Transcription
Today's Battlegrounds with HR McMaster celebrates its 100th episode [music] this week. Since 2020, the series has brought together presidents, prime ministers, military leaders, diplomats, and scholars for thoughtful conversations on the forces shaping global security, freedom, and prosperity. Grounded in the principles of strategic empathy, understanding how allies, adversaries, [music] and partners see the world. The series explores the history, ideas, and leadership behind today's most pressing strategic challenges. Here's to 100 episodes of Insight and many more to come.
On this episode of Today's Battlegrounds, our focus is Singapore. Our guest is Dr. Dr. Vivian Balak Krishnan, Singapore's Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2015 and one of the Indo-Pacific's longest serving chief diplomats. As foreign minister, Dr. Balak Krishnan [music] chaired the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or Asan in 2018, oversaw Singapore's role as host of the Trump Kim Summit, and [music] helped facilitate the negotiations that culminated in the Paris climate agreement. He has become one of the clearest voices explaining how small states [music] can preserve their sovereignty amid intensifying competition between major powers. Before entering politics, Dr. Bala Krishnan practiced as an opthalmologist leading the Singapore National Eye Center as medical director and Singapore General Hospital as chief executive.
The modern Singaporean state emerged from nearly a century and a half of British colonial rule, interrupted by Japanese occupation from 1942 to 1945. After the conclusion of World War II, British rule resumed and Singapore gained internal self-government in 1959. In 1963, Singapore joined the Federation of Malaysia, but political and ethnic tensions led to its expulsion by unanimous parliamentary vote in August 1965. The new Republic of Singapore was a small island with no natural resources, no farmland to feed its people, and no credible military. Singapore's first prime minister, Lie Kuan Yu, transformed the country into a hub of international finance, trade, and technology by leveraging its historic role as a shipping port on the Strait of Mala, grounding the economy in the rule of law to attract global investment and building a highly professionalized military through compulsory national service that established the country's self-reliance and credibility as a security partner.
Since Singapore's independence, the United States and Singapore have built one of America's closest security partnerships in Southeast Asia. When American forces withdrew from bases in the Philippines after the Cold War, Singapore stepped forward with defense agreements that strengthened regional deterrence while preserving its strategic autonomy. Today, that partnership continues to deepen through the arrival this year of Singapore's first F-35 fighters and expanded bilateral military cooperation. As competition between the United States and China reshapes the Indo-Pacific, Singapore has deepened economic ties with both powers while defending freedom of navigation, international law, and an open trading system. Its experience offers lessons for smaller states seeking to preserve prosperity and sovereignty amid protectionism, maritime and security and technological competition. We welcome Minister Balak Krishnan to discuss how Singapore is charting its own strategy amid great power competition, the future of the US Singapore strategic partnership in advancing regional security, and how the United States and its partners can preserve a free and open Indo-acific.
Minister Vivian Bali Krishnan, welcome back to Battlegrounds here in California. It's so great to see you. So great to be with you again. >> Great to be back. >> Well, I've always benefited so much from from your wisdom, uh from your, you know, your uh your president's wisdom, uh uh President Prime Minister Lee and now Prime Minister uh uh Lawrence Hong and of course the wisdom of Lee Kuanu. I think Singapore is known for being able to view the re your region and the world with great perspectacity. So I would like to to ask you since you're here in the US begin maybe with your expectations of of the US Singapore relationship. What what are your priorities of foreign foreign minister? What should our viewers know about uh US Singapore relations today and expectations for the future?
