PM Lawrence Wong in an Interview with The Wall Street Journal (Sep 2025)

Gordon Fairclough (The Wall Street Journal): In your National Day (Rally) speech this year, you talked about the US pulling back and the multilateral system coming apart. Could you maybe talk a bit about the economic and security consequences of that?

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong: Sure. We are very concerned, because clearly, the world is undergoing profound changes. It is not just the actions of any single country. Of course the US is very important. But it is a very complex ecosystem. Actions by one country will prompt reactions and recalculations by others and also by companies, and we have not seen the full ripple effects of all these felt across the board yet. And I think we are in for a period where there will be a lot of unpredictability, messiness. History shows transitions like that when you have a change in the global order – it is always going to be messy, unpredictable, somewhat disorderly. So we are concerned, because for a small and open economy like Singapore, we will certainly feel the impact, more heavily than most.

So, what do we do? On our own, we cannot change these big, powerful forces. But we are not passive bystanders. We will do what we can to shape our own destiny and make our own living in this new world. So we are redoubling our efforts on existing partnerships in Southeast Asia and beyond. But we are also forging new frameworks for cooperation with like-minded countries. So you might have seen the recent news where we announced a new framework for investment and trade partnership called FIT-P (Future of Investment and Trade Partnership), which we convened with Switzerland, New Zealand, and UAE.

We got small, medium trade dependent countries together, about 14 of us, I believe. We share the same concerns, and all of us would like to see how we can advance more forward-leaning trade initiatives – around supply chains, bringing down non-tariff barriers, facilitating more trade and investments. And if we can do that well amongst this group, then perhaps we can eventually scale up to more multilateral frameworks like the WTO. And this is just the beginning; there are 14 countries which are in the membership now, but more have expressed an interest, and hopefully we can grow the momentum over time.

The Wall Street Journal: Have you talked to von der Leyen, EU who are interested in this kind of an idea?

PM Wong: Yes, very much. In fact, I would say this idea (FIT-P) is a little bit like a startup idea. Because it is a new sort of framework (with) smaller economies. But it is not the only thing we are pursuing. Second, we are looking at strengthening existing global institutions like the WTO, where we are very active in the different efforts to reform and strengthen the WTO; that is ongoing. Third, we work with parallel efforts like the CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership), which we are part of, and I have had very good discussions with my counterparts amongst the CPTPP countries.

Many of my counterparts in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mark Carney, after he took over, the UK, which is the latest member, and then many of the members who are within ASEAN itself – we are all keen to pursue stronger partnerships with other groupings. So, we are talking to the EU and I have spoken to von der Leyen, and with Macron in France and others. They are very keen too. So discussions are underway, to see how we can forge a closer partnership. It does not mean that the EU will be part of the CPTPP. I mean that would be quite difficult to do. But to establish a stronger partnership that would facilitate trade and investments and look at how we can together uphold our shared commitment on multilateral rules for trade – I think that would be something. So that effort is underway. Within ASEAN itself, we are a sizable grouping, and four members of ASEAN are already members of the CPTPP. A few more are keen to join. So if you look at it, CPTPP comprises 15% of the world's GDP, EU is another 15%, ASEAN makes up 6% to 7%; now that is not a startup effort anymore. That is a major effort, and I think if we can get that progressing, then we have a chance of working with like-minded countries to preserve and reinforce the multilateral frameworks that matter. And through this messy and unpredictable period, who knows what would emerge down the road, but at least we steer things in the right direction.

The Wall Street Journal: Do you think there are enough like-minded countries?

PM Wong: I think there are. I mean, we are clearly moving into a direction where the world would be more multipolar, more contested, less coordinated. What shape this new global order will take, no one can tell. But it is not likely to be the product of a grand design by just one or two superpowers anymore, not even the product of a harmonious accord of a few major powers, like what happened after the Second World War.

I think it would be the product of actions and choices of many different countries. And if you speak to many other countries, not just Singapore, many of us would like to create space for us to have autonomy, to make our own choices, and not to be forced to choose sides. It is not just Singapore that takes this position. The Europeans, France in particular, espouses strategic autonomy. In Southeast Asia, all the Southeast Asian countries – of course, each one has a different depth of cooperation with the US and China – but collectively, ASEAN, having been the arena for proxy wars of major powers in the past, we do not want to have that kind of conflict again. And ASEAN as a whole, we have taken a clear position that we want to engage all the major powers. We reject dominance by any single power and zero-sum competition. You can say the same for India, which is fiercely independent, and for many other countries in the Global South.

