Transcription
This has been a successful APAC meeting, taking place amidst, uh, profound changes in the global economy. APEC's founding mission was to promote open and free trade in the Asia-Pacific. Uh, and so today, when we meet leaders, APEC leaders still talk about trade, but different modifiers are used to describe trade. It's not just open and free. Some economies talk about trade having to be fair and balanced, suggesting that it wasn't in the past. And more and more, security is used, uh, alongside trade. To be, I mean, in the, there's always been security carve-outs in trade agreements for national security, and these were in the past used sparingly. But nowadays, security is used very liberally, not just security in the traditional sense of defense, but also economic security, supply chain security, and technology security. So security is everywhere, and in the name of security, more barriers are put up against trade. So it's amidst this environment that we are meeting, and understandably, there are different views across APEC economies around trade. But it's still very good that in this APEC meeting, we were able to achieve a consensus amongst the leaders and the ministers on the direction forward for APEC, that is generally still pro-trade, despite all the different modifiers. And this is important for Singapore because we, we are such a trade-reliant and trade-dependent economy. Trade is not just good to have for us. Trade is our lifeblood. Trade is existential for us. So we must continue to support APAC. We must continue to support the momentum for trade and trade liberalization in the global economy, and for us, that means multiple threat, uh, lines of work. It means on the one hand, we have to continue to reform the WTO, which is very important, and I spoke about that at the APEC meeting. We also have to bring together the different regional groupings closer together. We have RAP, for example, CPTPPP, and other different, um, FDAs and, uh, forums for cooperation. We ought to try and bring them closer together and build bridges between them, which we are also trying to do. And thirdly, we should pursue new initiatives, as we have been doing, like at this, at the sidelines of this APEC meeting. We started with New Zealand and Chile, Chile, the green economy partnership agreement, as we did last time with P4, with Brunei and the three economies too. So these new initiatives help us to set standards, uh, you know, shape norms of cooperation, especially around new areas, and hopefully, in time to come, they can expand, grow, and be multilateralized. So these are our priorities for trade, for our economy, and I'm glad we were able to achieve, uh, some good progress during this meeting.
Hi, first question. So now, after the ASEAN summit and APAC, right? What's your read on the state of multilateral moon space world order? Are things more promising as we head into 2026 and also beyond?
>> The, these things will not change with one meeting, and it's also very hard to tell how things will evolve month by month, year by year. It's a, it's a little bit like the climate, you know. You know, the global warming is happening, you can tell, you know, over a long period of time, the world is warming up, unless countries come together to take actions. But you can't really tell the weather day by day or year by year. And, and I think it's hard to say at this stage. We know the longer-term trends. For now, if no actions are taken, if these trends continue, the structural trends continue, we are likely to see more fragmentation in the global economy. We are likely to see continued erosion of the rules-based multilateral system and move more and more into a multipolar world. That's our view. The, of course, these trends, um, you know, may happen, but the rest of countries also have agency. We, we are not passive bystanders and helpless, as though these trends are so powerful that we, we can't do anything about them. We can take actions, just like global warming. We know it's happening, but we can take actions to mitigate. And likewise, if countries are able to do more, like what we did this time with the APEC summit and through other, uh, areas of cooperation, if we can all take action together, then we can do something about these structural trends.
Could you share a bit about your thoughts about this Trump and C meetings, and then how you feel about the, their US and China relationships going forward from all the reports?
>> Uh, they had a good meeting.
>> All right. They had a good, uh, discussion and conversation. I'm glad it took place and that it has provided some stability. I think it's, uh, more of a temporary truce and some guardrails around the relationship, which is much needed and very welcomed, certainly by all the economies in APEC, and I'm sure by, uh, countries everywhere, and also for the global economy. This is much needed to provide some predictability. But it is short-term, and I think the underlying structural issues have not been fully resolved. The rivalry between the two countries remains. The mutual suspicion, the distrust of one another remains. The continued attempts to insulate themselves from one another, I'm sure, will continue. So, we just have to be realistic. It's a relief that this has taken place, but we should also be very clear that the underlying concerns and the underlying rivalry between the two great powers will continue.
Just building on that, in general, after the dinner with President Trump, do you have any sense of where the future of leadership policy is going? Any change in the?
