PM Lawrence Wong at the Official Launch of The Authorised Biography of S. Rajaratnam, Volume Two

Ms Irene Ng
Mr Choi Shing Kwok
ESM Goh
My Cabinet and Parliamentary colleagues, past and present
Excellencies and Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen

I am happy to join you this evening to launch the second volume of Irene’s biography of S Rajaratnam.

Tribute to Raja

Let me start by acknowledging the tremendous work that Irene has done in putting together the two volumes. Listening to her just now reminded me of a quote by Winston Churchill about writing a book. He said it is an adventure. It starts off like a toy, an amusement. It becomes later a mistress, a master, and then a tyrant. Irene did it not just once, but twice. Congratulations Irene, on your achievement in putting these 2 volumes together.

Mr Rajaratnam was one of Singapore’s founding fathers and truly the Singapore Lion. He helped create independent Singapore and define who we are and what we stand for as a nation.

He played vital roles at every stage of our nation building: From the 1950s, as an anti-colonial activist; through the 1960s, as a fierce warrior against the communist and communalists; until the 1980s, as an elder statesman.

Throughout he wielded a gifted pen – in his case, a typewriter – and was highly effective in mobilising the ground and shaping public opinion.

He was Minister for Culture in the first PAP government. Importantly, he was also our first and longest-serving Foreign Minister. He worked hard under very tough conditions to establish our foreign relations, practically from scratch. Foreign diplomats who called on him in those early years were struck by his “one-man operation”. Indeed, Mr Rajaratnam himself reflected that the foreign ministry then was “just one table, one typewriter, one secretary – and [himself]”. But through his efforts, Singapore established its standing, and gained many friends abroad.

Mr Rajaratnam, or Raja as he was fondly called, passed away in 2006. At that time, I was working as the PPS to then-PM Lee. I recall at his death, I was also involved behind the scenes with arrangements for the state funeral. Many young Singaporeans expressed sadness that they did not know him better.

In many ways, I shared the same sentiment. I didn’t have the chance to work with Raja or our founding leaders like Dr Goh Keng Swee, Dr Toh Chin Chye, Mr Lim Kim San and others. When I began in the civil service in 1997, they had already stepped down from office. I only knew them through their speeches and the policies that they had left behind.

After his passing, I started reading and learning more about Raja. Chan Heng Chee and Obaid-ul-Haq had earlier compiled a book of his speeches which was reprinted after Raja’s passing in 2007. That became my one-stop guide to all of his key speeches. Reading them, I was struck by his sharp insights, his wide-ranging views spanning economics, history, politics, and philosophy, and his incredible talent for ideas and words.

It is remarkable that in 1972 (the year I was born) he envisioned Singapore as a global city. This was just seven years after Singapore’s independence; and decades before globalisation became a buzzword or the invention of the internet. But Raja was a visionary. He said our hinterland was not just the peninsular, as most had earlier thought, but the world. By linking up with other global cities, we could overcome our small domestic market and lack of natural resources, and become one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world.

After I entered politics, I enjoyed quoting what he said about democracy and the role of the opposition. He once noted how easy it was to win public attention simply by disagreeing with the government. If the government says ‘white’ and you write letters or articles in the newspapers advocating ‘black’, your column will be read, and you will be hailed at the next cocktail reception as an original and bold thinker. He said this back in 1971, and it still rings true today. Instead of opposition for the sake of opposition, Raja called for a “democracy of deeds”, one made up of active citizens who would focus on solving problems, and developing solutions for a better Singapore.

This philosophy has guided me throughout my time in government. In every role I have undertaken, I have made it a point to engage and listen, and to create platforms for closer partnerships with stakeholders in the private and people sectors, so that they can be empowered to take actions and solve real issues on the ground.

In 2012, when we decided to bring together the community and sports portfolios in the-then MCYS with the arts portfolio in the-then MICA, I was given the chance to lead this new ministry. One of my first tasks was to come up with a name for it. Inspired by Raja, I wanted “Culture” to be resurrected in a ministry’s name, to build on the rich legacy he had left behind. That’s how we eventually came up with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth.

So Irene is spot-on when she said I am a huge admirer of Raja. Each time I read (and re-read) his speeches and writings, I always find something illuminating and inspiring. I enjoyed Irene’s first volume on Raja when it was published in 2010. When Irene invited me to speak at the launch of this second volume, I readily agreed.

Irene has put in tremendous work researching and putting together these two books. They are not just a biography of Raja but also a detailed account of Singapore’s history. For those who experienced the events of that time, and knew Raja well, the biography will surely bring back memories of the past. For many of us who belong to the post-independence generation, this book will bring us closer to Raja the man, and provide a vivid sense of what it was like in the early years of nation building. Irene has truly done Singapore a great service in bringing Raja to life for a new generation of Singaporeans. Thank you, Irene for this labour of love!