So I think there will be enough countries that would like to come together and work on preserving and strengthening some of these multilateral frameworks. And eventually, I think this will lay the groundwork for a new and more stable, hopefully more inclusive, global order to emerge in the years ahead.

The Wall Street Journal: Earlier, you were referring, I forget the names, referring to various eras of the earlier history of Singapore, the emergence of Singapore from colonialism; been sort of trying to think myself, are there parallels between kind of unravelling of the British Empire, and then the Global System that that comprised and now the US sort of retreat from parts of the global stage. Do you see this as an era similar to the sort of run up to the Second World War, or post-Second World War? Are there any kind of historical, parallels that you have in your mind for where we are now?

PM Wong: People say history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. So, there is a lot of rhyming now. You can find many historical parallels. I suppose the period between the two World Wars would be relevant. After Smoot-Hawley, that made the Depression worse. And then there were other consequences. You can draw parallels there. You can draw parallels with the height of the Cold War. But none of these are accurate, because today's context is very different than the past. Certainly, there are themes and motifs and issues that resonate today. But the situation today is very different because we are in a more complex and interdependent global system. For example, America and China are very heavily intertwined in their economies. It is not like America and the Soviet Union before. A full decoupling between the two – as I suppose people have started to realise – is unimaginable. It will be highly destabilising and damaging for both sides. So, it is a different context, and we will have to work out under today's situation, how best to manage the tensions, the rivalry and at the same time to continue to work together. But what has been true in the past is that these transitions between changes in the global order have been, in the past, usually resolved only, unfortunately, through a global conflict. We do not want that to happen, and it is, I think, our collective responsibility to try very hard and make sure that does not happen again.

The Wall Street Journal: How concerned are you if that is the way we are headed?

PM Wong: We are very concerned, because there are flash points everywhere. Already you can see violence and conflicts in the world going up. Countries can act with greater impunity against international law with less consequences. And all that reflects the new situation we are in; an America that is reconsidering its role in the global order and pulling back in many different areas, including, sort of its role as the world's policeman, if you will. So it is becoming more and more a world where might makes right. And that concerns us certainly, as a small country.

What concerns us too is the fact that global public goods get ignored. The global commons will be ignored, whether it is nuclear proliferation or climate change, these are all important issues. If every country starts to act for itself only, yes, you can optimise for yourself, but who looks after the global commons? And the challenge is that the global public goods benefits all of humanity, but it is very costly, and the cost is not always distributed evenly. So there are no easy answers here, obviously. But again, we will try as a small country, because we are concerned. We will try and work with partners to look at different ways in which we can strengthen these global institutions and multilateral frameworks.

The Wall Street Journal: Right. I think the sense, at least among some in the current US administration, is that the global public goods have been paid for by the US exclusively. Whatever the fact is, I think that is the impression. Is there a way to, I do not know, come up with a way to, as you said – keep supplying these global public goods if it is not the United States that does it?

PM Wong: First of all, we should question the burden sharing. Yes, America has borne a large share of it, but it is not America alone. And it is also not the case that America has not benefitted. All countries have benefitted. Of course, one can question the cost-benefit analysis from the point of view of the typical American citizen, and America is going through one of these phases where it is having a very deep introspection about its role. I suppose as other countries develop over time, as we move towards a more multi-polar world – because the centre of gravity of economic power is shifting to other countries – one can rightly say that others should also carry their fair share. Then we have to get into difficult conversations like global governance – shareholdings in the IMF and the World Bank, for example, which were all done to reflect a world after the Second World War, but is not reflective of the world today. And these conversations are important and do need to be had.

The Wall Street Journal: So one thing I have seen pundits writing about is a concern that maybe we are moving into kind of spheres of influence politics again, or geopolitics. We have the Americas and Russia, Europe and Asia with China as a hegemon. How does Singapore look at that kind of a scenario, versus a more diffused multi-polarity, versus sort of disorder.

PM Wong: As I said, it is not just Singapore alone. If you look at ASEAN, we do not want a region that is dominated by just one superpower. We stated that publicly. We prefer a region that is open and inclusive and engages all the major powers. Of course, as I mentioned just now, if you look at individual ASEAN countries, they will have different sorts of relationships, economic and security with America and China. Some are American allies, like the Philippines and Thailand. We are not an ally, we are a Major Security Cooperation Partner. Some in the Indo-China region would have understandably closer links with China. But still, collectively as a region, we think it is in ASEAN’s interest not to have a region that is dominated by any single power.