>> We had a good dinner. It's not just a few of us around the table. Um, President Trump was warm, friendly. It's an informal dinner, so we talked about a wide range of issues, global and regional. Um, we didn't get into very many specifics on trade, but, uh, if you look at US policies under this administration, it's quite clear where they are, but what they will continue to do where trade is concerned, as I mentioned just now, um, they would like to see trade continuing. They know that they can't do everything within America. It's not possible. They will need partners. They will see trade, but the current administration reflects the mood, good, of American society, which is that trade in the past decades has not benefited American people. Uh, it's not been so fair to them from their point of view, and they would like to see some rebalancing. And of course, there's also the concerns around technology, around security. So it's a different way of, different approach to trade compared to a completely open and free trade system that we have been used to in, uh, in the past, and that, that policy is clearly upheld by this administration.
How long will this continue for?
>> No one can say. But I think, as I mentioned just now, these wider trends, I, are likely to continue, not just in America, but across the world. Countries are concerned about securities, countries are concerned about supply chain disruptions, countries are concerned about their industrial base. The advanced economies, they want to reshore more manufacturing. So these wider trends, I think, are likely to continue, be it in America or other countries, and for some time to come.
>> What are some of the key outcomes for Singaporean businesses from this?
>> We, APEC has a very strong business community that works alongside, um, the APEC, uh, ministers and leaders. So we meet with the, uh, business advisory council every year, and they give us recommendations. And one of the recommendations that came out through our efforts working together with the Australians was to advance the agenda for paperless trade, just to digitize trade processes, make it more seamless and convenient, reduce frictions. And I think that's a good thing for businesses. It may not seem like a very big news about tariffs and big policy change, but these sorts of cutting of red tape, um, reducing of b, of frictions for trade are things that we should pursue. And a lot of the feedback comes from the business community, business leaders that APEC engages. And through these, uh, constant engagement and feedback mechanisms, we are able to again take mix, uh, make good progress towards, uh, facilitating trade and investment flow between our economies.
>> PM, uh, are you optimistic about trade policy reform after your intervention about the WTO on day one? And what are your reflections on the prospects for and future of smaller multi-country packs like GPA or DEPA, uh, after your meetings at this year's summit? And can you talk a little bit about how they will benefit Singaporeans on the ground?
>> We have to keep trying. I mean, we have to be realistic about the challenges of WTO reforms and trade policy reforms globally. It's very complex. It's very challenging. Uh, but we cannot afford to give up trying. So we have to keep pushing at this and do our very best, uh, to achieve reforms. Uh, even if it, the trajectory may not always move in a linear fashion. Sometimes it's up and down. Sometimes it may curve and bend. But over a period of time, as long as we are moving forward in the right direction, I think that's already an achievement. And we will do so not just by ourselves, but with like-minded countries. That's WTO reforms. As far as the new initiatives that we are doing, whether it's the FITP with the future of investment trade partnership with other small and medium trade-dependent economies, or the JPA, I think these have a lot of value because you get smaller trade-dependent economies. We are very like-minded. We can start to push the frontiers and harmonize standards amongst ourselves. It's easier to do it. And when we start to set these new standards, particularly in areas like the digital economy or the green economy, then you can facilitate more flows in the digital economy and the green economy amongst ourselves. Then others see it, hopefully others get a little bit of FOMO and they say, I want to join in too. And this is, we are, this is not just speaking in theory or in abstract. It has happened. That's why P4 started amongst very, you know, relatively small economies for trade, became the TPP, and then now the CPTPP. That's why the digital economy partnership agreement started with a few of us again. You see countries applying to join because they see value in it. And we hope to do the same for the GPA now with the, with regards to the green economy. To illustrate, when we talk about the green economy, what are we saying? There are still deferring standards around some very basic things. What is a carbon credit? You know, the rules may be different from one country to another. What do you mean by sustainable fuel? Different countries have different definitions. Disclosure standards for businesses may be different. And so when businesses have to interoperate across boundaries, across countries, there are multiple rules to look at, and it raises compliance costs, makes it hard to interoperate, and this is bad for business. So when we are able to harmonize some of these standards, converge around an agreed format of disclosure, for example, then all of these helps to reduce compliance. It helps to facilitate more trade and investment flows, and that should be good. And, and so we have done that for the digital economy, and we hope to do that similarly for the green economy.
How does all this help Singaporeans at the end of the day?