Lessons from Raja

Today, Singapore is in a new phase. It is not just a change of leadership, but a generational change. I am the first PM to be born after independence. All the previous PMs have sung two if not three national anthems – God Save the King, Kimigayo and Negaraku. I have sung only one – Majulah Singapura. That’s also the case for the rest of my 4G colleagues.

We share Raja’s concerns about whether Singapore can endure. Especially at a time of growing global fractiousness, big power contestation and a weakening international order. So we are clear about our mission: to build on the strong foundations we have inherited, and to keep Singapore going and thriving.

As we venture into uncharted waters internationally, we must rally together as one people. We must develop new ideas, and try out new approaches to problems. But at the same time, we should remember the wisdom of our founding leaders, and uphold key principles and insights that remain relevant to our success.

As I read Irene’s book, and as I reflect on Raja’s work and legacy, let me share some of my thoughts on these insights.

First, the need to stay open and plugged into the world.

When Raja articulated the vision of Singapore as a “Global City” in 1972, he was ahead of his time. With the end of the Cold War 20 years later, globalisation took off and brought about significant economic integration worldwide. Singapore reaped substantial benefits from this global shift. We became a major hub for finance, trade, logistics, and home to multinational enterprises. As Raja predicted, plugging into global networks enabled us to overcome our small size and lack of hinterland, and created growth and prosperity for our people.

Now the world has changed. Nativist and anti-immigration sentiments are rising across many countries. Protectionism is gaining ground. Countries are prioritising their own security interests over international cooperation. A growing sentiment of economic nationalism is challenging the multilateral trading system and reshaping the global order.

We are not immune to these pressures in Singapore. As more and more countries put up barriers to trade, investment and talent, ostensibly to protect their citizens, we too hear calls for Singapore to do the same.

Raja himself anticipated this in one of his later interviews. He said that the pressure will inevitably grow amongst businessmen and professionals who resent foreigners being awarded contracts on the basis of merit. Instead, there will be calls for projects to be awarded to locals, even if the work is of inferior quality – a demand to protect the second or third best against the best. But Raja warned: any government that takes this path just to win elections will lead Singapore towards “irreversible disaster”.

We do well to heed Raja’s warning. Staying open is not just essential, it is existential for us. Singapore cannot exist other than as an island city-state connected to the world. We need the best ideas and the best teams to excel and hold our own against tough competition. At the same time, we know that this comes with its share of costs. The rapid pace of change that takes place in any vibrant economy means that there will be some who are displaced from their jobs or who struggle to keep up. What then should a government do to provide a secure base for all so that we can compete effectively as a nation?

One option is to turn inwards and away from the world. But then we will surely stagnate and atrophy. Everyone will be worse off.

The right approach is not to impede progress by putting up more barriers, but to ensure fair competition and fair employment practices; to help every worker reskill and upskill; and to support those who suffer setbacks and enable them to bounce back stronger.

This is indeed what the government is doing. This is why we have expanded SkillsFuture to equip every worker, and worked with the community to strengthen safety nets and uplift disadvantaged families. We will soon be introducing new laws to uphold fair employment practices. All these initiatives are part of Forward Singapore – our effort to renew our social compact so that every Singapore can share in the fruits of our progress, and nobody will feel that they have to deal with life’s volatilities or uncertainties alone.

This brings me to my second point on solidarity.

Raja used to ponder deeply about what enables some societies to thrive, while others decline. He referred to the ideas of 14th century Islamic philosopher and historian Ibn Khaldun. Khaldun wrote about the concept of “asabiyyah” – an Arabic word that describes the bond that exists in a community. Nowadays we might call it “social capital”.

In Raja’s view, it’s this sense of community and solidarity that explains the rise and fall of societies.

When a community first forms, everyone is prepared for austerity, discipline and self-sacrifice, and society prospers.

But over time, as life becomes more comfortable, this sense of solidarity is weakened. People lose their social anchors and seek to advance their own individual interests. When that sense of community and common purpose is eroded, things start to fall apart.

Indeed, there are powerful forces at play that will test our solidarity and pull us in different directions.

For example, race and religion continue to be highly emotive issues. Raja was an idealist, but he was realistic about what he called the “primitive emotions of race”. He once compared this to a “wild and hungry beast pacing impatiently behind the bars of a cage” and that we must never let up our efforts to ensure that this “wild beast remains locked in its cage”.

Of course, there are other aspects of identity that people care and feel strongly about. The internet has made it easier for these diverse groups to organise themselves. Naturally, every group will be motivated to push claims and narratives that will promote their own interests, or to paint their actions and goals in an attractive light. We hope for enlightenment to emerge from this marketplace of ideas. But in practice, we see an amplification of more extreme voices and views, thereby pulling us apart.