So our policy is one of active engagement. We want to engage all the major powers, and that is why Singapore in particular, has consistently been a voice and advocate for more American engagement in this part of the world, not just on the security front, but especially on the economic front. And we tell our American counterparts that America has expended blood and treasure to bring about today's Asia. America is a Pacific power. You have considerable stakes here. So it is in your interest, and it will bring opportunities for America and American citizens, for America to be actively engaged in this part of the world. And we tell the same to our Southeast Asian counterparts.

The Wall Street Journal: Do you think your counterparts agree with you?

PM Wong: I think they do. But if some countries receive good infrastructure proposals from China, can you blame them for accepting it? It is bringing about tangible benefits – in terms of high-speed rail, in terms of better infrastructure, airports. There is perhaps sometimes a perception that these are projects that lead to a lot of debt and no benefits. That may be so in some places. But certainly in Southeast Asia, if you look at many of the infrastructure projects supported by China, the response, the people's response to these projects have been very positive. Because people can see it has really benefitted their lives. But still, I mean, there is no reason why American companies cannot invest. There are opportunities. There is no reason why America cannot play a bigger role in many of the new projects that are being developed, that are opening up.

The Wall Street Journal: Have we seen since the beginning of this year, would you say we are already seeing in terms of the way supply chains are adjusting trade flows, FDI? What is Singapore's experience in terms of what is actually already happening?

PM Wong: We are seeing some changes, but I think it is still early days. There is a lot of unpredictability, and because of the unpredictability and uncertainty, we see companies – and that is our concern about the immediate term – have front loaded inventories, but (they are) not making new investments yet. Because everyone is worried. When I make a new plant, then something happens, and I end up with a stranded asset.

Even earlier, even before the tariffs, there has already been some reconfiguration of supply chains because of diversification and China plus one. So you can see factories coming up in Vietnam, in Indonesia. So some of that has already started. But because of the present uncertainty with the tariff situation, for now, not so much new investments.

The Wall Street Journal: Right, and in terms of trade flows through the Port of Singapore. Are you concerned that some of the healthy was, you know, people trying to, I do not know, Americans trying to get stuff in before the tariffs, and now we do not know what is going to happen or?

PM Wong: Well, I think overall trade, if you look at trade patterns, actually, the trade share globally has been holding up relatively well, not rising as it used to be, but neither has it been coming down drastically. People still trade.

I mean, interdependency has become a bad word these days. We used to talk about its virtues, and actually, and perhaps it was overstated – there is no McDonald's Theory of Peace. But there is a lot to be said about interdependency, because you have stakes in one another. I think countries will be more inhibited to take aggressive actions when you have more stakes in one another's success. There is a lot to be said about that. Conversely, if we move to self-sufficiency, it is just not possible. So, I think trade will still continue, but the patterns of trade will change.

China will still remain a very important manufacturing engine. And that combination of “Invented in America, Made in China”, was a very powerful combination when it lasted, because China's strength is in its market scale, its deep engineering capabilities and its ability to iterate very, very quickly, and no other country can replace that in the near term. No one. So, if you do not have invented in America, made in China now, well, it cannot all be made in America. So where else? It will take time, some Southeast Asian countries, some Latin American countries, India, perhaps after the trade issues have been sorted out, but it will take time. And I think the trade will still happen, but the configuration will be different. And so long as there is still trade, there is always going to be a role for a hub like Singapore, and we want to be at the centre of all these trade flows.

The Wall Street Journal: Speaking of being able to make everything in America, how do you think companies in Singapore are reacting to the news of the immigration arrests of all the South Korean engineers in the United States? It is one thing that sort of made me question, well, if you want to build factories in the United States, you are going to need this kind of expertise from abroad to be able to do it. At this point, it seems going in the other direction.

PM Wong: I have not picked up much of a reaction, at least from Singapore companies, because we do not have that kind of scale in terms of direct investments from our Singapore companies. And you know, truth be told, in Singapore, we also take a very harsh attitude towards illegal immigrants, illegal workers. So our attitude is, yes, we welcome foreign professionals, we welcome foreign workers, but we have very strict rules and controls and you operate within those rules. If you bring someone into our country illegally, we will take very tough action too.

The Wall Street Journal: Right. So, we were talking about the uncertainty and the unpredictability. I think I saw your Deputy PM said when he came back from Washington, that Washington was non-committal about whether tariffs would go up further for Singapore. What do you think about that? What confidence do you have that…?