Well, I think the first thing you need to know, Singapore's very small, 1/5if of Rhode Island. And yet having to be independent, sovereign, and that includes having to have your own defense, your armed forces, your own electricity, your own port, airport. And it's a city state, a modern city state in the heart of Southeast Asia. And we've only been independent since 1965. in 60 years to grow per capita GDP from $500 >> to $90,000 US. >> A miracle. Yeah, >> it's a miracle. But and full credit to our people >> to the pioneering leaders, but it's also worth putting it in context. We are one of the chief beneficiaries of Pax Americana. America, which in a unique act of magnanimity post World War II decided the world will be better off by rebuilding even those you won you vanquished in World War II. By creating free market across the world, disseminating technology, access to your markets, global supply chains, the growth of multinational corporation. All this gave a tiny city state that was non-communist a wonderful opportunity to grow and we are proof of that. [snorts] Just as Japan, Germany, Europe, the Asian tigers, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea and Singapore and and ultimately the rest of Southeast Asia. So key point, we benefited from Pax America. Second point, we also had a turbocharge from the reform and opening of China since 1978 under Tang's helping. What that really meant is that the biggest beneficiary of them all of Pax Americana has been China. And it's very different. The rise of China has been very different from the challenge that the Soviet Union posed to America because that was really an iron curtain, a different ecosystem >> eventually collapsed under its own internal contradictions because they couldn't compete with America. China is different because they really operating and benefited from the American operating system and today for the first time after 250 years of independence America fe faces a peer competitor. So for us in Singapore the last 60 years great run we had the best of both worlds. Now what if we're not careful what used to be the best of both worlds can become the worst of both worlds and Singapore has to operate by being trusted by being relevant >> to both of you right and it is difficult because there are big systematic differences as well between yes >> China's status merc model the US free market economy I want to talk with you more about that but I'd like to to focus on Singapore first and and on you know on Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's uh agenda. One of the things I think is it seems to me baked into Singaporean culture is >> uh this is from Lie Kuan Yu that you're always striving and working hard to make it better to make it better. There's never complacency and and and I know there are certain pillars into Prime Minister Wong's approach of of reexamining the social compact looking at the economic model and and and and trying to increase economic growth, new technologies to infuse into Singapore. Can you talk a little bit more before we talk about the world broadly?
>> Yes. >> What are the priorities within within Singapore at the moment? the political imperative whether it's in the United States or in Singapore particularly at a time of acute challenge or a time of a technological revolution which is and it happens to be both right now is first and foremost your domestic social compact has to be functioning meaning people need to feel that we're in the same boat need to feel that the life jackets safety belts are on because a storm is about to come. So yes, we're a curious combination of leftwing and right-wing policies on education, housing, healthcare, we're socialist. >> Yeah. >> On the organization of the economy, on non subsidies for consumption, for making sure price signals work. Mhm. >> We are far more Republican than the Republican party >> in the United States. So my point is the focus on domestic social compact is to give people confidence at a time when you know you're going to face a storm. You're on a roller coaster and you need to get those seat belts on. Without that, you actually, and I'm going to be slightly provocative here, without that sense of collective safety, >> Mhm. >> you will run into a society that fractures, that's polarized, that's unable to meet at the middle ground and to find solutions. So, that's what we're trying to do. I've been worried about, you know, income uh income distribution. And of course, Singapore has benefited >> from China's crackdown on a lot of its tech sector, but I mean, in terms of real estate is so high, right, commercial real estate, so many businesses moving to Singapore. How are you managing that, right? The increasing demand. And then you think, okay, prices are going to go up, right, for uh for housing and and for commercial real estate. >> Uh how how are you coping with that challenge?