>> Well, the simple formula is more trade, more investments leads to better jobs for Singaporeans. That's the tangible benefits from trade. But trade also has a lot of intangible benefits. When we trade with one another, we, it leads to more competition, but the competition sharpens our capabilities. There's an exchange of ideas. Uh, we learn from one another, and we all get better along the way as we have these exchanges. Trade also facilitates more culture and people-to-people exchanges, and Singaporeans benefit tremendously from that.
Just to go back to the Singapore and US, you mentioned that, um, you didn't speak much during President Trump about trade, but you also had a meeting with the Treasury Secretary. Did trade come up in that conversation? Um, is there a tariff pause or any discussion on tariffs mentioned during that?
>> I had a good meeting with, uh, Secretary Bessant. We are both finance ministers. I'm, I'm finance minister. He's a Treasury Secretary. So we spoke a lot about financial cooperation in the whole, you know, all its different aspects, uh, be it on, um, fintech and digital assets, for example, also on tax policies, as well as, um, what we do when we cooperate with the American.
So what do I do now?
>> Meeting with Besson. Is it okay? I'll just, I'll just reply to you.
>> Uh, I had a very good meeting with, uh, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant. We are both finance ministers. He's the Treasury Secretary. And so there's a lot to talk about in the area of finance. For example, around fintech and digital assets, which we discussed. We also had a good discussion around tax policies, as well as how we cooperate with the Americans around the actions they take against organized crime. So there's a wide range of, uh, areas for discussion. We touched on trade briefly because he's not the main interlocutor where it comes to trade talks. DPM Gan has been discussing that with his counterpart, which is, uh, Secretary Lutnik. But he is aware of the conversations. So I updated him on Singapore's positions and, uh, where we stand, and hopefully he will update and share that with his colleagues in the government too, and we can continue to make progress on our trade negotiations.
One last question from one, one question for me. Uh, you have, uh, various engagement with economic leaders during the tax and ASEAN summits. Uh, what's your takes on Singapore economy next year, especially after Trump's meeting has finally taken place? So do you think the worst is over, or do you think, uh, there are still a lot of uncertainties, uncertainties around? And then there's an even a TBS report mentioning that by 2040, Singapore economy will grow double to $1.4 trillion. Do you think it's an ambitious goal?
>> It's very hard to predict near-term economic, uh, changes. I leave that to the economic forecasters in MTI. They provide regular updates, and they will also provide an update on the Singapore's economy for next year. And whether it's MTI, the official forecast, or even the best of private sector forecasters, you know that it's very hard to get it right because Singapore is so small, and we are, um, so dependent on external, on the external environment and external demand. And, and so really forecasting what happens to the Singapore economy in the near term is really about forecasting what happens to the world. And who can get that right? It's very difficult. So we do our best. Uh, but in the sort of broader horizon, over the broader horizon, there's no doubt, as I mentioned just now, that the era we are in is going to be different from what we had in the past. The external environment will be less hospitable, and we have to be prepared for that. Embrace ourselves for a different, um, way of operating. If you think back in a very broad sense, the, you know, after the Second World War, when America started growing, and then in the 50s, 60s, started to talk about offshoring its manufacturing, it was Japan that first started to take off and built their industrial networks, manufacturing in Japan, selling to America. Japan led the way for the Asian tigers, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan. And we all benefited. And then China came along, and China did it at China scale, large. So it became invented in America, made in Asia. And, and by and large, Asian economies all benefited from this model, not only building our industrial production and capabilities but exporting to not just America but also Europe. And as I said, that model is starting to come apart because the advanced economies all want to reshore. They all want to rebuild their industrial base. Um, they don't just want to rely on Asian manufacturing. They're looking at different partners. So it's a very different model, and we have to be prepared that this new environment will be different. There will be more barriers to trade. There will be more uncertainty. There will be more competition for investments. And we have to find our new way forward in this environment. That's why we are doing a fundamental review of our economic strategies. Uh, so whether or not we can get to whatever the DBS target is or the figure is by 2040, I would say that's a very ambitious, uh, objective. If we can get there, it will be very good. But beyond just GDP alone, uh, we want to grow. Of course, we want our economy to grow. We want the pie to grow. But GDP alone is not sufficient. We must also ensure that the growth is based on innovation, productivity, high-quality growth, and then ultimately that, uh, benefits Singaporeans across the board. And that means we have to ensure that growth leads to more jobs, better jobs, and higher incomes for everyone.