PM Wong: No one can tell. I mean, for now, we are subject to the baseline tariff of 10 percent. No one can tell if that baseline will be higher or lower in the coming future. But we have also been talking to our counterparts on the sectoral tariffs which America is considering on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. And the discussions are still ongoing. Hopefully we can achieve a good landing with them.

The Wall Street Journal: And if you look at the trade agreements that the US has been making with other countries, some of which strike me as being a bit more transactional, commercial than, say, setting trade rules per se, what conclusions do you draw from that and what that says about how the US is looking to reshape things?

PM Wong: That is the approach that the current administration is taking to strike a trade deal – to also bring in more investments into America and to see what other areas where it can find benefits, or find some areas of gain. And from an individual country point of view, it is understandable, but that is a different approach for looking at trade that America has taken now. So countries would have to respond to that, and some have done so. We are discussing with our American counterparts. But if you look at our overall relationship with America – as far as the trade balance is concerned, America has a surplus with us. As far as investments are concerned, we invest significantly in the US as a country, which is remarkable considering how small we are, and yet we are one of the top investors in America, and our investments have created many good jobs in America.

On the security and defence side, we have a very close partnership forged over many decades. And it goes beyond just procurement and buying of American equipment. It includes very deep cooperation in intelligence, cyber security and in many areas. So if you look at that breadth and comprehensiveness of the relationship, we certainly hope that when we talk about trade, our American counterparts will look at trade in that broader and wider context of the overall relationship we have.

The Wall Street Journal: That does not always seem to be the case, as we have seen with India. Are there other approaches that you can take? How do you emphasise those broader things when you are dealing with your American interlocutors?

PM Wong: Well, we will have to take it one step at a time.

The Wall Street Journal: Amongst other things. So what is your view of what is going on with the Federal Reserve, and how is your confidence in investing in US Treasury assets, other American assets, and the strength of the dollar?

PM Wong: We still have confidence long-term in America. Of course, we are watching closely what happens in the Fed and we certainly hope that institutions will continue to be preserved. Then there are decisions that the Fed will make. Everyone watches that very closely, how it moves the market in the near term. But we invest, not just with a short-term perspective. We are long-term investors, and we ride through market cycles. We, as in, referring to our sovereign wealth funds, because there are many other private investors from Singapore.

We are long-term investors, and we ride through market cycles. And in the long term, we still believe in the potential, and we are still confident about America's prospects, because in terms of the private sector dynamism, the innovation potential, the leading-edge technologies, all this is to be found in America.

The Wall Street Journal: An important underpinning of the global trading system has been the stability of the dollar. What are the risks if the dollar becomes less stable?

PM Wong: We watch that too, but really in the near-term, again there are no alternatives. The depth of the US financial system, the institutions. Yes, there are concerns that some of these may be eroded in the near-term, but these things again, look through the cycle and look at it over time. I think that there should be sufficient checks and balances within the American system. The institutions have proven to be robust and durable over a long period of time. And then if you look at the alternatives, as far as the US dollar is concerned, there really are no alternatives in terms of reserve currency.

Yes, some countries will try to diversify and do trades in local currencies, but that would chip away a little bit at the use of the US dollar for trade, but I think marginal. But certainly, if you talk about risk, the risk has gone up. There is no doubt. So we have to look at it, not in binary terms, but in risk terms. And you recognise that there are greater risks. But it does not mean that you just stop investing or stop trading. So you have to adjust accordingly, based on your risk appetite and looking at how we can get the best long-term returns for the risks that we are prepared to take, and look at it globally.

The Wall Street Journal: On the security front, as you are looking at more turmoil and everything else, do you think that is going to mean increases in defence spending for Singapore or more resources put towards defence?

PM Wong: Not quite, because we have not had an issue of cutting back on defence spending ever. We have been able to maintain our defence spending at an even keel, sort of growing with our economy over time, and we have consistently invested in capabilities. So we will continue with that approach. We are not like some countries where they have not been spending and now they have to ramp up considerably. We have been spending about 3% of GDP now, in the past higher. And so that has helped to build our capabilities over time, as a deterrent capability. We know that we live in a dangerous world. We have always known that, since the time when we became independent and then the British pulled out their military forces, we had to defend Singapore ourselves. That is why we still have military service for men; two years and then continue reserve training. And we still find ways to make sure that we have a capable force that will provide deterrence against any potential aggressors.