Well, I think let's unpack that at several levels. First point is an open inclusive society which is able to both operate in the American system, American rules, common law >> and yet a society that also has cultural, linguistic, historic >> affinity, >> right, >> with China, >> right, >> and that is very familiar with Europe. And that's building bridges with Africa and South America. >> Yeah. >> That openness >> is critical. >> Well, what strikes me in Singapore is is how cross-cultural it is. I mean, within one block, you know, you have you have a Hindu temple, you have a mosque, you have a church all all together. >> And managing that has to be done. It's not >> a less afair approach to it. >> The government has to give people assurance of safety, of security, of fairness. Mhm. >> And then it becomes an attractive place for people to live, work >> for talent, which is you're a talent magnet in Singapore, >> which is the next point, right? That >> if you agree that there's a revolution in digital technologies on AI, if you agree there's a another revolution in biotech and in energy, >> both sustainable green energy and nuclear energy. The key currency beyond infrastructure and and investment, the key currency is talent. >> Yeah. >> But you can't have talent unless you give people an assurance of safety, security, and fairness. And don't forget the other point is only citizens get a vote. >> Which means you also have to make sure that citizens come first, >> right? and membership of the family has privileges. So you see that balancing act that we need to be open and yet we also need to look after our own citizens. And then the other point because we are a government that has accumulated surpluses because we are a low tax we're not a tax haven but we are a low tax regime because the government expenditure is about 20% of GDP which is actually very low >> for an advanced economy. We have no capital gains tax. We have no estate duties. We don't tax you on overseas income. We don't tax you on dividends, on interest. Of course, we're an attractive place for any for talent, with ideas, with capital, and for companies that want to build regional headquarters in Asia. Now you've alluded to the point that given the state of the world, if we are so attractive to talent and capital, you will get domestic pressures. On the real estate point of view, we're not interested in a real estate play. And in fact, we've had to take measures over the last decade or so to make ourselves less attractive as a real estate play. So for instance, you know, if you try to buy an apartment in Singapore, I would have to tell you upfront. We'll put at least a 60% tax on that. So don't we don't need you to buy a place in Singapore. You can rent if you need a place, but we do need you. We need people like you, your ideas, your enterprises, your companies, your networks, and your technologies. So this gives you and the reason why we're in this conundrum is because we are so tiny. Yeah. >> 1/5if of Rhode Island, >> right? [laughter] >> And a wellorganized 1/5if. I mean, if anybody hasn't gone to the gardens in Singapore, you've got to go to the gardens. >> But just understand, we're well organized because we have no choice. Singapore is an act of desperate imagination. >> Our greatest fear is irrelevance. >> Right.
Well, I think also, you know, Singapore is at the hub of so much global trade. Could you talk about a little bit? I'm sure this is an anxious time for you with with you know in with the United States but other countries as well moving toward uh you know tariffs, other trade enforcement mechanisms, concerns about the fragility of supply chains, the desire to re-industrialize, make more things at home that's created a lot of pressure on on the global trade system. What are your concerns about that? Uh are you do you feel okay and secure now as you know as the tariffs have kind of settled down and and the US Singapore trade agreement which has been in place I think since 2004 is still intact. I mean what's your perspective on on trade US trade policy and how does Singapore see it?
>> The Singapore government is a congenital worrier. Our trade volume is more than three times our GDP. I don't think anyone else has got that kind of ratio. So when we say we are free traders, it's lifeblood. It's not just negotiating a free trade agreement. Um so for us we have reached you know the zenith of success by being open an open economy. capital comes in and out freely as in goods and our free trade agreement with the United States means there's zero tariffs on all American goods and services and after 22 years America's trade surplus against us >> has increased the last I checked it's $33 billion I'm >> sure President Trump loves that >> he loves that's the made report card is but I've had to comp complain gently to remind him, >> you know, if anything, if we if I was to use tariffs on the basis of trade surplus, we should be putting a tariff on the United States. But we're not because we are truly believers in free trade. And so we're not fans of tariffs, but I think we should also take a step back to understand why America is doing this. Singapore used to be criticized for industrial policy, meaning that governments have a responsibility to look into infrastructure, getting the regulatory environment right to promote innovation, enterprise, to understand that industrial capacity is important for both economic and security reasons >> and that people everywhere will want good jobs. >> Mhm. And if in that pursuit of globalization and hyper efficiency and return on capital, if you don't look after your domestic sector, jobs, infrastructure, and competitiveness, you will get a rebellion against globalization and free trade. I think that's what actually has happened in the United States. For better or for worse, you have chosen to use tariffs. We're not fans of tariffs, but we kind of get why you're doing this, even though we disagree with the way you're implementing it. And you know, today no one criticizes us for industrial policy. Today, in fact, everyone is trying in their own way to find a way to re-industrialize. And for global supply chains, which for decades have been in pursuit of efficiency, just in time. Yeah. >> Now it's just in case. And what happened during co >> Sure. And then as you envisage uh this wrestling match between America and China and America trying to to crimp Chinese supply chains particularly on semiconductors and the Chinese returning the favor I would say >> they're returning the favor with heavy critical m so so of course all these things are you know they're anatima to us but we are the ultimate realist. >> We understand why people resort to these measures and our challenge is to continue to operate despite the friction to this system and continue to be relevant, continue to be honest brokers, continue to be transparent and reliable. So that's a short summary of our challenge.