>> Yes. Sorry, now we're switching to the B questions about the soon.
>> I was wondering in terms of economic opportunities, specifically in terms of South Korea, whether there are some industries you would like to highlight where cooperation between South Korea and Singapore is especially promising, and what sort of opportunities there are for Singapore businesses.
>> The relationship is a longstanding one, and it's continued to grow from strength to strength. We mark 50 years of diplomatic ties this year. We've had similar development trajectories too, as I mentioned just now, between Korea and Singapore. Both started from a position of great adversity and vulnerability, and we both rose above, above these challenges to develop our economies to where they are today. So in our, in, we share some commonalities, we share complementarities between our economies, and we both have shared ambitions to move forward in innovation, in sustainability, in technology, and that's where I think there's a lot of scope for greater collaboration. Korea has a lot of technological strengths in energy, in AI, and, you know, in semiconductors, for example, uh, and we hope we can work closely with them and complement their strengths with our market networks, with our financial strengths, for example, and with Singapore as a base for their companies to expand into the wider region, and even to the world. And already, there are these sorts of partnerships happening with quite a number of leading Korean companies with their headquarters in Singapore. So we hope to expand on that, uh, do even more in these areas, and potentially in other areas too. For example, Korea is an agricultural producer as well. So when we talk about diversifying our food sources and increasing food security, Korea can be a very good partner. So these are areas we hope to discuss when I next go to Seoul for my bilateral meeting with President D, and we are aiming to upgrade our relationship to a strategic partnership.
>> Just adding on to that, right, apart from agriculture and also benefits to the companies, what about other tangible outcomes for Singaporeans in other areas? We're signing quite a few there as well.
>> There will be many outcomes. I mean, the, as I mentioned just now, if you look at any trading relationship we have with our partner, or any strategic partnership we have, it's a comprehensive partnership, multifaceted in nature. Naturally, with trade, the most direct beneficiaries are businesses, which in turn translates to opportunities for jobs and workers. But the student exchanges, the people-to-people ties, the cultural exchanges are tremendous too, and I'm sure there's a lot we can benefit with from these exchanges with Korea. I mean, Singaporeans are huge fans of Korean culture, film, music, drama, and Singaporeans love to come to Korea to travel and enjoy all that Korea has to offer. We hope we can also offer something unique and distinctive for Korean visitors when they come to Singapore. So we will continue to encourage these sorts of collaborations, too.
Building on what you said about comprehensive partnerships, you have over the past year launched various CSPs with France, New Zealand, Vietnam, India, with the caveat that, of course, these make, uh, these take many years of background work. But, uh, is this as concerted strategy to respond to the, you know, the coming apart of the whole economic model that you mentioned earlier? And, uh, if so, could you expand on that, please?
>> Oh, very much so. Right. The model has changed, as I mentioned just now. The global context is different. And so for Singapore, given that we are just a small island city, how do we respond? We have to double down on our collaborations with partners. And as I've said before, when we talk about having a comprehensive strategic partner or strategic partner, we don't just put these as labels for convenience. Uh, we make sure that there's substance in the relationship. And when there is substance, then we want to forge a partnership of trust with these countries, a partnership that provides a stable and predictable framework for businesses to operate, uh, amongst these countries. So when the global economy is facing more pressures of fragmentation, when companies are facing so much uncertainties, how do they operate across borders? Where did they, why do they put their factories? Where do they sell? Will export restrictions be imposed willy-nilly one day after I've sunk in huge amounts of investments in a particular country? These all raise business cost, makes it very hard for companies to operate, makes it hard for Singapore as an economy to operate and to survive. But with a network of trusted partners, we provide that framework from which then new supply chains can be forged, uh, new linkages can be put together by the businesses themselves, and then we can, uh, ensure, uh, the macroeconomic conditions for our businesses to thrive.
>> That sounds like you are describing a network in which Singapore is the center of this. Is that curious your vision for this?
>> We would, of course, like to be at the center of these trade and investment flows, but we are not the only country. Other economies will want to be at the center of it too, and at the end of the day, there will be multiple nodes. It's not going to be only one. But as long as we can stay relevant, add value, we will be one of the nodes in this evolving network. And that's how we can continue making a living for ourselves even as the world changes.