We already see this dynamic at work in many countries around the world. Echo chambers form online. People gather around their own tribes. They self-select information to support and reinforce their own points of view. As a result, it becomes harder to find consensus on national issues. The centre is hollowed out and extreme views gain ground. When one side pushes their demands, another side pushes back twice as hard. Eventually societies are deeply divided, and it becomes impossible to govern.

This is why we work so hard to keep Singapore society together: Not by suppressing any particular racial, religious or linguistic identity but by expanding the common spaces linking our multiplicities. This is why whenever we confront any controversial issue – be it 377A or conflict in the Middle East – our instinct is not to underline or accentuate the differences, but to seek a consensus that unites as many as possible.

This starts with making genuine attempts to engage and listen, and to bridge the gap with those with different views from us. When issues arise, we accept them and seek pragmatic compromises. We do so always in an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect – to build shared understanding, and to use our diverse perspectives and ideas to build better outcomes for all.

In the end, Singapore can endure only if we care for our fellow citizens, and we put our hearts and souls into helping our fellow citizens and making this a better home for all.

Raja understood this well. We all know the second part of our national pledge: “to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality, as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation”. The original version drafted by Raja was: “to build a democratic society, where justice and equality will prevail, and where we will seek happiness and progress by helping one another”. Seeking happiness and progress by helping one another. I think that is a key insight on how we can take Singapore forward.

We want everyone in Singapore to work hard, strive for excellence and go as far as they can go. But if all that striving is focussed narrowly on promoting our own well-being, it will only lead to more self-centeredness in society; it will engender a “me first” mindset. Those who are less able will envy the success of the more able. After some time, envy will breed resentment. That’s how the fabric of society is destroyed, and things quickly fall apart.

So let us instead pursue happiness by helping others – by giving back, contributing to the community, and serving our nation. When we serve a purpose larger than ourselves and do our part to uplift our fellow citizens, we start to build a culture of kinship and respect. We learn to empathise with our fellow citizens. We bring out the best in each other, and we succeed together as one people.

Finally, we have agency to determine our future.

When Singapore was thrust into independence, our founding leaders did not just throw their hands up in despair.

There were many then who predicted Singapore would fail.

A day after our independence, on 10 August 1965, an article in the Sydney Morning Herald said: “An independent Singapore was not regarded as viable three years ago. Nothing in the current situation suggests that it is more viable today”.

The commentators had some basis for their prediction. A small country, with no natural resources, no hinterland and no defence force, and in a difficult external environment. Any country in such a precarious situation could not have lasted long.

But we were fortunate that our founding leaders, supported by the pioneer generation of Singaporeans, did not give up, and worked hard to succeed against the odds.

The Singapore of 2024 is different from the Singapore of 1965.

We are in a much stronger position. But we also face new and daunting challenges. Now, like then, there will be cynics and sceptics who say that we can’t make it.

But Raja reminds us: “A nation creates its own future – every time and all the time. Nothing is predestined.” Outsiders can say what they want about us. But ultimately, here in Singapore, we have agency to determine our own future.

Raja once noted that historically the tendency has been for successful societies to go into decline. But he was also quick to stress that trend is not destiny. As he put it, in times of prosperity, there will be a proliferation of leaders who promise a better life for less or even no effort. Time and again, such ‘bread and circus’ leaderships have won the hearts of people time and again, who discover too late that there is no bread or circus, and that they are in an arena confronting hungry lions.

To be clear: I offer no bread or circus; no quick or easy solutions. But I know that, working together, we have the means to go against the trend, and keep Singapore exceptional. Importantly, we have the will to build on what we have today and to take Singapore onwards and upwards.

Conclusion

In a few weeks’ time, we will celebrate our National Day.

It is fitting that we are launching the book now – there is much for us to celebrate and rejoice, and much we need to remember and uphold as we take the next step in our nation building journey.

I share Irene’s sentiments about the importance of our National Pledge. There will be different views on how we can enshrine it. But in the end, it’s more than what we do in Parliament. Every day, when students recite the pledge, and each time we do so, we are imbibing Raja’s hopes and dreams for Singapore.

To me, the best way for us to honour his legacy is for us to be that democracy of deeds: to seek happiness and progress by helping one another. I hope this book will spark further conversations amongst Singaporeans on how we can do so. And how we can all take practical steps, to move ever more closely, day by day, towards that ideal of one united people, regardless of race, language or religion.

Thank you very much.

Explore related topics

• Arts, culture and heritage

• Governance

• Multi-racial and multi-religious society