>> Well, so one aspect of this just to maybe just take us just a bit further is export controls. export controls on microprocessors, semiconductors, >> this this AI race now, right, where China and the US are locked in this race and whoever gains advantage in in these learning models could gain an an advantage in the emerging global economy, but in in defense as well. So, how do you view the issue of semiconductors? There have been, I'm sure, a large number, it seems, of semiconductors trans shship through Singapore uh in route to to China. Um what what is your perspective on this on export >> cons?
Again, let's put this in context. A lot of people are not aware >> that Singapore produces about 10% of global semiconductor supply. >> Absolutely. >> Not bad for a tiny >> No. Absolutely. >> And for semiconductor manufacturing equipment, we account for about 20%. So this flow two-way flow of of semiconductors and semiconductor >> Japan and and uh and I think Denmark Netherlands Netherlands >> we're part of this global supply chain. So that's the first fact. >> The next fact is we ourselves as I said we don't believe in tariffs. We don't believe in export controls and restrictions. Nevertheless for a variety of domestic political reasons others will do so. Now it is not for us to implement American export controls. But what we will ensure is that companies which operate in Singapore do not use Singapore or ride on the branding or name of Singapore to evade what responsibilities they're liable for in their domestic jurisdictions. And that's why we insist on transparency, on property, on conducting business openly. >> Right? So that's how we will continue to operate and I said the main point is to be open to be relevant >> and reliable and that again is another challenge which we have to operate because we want to be able to operate with both China and the US. >> Yes, >> we will refuse to be boxed into a binary choice. But we at the same time we've got to maintain trust and reliability on both accounts. What it means is in fact if you're going to put rules on the export of semiconductors and the other side is going to put rules on critical minerals. >> Mhm. >> We will have to operate our model of transparency and property in an even-handed way. >> Right.
You know, when I often have conversations with with you, other friends in uh in Asia, Southeast Asia in particular, often times I'll hear, "Hey, don't force us to choose, right, between Washington and Beijing." >> Well, so far neither side has forced us to choose. At least at least [laughter] that's what they tell us. >> Well, but but the argument that I would make is, hey, it's really a choice between, you know, sovereignty and servitude. What disappointments me lately is just some of the rhetoric, not actions, but rhetoric out of Washington, whether it's about the Panama Canal or Greenland or or, you know, or or Straits of Hormuz. The United States though has been on the side, I think, of sovereignty and and what I I would say is that Singapore is in a difficult spot because, you know, you have to jealously guard your sovereignty. Would you would you comment on on the u on your concerns on both sides, US and China? maybe talk about the madness acquisition or other examples where you you know there is a threat to to that free market economic model, free trade model and and Singapore's sovereignty.
