SINGAPORE: Prominent academic Donald Low has described the tone of Singapore’s election campaign as “the most depressing moment of the election campaign so far,” following Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s remarks at a People’s Action Party (PAP) rally on Saturday (27 April).
Speaking at a rally at Fern Green Primary School, SM Lee recalled the 1997 General Election and former Workers’ Party (WP) candidate Tang Liang Hong, whom he said had “stirred Chinese chauvinism sentiments.”
Citing Tang’s case while warning about foreign interference and the dangers of race and religion in politics, SM Lee noted that the government had “gone all out” against him.
Tang had contested in Cheng San GRC as part of a five-member WP team and was accused by the PAP of being an anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist.
Following the election, Tang filed police reports against several PAP leaders alleging false statements and incitement. He subsequently left Singapore for Malaysia and later moved to Australia.
In his absence, Tang faced multiple defamation suits brought by PAP leaders, resulting in over S$8 million in damages awarded against him. As Tang did not return to contest the lawsuits or pay the damages, he was eventually declared bankrupt in Singapore.
Donald Low: An Ominous Signal
Responding to the rally speech, Low described SM Lee’s reference to Tang as “ominous at best,” suggesting it undermined Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s efforts to foster a more inclusive political environment.
He predicted that the PAP would likely intensify warnings about threats to national unity, implying that voters should support the ruling party if they value Singapore’s safety and security.
Low shared that until SM Lee’s speech, he had “optimistic” hopes that the PAP might pursue a more conciliatory approach after the election, potentially initiating a state-led reconciliation process acknowledging past victims of political persecution.
Such a move, he believed, could have made Singapore “exceptional globally” in an age of rising political polarisation and fulfilled former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong’s aspiration for a “kinder, gentler Singapore.”
He noted that after the divisive 1997 election, aspirations for a softer political approach diminished, citing how Workers’ Party’s JB Jeyaretnam also faced 11 lawsuits from nine PAP ministers following that election.
Like Tang, JBJ was ultimately declared bankrupt after failing to pay the damages awarded against him, resulting in his disqualification from Parliament.
Criticism Over PAP’s Handling of Foreign Commentators
Low also criticised the PAP’s earlier reluctance to address offensive online comments made by prominent supporters and divisive narratives propagated by a foreign commentator, “Critical Spectator,” a Polish national known for his staunchly pro-government views.
Critical Spectator, whose real name is Michael Petraeus, had previously attacked opposition candidates and criticised policies proposed by various political parties.
Ahead of the 2020 General Election, Facebook removed the Critical Spectator page for violating its policies, based on the behaviour of the accounts. However, the page resumed activity shortly after the election.
Low pointed out the irony that many Singaporeans who shared Petraeus’ posts might be unaware of Poland’s own history of deep political polarisation.
“Just as we’re concerned about Malaysian or Chinese politicians or commentators interfering in our domestic politics, so too should we be concerned when other foreigners do the same,” he said.
Adding to the criticism, fellow academic Cherian George commented on Low’s post, highlighting the government’s slow response to offensive comments made in March by one of their influential supporters, whom he did not name but is publicly known to be Calvin Cheng, a former Nominated Member of Parliament.
George noted that Senior Minister Lee’s remarks were “all the more depressing” in light of the PAP’s initial inaction. He pointed out that Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s statement condemning the influencer’s “completely insensitive, unacceptable” remarks came only two weeks after the controversy erupted.
During those two weeks, ministers merely stated that they did not share the influencer’s views, without explicitly calling him out or satisfactorily explaining how two PAP-linked accounts had “liked” the inflammatory comment. George argued that this moral vacuum was exploited by foreign radicals, who capitalised on the government’s hesitation to deliver a firm rejection.
“However unacceptable their other views, these individuals expressed eloquently Singaporeans’ outrage over the influencer’s hate speech during the two weeks when government leaders were still performing calculations over what should have been a no-brainer,” George said.
Even after the Prime Minister’s belated condemnation and the influencer’s expression of remorse (noting that a proper apology was never made), radicals continued to exploit lingering doubts, including unexplained actions such as the Foreign Minister’s errant ‘like’ on the post.
George warned that such delays by mainstream political leaders in acknowledging and addressing public grievances create openings for extremists to gain traction, much like how the far-right rose in Europe under the guise of “reasonable criticism” of immigration policies when centrist parties failed to address concerns directly.
“This is what happens when mainstream politicians, including government leaders, fail to acknowledge people’s legitimate concerns,” he concluded.
PAP sounds alarm on foreign interference, challenges opposition’s stance
The issue of foreign influence returned to the spotlight recently after the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) ordered Facebook’s parent company Meta to block access to posts by two Malaysian politicians and a former Internal Security Act detainee, now an Australian citizen, for allegedly encouraging voting along religious lines.
Following the intervention, SM Lee criticised opposition parties for only condemning foreign interference after government action was taken.
“Day before yesterday, where were you? You didn’t notice, you didn’t know, or buat bodoh?” he said, using a Malay phrase meaning to feign ignorance.
Although all opposition parties have since declared their opposition to foreign meddling, SM Lee pointed out that their statements came only after the PAP government had intervened.
Prime Minister Lawrence Wong also reiterated on Saturday that external actors must not be allowed to exploit divisions within Singapore.
He urged all political parties to “clearly and categorically reject endorsements” from foreign entities.
On 26 April, Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh stressed that the WP could not be politically successful if it resorted to playing the “race and religion card.”
He clarified that the party had given no agreement to Islamic religious teacher Noor Deros, a Singaporean based in Malaysia, who had posted a series of election-related messages on social media.
Noor had claimed to have met with WP’s Malay candidates, raising concerns about religion’s role in the election.
Singh emphasised that Singaporeans are capable of representing themselves and reaffirmed the WP’s firm stance against foreign interference.
In his rally speech, SM Lee concluded by urging Singaporeans of all races and religions to “stand with” the ideals of multi-racialism.
“It serves us well. It’s good for minority communities. It’s good for the majority community too,” he said.
“If you clash, if politics becomes race-based — Chinese party, Indian party, Malay party, Muslim party, Christian party, Hindu party — there are a lot of such things all over, not very far away.
And we fight, we all lose. Don’t do that. Know it seriously. And consider that when you vote.”
The post Donald Low calls SM Lee’s Tang Liang Hong reference “ominous” amid election campaign appeared first on The Online Citizen.
