terrorists were in fact a tiny exception, the few misguided lot. Otherwise, mutual suspicions will grow and unravel the cohesion and unity among the different groups. .
23 We therefore had to move fast. What we did was to immediately publish and widely circulate a White Paper on the JI arrests, detailing as much as we knew of the structure of the JI group, the members' backgrounds, and what led to the arrests. We considered the costs of releasing sensitive information that could affect the operation of our security forces. But ultimately, it was more important to fully inform the public, in order to forestall any inaccurate rumours and damaging speculation about the Government's motives that could arise otherwise.
24 Next, we embarked on community initiatives. At the CDC or local government level, we formed more than 80 Inter-Racial Confidence Circles (IRCCs) in schools and workplaces to promote better understanding among the different communities.
25 Separately, the Government also held a series of dialogues with several thousand grassroots leaders of all ethnic groups and religions to make clear that the Government viewed the Muslim community in Singapore as peace-loving and to emphasise that the JI arrests should not cause fault lines to develop in inter-racial and inter-religious relations. All the major religious and ethnic organisations, such as the Islamic religious authority in Singapore, MUIS, the Singapore Buddhist Federation, the Singapore Council of Christian Churches and many others, were drawn into a 4-month long consultation exercise that finally agreed on a joint Declaration on Religious Harmony. As all the major stakeholders of ethnic and religious peace were involved in this bottom-up initiative, the Declaration was effectively a statement by all residents in Singapore to safeguard religious harmony.
26 What I found most heartening was that there was a consensus among the various stakeholders that the process of consultation and discussion was valuable in itself. To keep the process of consultation going, the stakeholders decided to come together and form a permanent Inter-Religious Harmony Circle (IRHC) to promote the spirit of the Declaration. The IRHC has proposed that on 21 July of every year, the anniversary of the 1964 race riots and designated as Racial Harmony Day in Singapore, Singaporeans should reflect on the Declaration on Religious Harmony.
27 There has been other smaller-scale community events, but no less meaningful. For example, when Sister Theresa of the local Catholic community was about to leave for an appointment at the Vatican, a simple ceremony was held at the Ba'alwie Mosque, at the time of the breaking of fast, to celebrate her appointment with representatives of other religious organisations. Such gestures do much to widen the common areas of inter-religious exchange.
28 The other strategy that I want to highlight is the need to engage regional governments and promote regional cooperation. In the context of global terrorism, national governments cannot deal with questions of ethnic and religious cohesion by themselves. Terror somewhere is terror everywhere. If there is a bombing in Bali or Madrid or Moscow, we are all affected. That is why regional cooperation among governments is essential. Terrorists will try to inflame religious sentiments in different countries without regard for national boundaries. Radical preachers are advancing the concept that the grievances of one religious community are the burden of all communities of the same religion, regardless of nationality. Terrorists thrive on rifts within a country because they serve their agenda.
29 Fortunately, countries in the region recognise the terrorists' agenda and have stepped up cooperation in the form of intelligence exchanges and information sharing. This is encouraging. But we must also place emphasis on holding constructive dialogue at the regional level. Only when we sit down together and exchange views, can we better tackle what is at heart a trans-national issue. For example, if a radical religious preacher breaks the law in Singapore and escapes into another country, we will need to work together. Regular consultation and dialogue among national governments can help improve this sort of understanding.
Conclusion
30 I have dwelt on several examples of Singapore's policies at the legislative, institutional and community levels, not because I think that all countries should emulate Singapore's approach. Rather, my purpose is to make the broader point that resolving ethno-religious conflict and tensions is not a self-contained area of Government policy. It cannot be left to one Minister or a team of bureaucrats. Instead, it must be an effort that runs through all levels of Government policy, and with the collective effort of all ethnic groups. .
31 Singapore's approach of expanding "common space" down to the level of local government and community programmes has served us well in bringing people together for a common cause. As greater interaction is the foundation of greater understanding and trust, community efforts will remain a cornerstone of ethno-religious harmony.
32 Just as important, regional cooperation should be deepened so that we can learn effective best practices, tactics and strategies from one another, as well as better understand one another's capabilities and constraints. With greater engagement, we will make the breakthroughs we need to ensure ethno-religious harmony. As the world becomes more borderless each day, the ethno-religious challenges will grow more demanding over time. But closer cooperation means we will be able to come up with better and more creative solutions for the benefit of our societies.
33 Thank you.