>> Let let me deal with America first. >> As I said, we're all beneficiaries of Pax Americana. >> What did America provide for Southeast Asia? Your strategic presence, including your military, provided stability, gave us time and space for non-communist Southeast Asia to prove that free markets worked. Your strategic economic presence, America has more invested in Singapore and in Southeast Asia than America has invested in India, China, Japan, Korea combined. Yeah, >> you've got real skin in the game. >> The investments and the trade between America and Southeast Asia and in particular with Singapore with Singapore alone probably supports 350,000 jobs in America. So you're an investor. Your investments have paid off in return at a much on completely different scale. We are the third largest Asian investor in America. Our investments in America continue to grow because we happen to believe in American enterprise and innovation and technology. Point is this has been win-win >> both sides. The strategic point is that America has had both hard power and soft power >> and that should not be underestimated. You know, I mean, people will complain about America, but generally if you ask any of my colleagues in Southeast Asia, do you really want America to abandon and leave Southeast Asia? They don't. Everyone wants America to be around. But as I said, it's because you've had both hard and soft power. I do worry about the erosion, especially of soft power. >> Mhm. Um, but you know, I will take solace from not just listening to what is said, >> but to what America actually does, [snorts] >> right? >> Our reason for, you know, promoting free trade and investments with America is to also remind both the American voters and our voters that America really has strategic skin in the game. And if America has strategic skin in the game, which it has in reality, >> that's all the more reason why you've got strategic interests to protect and why you need to stay around and yet not, you know, not demand exclusive allegiance or servitude because in the end even small countries have pride, have national selfrespect. to protect and I think the best relationship whether countries are big, small or medium countries is one of mutual respect of mutual relevance and reliability and trustworthiness. >> Yeah. >> And you know I might it might sound over naively idealistic but I think there's a good reason why human beings have developed cultures, rules, norms and the rule of law. Yeah, >> and we should not forget that even in these trying times. >> I totally agree with you and and I think US interests are advanced when you have strong sovereign countries who respect the sovereignty of their neighbors and and and respect their own people, the sovereignty of their people and >> and and the US has benefited from the growth of its allies. >> Yeah, absolutely. and friends. I don't I in history I don't think you can think of any other superpower which did not rely on empire but relied on soft power >> and alliances and partnership >> right alignment of interests and principles and absolutely you know I I I'd like to just ask you about a couple of overlapping uh uh issues here which is you know uh technology in the in the form of artificial intelligence artificial intelligence stacks which as you know along with what we're talking about in terms of industrial production and supply chains has a lot to do with energy demand right and and fulfilling energy demand energy security I think this is anotherwhere area where the US and Singapore are totally aligned uh and could you talk a little bit about uh about what your objectives are in the area of artificial intelligence the development of that technology in a way that benefits Singapore and its citizens uh and uh and also how that overlaps with energy
>> Well, I I think The revolution that has brought artificial intelligence is the biggest deal. The biggest technological step change in our lifetime. It goes to me beyond elect the jump that electricity provided for us. Uh this is a new industrial revolution. And the point about AI and digital technologies, it also has all generated another adjacent revolution in biotechnology and also whether you realize it or not on energy both in terms of more efficient, more sustainable, more resilient and reliable energy sources as well as in turn being a major consumer of energy in its own right. you've got three simultaneous revolutions. So this is a big deal. Now what is interesting and again if you draw the comparison with the Soviet Union is that this time the entire world is actually working on the same scientific foundations. the large language models and underneath that the transformers >> the methods for pre-training these models the methods for reinforcement learning then post-training refinement everyone's working of the same stack but yet there is this hyper competition and accentuated by geostrategic competition between the US and China who are the leading paragons of this revolution you know is also leading to potential problems because if you actually try to completely separate these Siamese twins who actually are living on the same stack you're going to have a significant uh penalty to the speed of progress but also when you have to deal with the problems that will inevitably be generated from such powerful technology. So the energy needed to feel this, the chips needed, the algorithms, the data, the need for global standards, the possibility of interoperability and making this technology a force for good for everyone. That's the higher order challenge. My worry is that because the world is currently fractured and global leadership and I use that in the broadest sense of the word uh is hamstrung uh both the pace of progress and our ability to deal with the dangers are being compromised. Right. Yeah.