The Wall Street Journal: We have seen in Europe, one of the things that countries have been talking about is the sovereign limits that come with US weapons, since the US, in a lot of weapons arms deals, retains authority over how and when they can be used. Is that becoming more of a concern for Singapore? Singapore does buy a lot of weapons from the United States as a source.

PM Wong: We do. It has not been an issue up till now. And in any case, a lot of our capabilities, it is, as I said, is to build up our forces, really as a deterrent force. It did not happen by chance that we have enjoyed peace, stability these last 60 years as a small, independent country. It is because of the defence capabilities we have built up. And it’s more than just the hardware and the equipment, it is also the spirit of the people. There is a very high level of support for national service, and so anyone looking at Singapore knows that this is a people who will be prepared to fight and defend themselves.

The Wall Street Journal: It would be like trying to hug a hedgehog. So are you concerned? When I was here for Shangri-La Dialogue, a lot of people were talking about Taiwan contingencies. What struck me as different was the assumption that any conflict over Taiwan would spread almost instantaneously, because of US assets in the Philippines, Japan, Korea, that all of those countries could end up pulled into the conflict. How do you sort of handicap the chances of this now, and are you concerned that Singapore would get somehow sucked into it?

PM Wong: We are all very concerned. If something were to break out over Taiwan, everyone in Asia will be sucked in. And it will have very damaging consequences for not just Asia's stability, but for global stability, because then you are going to drag in America and China into a confrontation. And then we are going to have even larger consequences that I think will be potentially disastrous for the world. So we should look at Taiwan very seriously and really find ways to prevent conflict from even happening.

A lot of conversation in America has been an emphasis on deterrence – deter China from invasion. And there is certainly some value in that, and it is certainly important. At the same time, there should also be attention paid to deterring moves towards independence. Because this is China's reddest of red lines. It is a matter of sovereignty for China. They consider Taiwan as part of “One-China” and the US and many other countries, including Singapore, also have some version of a “One-China” policy.

It is not clear now how things will be resolved. No one has a good answer, but we should not allow a move away from the status quo that is done in a non-peaceful manner, and that would include deterring invasion, deterring any aggressive moves, but it would also include deterring unilateral moves toward independence. And all parties have a part to play – US, China, Taiwan itself, and all of us in the region. And if we can all find ways to manage this carefully, wisely, keep to the status quo for now, continue to allow engagement to happen, and allow diplomacy to happen; who knows what path diplomacy will take, but if we are able to do that, then I think we can minimise the risk of conflicts happening.

The Wall Street Journal: In addition to deterrence, are there ways that Singapore and other countries could incentivise a less, a non-conflict outcome?

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong: Well, I mean, we engage China and we have conversations with Chinese counterparts. The concern, of course, is that there might be unilateral moves. But I do not think it is in China's interest to make any unilateral move, unless, of course, on the flip side, there are moves that crosses its red lines. China has enough preoccupations to focus on, not least its economic situation, property market, which is improving, but still needs some way before it gets to a soft landing. And yes, China is growing, but, you know, China is still one-sixth of America's per capita GDP. It still has a long way more to modernise, transform itself, and uplift the livelihoods of its people. That is our impression – that that is their preoccupation. Would they like to see a peaceful reunification of Taiwan? Of course they would like to. But does it have to be done within the next 10 years? I think their time frames will be much longer than that.

The Wall Street Journal: Is there anything I did not ask you about that you wanted to discuss?

PM Wong: I am at your liberty.

The Wall Street Journal: Any message for our readers in the United States?

PM Wong: Well, you know, I think America is going through this, like I said, this introspective period. I was a student in America in the early ‘90s, in Wisconsin, Michigan. And even before, you look at America's history, it goes through these periods of introspection, of huge debate about its role in the world. Of course, this time in America's history, things do seem more divisive and polarised than before. But I still believe there is something about the quality of America that allows it to come together as a people and as a country, and to find that sense of purpose and be that Shining City on the Hill it has always been. And so I am still confident that amidst all the challenges that America faces, it will be able to provide leadership for the world. It will be a different world. It will not just be America alone. It will be more multipolar but in this more multipolar world, not all the poles are created equal.

We know our place in the world. We are just a very small country, and America will always, well, I think in the foreseeable future, still have a very important role to play. And we would encourage America to think about how it can constructively play a role in shaping this new global order. There are important responsibilities, a lot of work to be done, and it will benefit all of humanity, but it will certainly benefit Americans too.

The Wall Street Journal: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

PM Wong: Thank you.

Explore related topics

• Economy

• Governance

• Foreign affairs