I think um you know the the mistake we made with the with the internet was the belief that it would automatically advance freedom you know and and there would be one system and of course >> you know the old the old days we said we'll be one happy global village >> well it just turns out that internet if misuse is also an instigator of hatred a catalyst for tribalism >> in an exclusivist sense and you don't have you may have a more technically knowledgeable world but less restrained, less wise, >> less inclusive. >> Yeah. >> And today, no matter how crazy you are, you can the you can use the internet to affirm the craziness of your views, >> right? Unless you're in China, in which case the state uses it to to stifle human freedom and expression. >> No, but even think about it. Why does the state do that? because they recognize the danger, >> right? It it's a two-way >> Well, well, they they certainly recognize the danger of the people maybe wanting a say in how they're governed, I think, yeah, as part of the danger they recognize. But it's you're right. I mean, in the in the West, it leads to this kind of severe polarization with, you know, showing people more and more extreme content. >> In fact, you could argue this is one of the fundamental threats to democracy. Democracy actually requires some shared frames of reference, some common values, some give and take, >> compromise, mutual respect, and if you have reached a stage where you can't agree on a set of facts, you can't even agree on what's good and bad, >> and you can't arrive at any compromise, >> how how how will democracy function. >> Yeah. >> And the democracy which we currently operate was based on the old industrial model, revolution model. Now that we've got a new industrial revolution with new means of production and we're entering a new gilded age where the owners of capital and ideas have outsized returns on their investments compared to the return on labor. Well, the last time this happened in industrial revolution, you had a communist revolution, but you also had the development of the welfare state. You also had new laws to protect employees, the environment, right? We we're going to have to go through a new stage of political both domestic and international adjustment again because the means of production Yeah. have changed, right? And I think education is so important to be able to judge right the the content of what you see. And >> you know I'd like to ask you you mentioned about you know the assumptions about uh multinational cooperation every get along. Yes. >> Well part of that is is ASEAN. You know Singapore's been a been a strong voice within ASEAN. >> I think some people have unrealistic expectations of the organization because it requires unonymity. What are your expectations of ASEAN? What do you think can be achieved within that format these days?
Well, we are a a regional organization, 11 members, but the amount of diversity amongst 11 of us in terms of economic levels, in terms of economic systems, political systems, we've got constitutional monarchies, absolute monarchies, a variety of democracies, military coups. >> Mhm. No other or regional organizations among diversity which we have. The reason why we operate by consensus rather than majority and this is a design feature and not a bug because without that assurance there's no way this MBY crew >> would trust each other >> would trust each other and be able to do anything together. So that's first thing. Second point >> is we therefore are much less ambitious than the EU. We're not looking for political union. We're not looking for monetary union or common currency. Um we're focused on economic integration systematically bringing down barriers, trade barriers and non-tariff barriers. Trying to create a single investment zone, production zone, trying to mobilize our energy resources, make ourselves more competitive, make ourselves more resilient, prepare for the future jobs of the future. And so far our focus on economics, deepening integration and widening our partnerships with the United States, with China, with all our dialogue partners has been right. Now things will never move quickly enough for many people. But generally, despite the setbacks, generally we've been moving in the right direction over the past 60 years.
You know, Singapore is, as you mentioned, in in a difficult position, straddling multiple worlds. But you know, Singapore is not averse at times to take a a tough stand when it's morally right. Yes. I'm thinking about after the invasion of Ukraine, uh Singapore taking the unprecedented act to sanction Russia. Um and I think in recognition that this maybe axis of aggressors, the two revanches powers on the Eurasian land mass was becoming much more aggressive. This is we saw China at the same time being very aggressive in the South China Sea laying claim to the ocean there, you know, and threats to Taiwan. How do you see this this geopolitical competition between what some have described as an axis of aggressors and the and the free world? Is there a way to get beyond this competition or do you think that we are are kind of locking ourselves in to a second cold war which you experienced um you know and and uh from from SEO's perspective being in in the middle of of that competition?
>> Well, I'm going to give you an answer from the perspective of a tiny city state. If you made all foreign affairs a morality play >> Mhm. >> evil, good, saints and devils, you would find it impossible to work together >> to arrive at compromises, >> right? >> To find practical solutions. So my general point is don't make the conduct of foreign policy a morality play. Now having said that because we are so small and we've only been around for 60 years for us international law is crucial for our existence because without law without a set of agreed on principles >> the law law of the jungle would apply and it'll just be big country small swaring small country. So specifically in the case of Russia and what they did to Ukraine, we our assessment that this was a full frontal breach of the UN charter which provides for all of us big or small, weak or strong, >> territorial integrity, sovereign equality and political independence. So we took a stand and we said no that's wrong and yes it's true we are the only Southeast Asian nation to have the tmerity to even have sanctions on Russia >> but I meet lover regularly he knows it's not personal >> I know >> we are not breaking relations >> say the United States God bless you because I mean >> noond oh you're fond of him >> I'm fond of him he's a smart cookie >> that makes one of us >> well but he knows it's not personal >> Russia knows we're not breaking ties with them. In fact, I was in Russia a month ago. >> Um, but from time to time, we will have to say no to Russia as we have said no to America and then we have to say no to China from time to time. But when we say no, everyone needs to understand. I'm not taking sides. And I'm not saying no on behalf of someone else. I'm saying no because in our own long-term assessment of our national interests, >> absolutely. >> We have to disagree. and we disagree respectfully. >> So this is the line you know our survival technique and we will try and we will maintain this for as long as we can do so. It's the same reason for why we say we will refuse to choose sides for as long as we can do so. >> Sure. And this is the whole point of this program is what we call strategic empathia term. >> I know you call it battleground. >> Zachary Zachary. Sure. I know. Maybe I need a more optimistic name. No, but the you know it's it's to see the see the world from the perspect your perspective the perspective of others you know that's what's important I think >> you I mean you've been a military commander you know a lot of the battle procedure consists of putting yourself in the other guy's shoes >> and eyes >> yes >> and how he sees it >> and actually if we do our staff work correctly >> Mhm. Sometimes you can even head off the battle, >> right? >> Or prevent the war. >> Absolutely. >> Or even you have no choice and you do need to collide. There's a proper and civilized way of doing so, >> right? And you avoid these cognitive traps that people fall into with mirror imaging and everything else, you know. >> Yes. >> So, I'd like to ask you, of course, you know, this is an unfair question because it's such a complicated situation. >> Um, you know, there have been profound changes in the Middle East. >> That's an understatement. >> Yeah. And I would say, you know, these go back at least to October 7, 2023 when uh the the ring of fire was lit around Israel. It found itself in a sevenfront war. I think the next big evolution uh was in 20 uh you know 2024 when Iran for the first time attacked Israel directly. This was in in uh in April and October of 24. Another big change was now Israel attacking attacking uh directly to against Iran in in August of 2025 with the US then striking the nuclear program and now we've had the the initiation of the campaign in in January uh against January February uh the US and Israel. We're in, I guess, what you might call a ceasefire war now, you know, uh, uh, so Singapore has vital interests in the Middle East, you know, in terms of global trade and energy security. I'd just like to ask you, what should our viewers know about Singapore's perspective uh, on the ongoing conflicts um, and wars in the Middle East?
>> Well, we start from a place of humility. There's been conflict in the Middle East going back >> quite some time. 3,500 years. Coincidentally, >> Jerusalem has been conquered more than 40 times. >> Mhm. >> When I go up to Temple Mount or Al Haram Sharif >> and I'm sure you've been there and you just walk quietly pensively. I always feel the weight of history, don't you? >> Not just the weight of history, but the thought that comes to mind. How much blood has been shed on this hill in that one spot? Yeah. >> In the name of politics and politics dressed up in as religion. >> Sure. >> Right. So I think we should all you know start with a place of humility that this is a longstanding problem and there are no quick >> Mhm. >> solutions. But from a surgical point of view, whatever we do don't make things worse. >> Yeah. I can't speak for Israel, but Israel's long-term security cannot be achieved just by the application of overwhelming force. Even though for now in this thousands of years they happen to have significant military force. At some point in time [clears throat] all the Semitic people will have to find a modest vivandi. Now you can argue about two states or variety of political solutions, but that's that the the answer for that can only be generated by direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians >> and their neighbors >> and the Arab neighbors >> like what's happening with Lebanon now. I mean I mean I mean this that's a long shot but at least it's happening, right? At least it's >> hopefully. But then you also have to remember the Persians and the Arabs >> are two distinct people within the Ottomans, the new Ottomans. >> And then you had the Ottoman Empire >> and the Russians were now out of it, but they were the Russian Empire was in there for a little while. >> And don't forget even the Western powers. >> Sure. Well, yeah. >> It had their own in company too. Yeah. The Americans. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, you know, this is just one more painful chapter in a long saga. And my appeal to everyone is don't make it worse. >> Well, you know, >> I don't have a solution. >> No, I think that's good advice, right? Recognize the limits of your agency. Look at things in a historical perspective. Absolutely.
Okay. I I can't believe we're almost out of time, but conversations with you. They always go they always go so fast. Okay. So, what I would like to do is give you the final word and maybe in in the final word, you can maybe channel your inner Luanu, you know, who I go to for wisdom. I mean his his long interview with Henry Kissinger, do you remember this book? >> It's it's just packed with wisdom. And you know, the issues he talked about are still the issues today, you know, and and so I I would I would just like to give you the final word. What is your message to the American audience, but the international audience?
>> You mentioned Henry Kissing. He was a very close friend of Lee Kuanu. >> Yeah. and in his own way a a real supporter of Singapore. Now I've been foreign minister for a long time and I used to make it a point of seeing him every year. It was an annual pilgrimage until he passed away. >> Right. >> And you remember Henry Kissinger in the latter part was focused on AI. >> Yes. >> On the technological revolution. He was also very worried about America and China. >> Mhm. >> And similarly was also focused on what was happening in Europe in Ukraine. >> I think if you join all these dots actually this is a awfully fascinating time to be alive. America has reached 250 years. Uh, China is trying to get back to its historical position and historically when China was at peace and united and mastering technology, it would account for between 25 to 30% of global GDP. America is historically unique superpower. We're also at an age of revolution, technological revolution. So we are at the foothills. >> Mhm. >> You climbing up this mountain, you're either going to look down into the abyss or you're going to get to a new plateau. >> Yeah. You know that to me the exhilaration from both the possibilities as well as the deep anxieties about the dangers make this a you know intellectually emotionally this is a it's a wonderful time to be alive. Can we just take a step back? Can we chill a bit? And can we look with a little bit more confidence to the future? a bit more cohesion >> domestically, >> hopefully make some right choices collectively, >> right? >> And there could be another in fact there should be another golden age for humanity ahead of us. >> So it is that exhilaration and hope for the future that uh not only helps me sleep at night but wake up in the morning with a sense of purpose. >> Well, Mr. Vivian Bell Christian, I can't think of a better note to end on. Thank you for joining me and thanks for your continued leadership as a as a diplomat and and you know a voice I think for this positive vision of the future. >> Thank you so much. >> Wonderful to be with you. >> Thank you >> always. >> Thank you. >> Battlegrounds is a production of the Hoover Institution where we generate and promote ideas advancing freedom. For more information about our work, to hear more of our podcasts, or view our video content, please visit hoover.org.