Sunday 26 June 2016

One Man's View of Euro troubles



In his book, One Man’s View Of The World, Mr Lee Kuan Yew explained why the euro, in its present form, cannot be saved. He wrote:

"The fundamental problem with the euro is that you cannot have monetary integration without fiscal integration - especially in a region with spending and thrift habits as diverse as those of Germany and Greece.

The incongruity would break the system down eventually. For this reason, the euro was destined to flounder, with its demise written into its DNA.

Its difficulties over the last few years should not be seen as stemming from either the failure of one or two governments to spend within their means or the failure of others to warn them of the dangers of not doing so.

That is to say, the euro’s troubles are not the result of a historical accident that could have been prevented if a few actors involved had made different decisions - more responsible ones - in the course of its implementation.

Instead, it was a historical inevitability that was waiting to happen. If things had not come to a head in 2010 or 2011, they would have come to a head in another year, with another set of circumstances.

I am not convinced, therefore, that the euro can be saved, at least not in its present form, with all 17 countries remaining in the fold.

From the inception of the euro project, clear-eyed and well-respected economists, including the likes of Harvard Professor Martin Feldstein, had been sounding alarm bells about its inherent paradoxes.

The British did not join because they did not see it working. They were not convinced about the benefits and were fully cognisant of the dangers.

However, the governments which joined the euro zone in 1999, as well as the populations that elected them, while eager to move on the single currency, were not prepared to accept fiscal integration because of the loss of sovereignty that it obviously implied.

In the end, their choice to go ahead with the euro anyway reflected a misplaced belief that Europe was somehow special enough to overcome the contradictions. It was a political decision.

In the United States, one currency can work for 50 states because you have one Federal Reserve and one Treasurer.

When one state runs into economic hardship, it receives generous transfers from the centre in the form of social spending on individuals living in that state and government projects.

The federal taxes raised in that state will not be sufficient to pay for the federal spending disbursed to that state.

If one were to keep accounts, that state might be running deficits for years - but it is a sustainable situation precisely because nobody is keeping accounts.

The people living in that state are considered fellow Americans and the people living elsewhere do not actually expect the money to be repaid. It is effectively a gift.

The other extreme works too, of course - that is, Europe under a pre-euro system, with each country having its own finance minister and managing its own currency.

Under that system, when one country experiences a slowdown, it can roll out remedial monetary policies because it is free from the shackles of a common currency.

These include expanding the supply of money - what the Americans call “quantitative easing” - and devaluing the currency to make the country’s exports more attractive.

But these were tools that the euro zone countries gave up as a result of their entry into a common monetary community.

They did so, furthermore, without ensuring that there would be budgetary transfers similar in type and magnitude to those that depressed states in the US receive.

What do you get, then, when a motley crowd tries to march to a single drummer? You get the euro zone.

Some countries surged ahead while others struggled to keep pace.

In countries that fell behind economically, governments were under electoral pressure to maintain or even increase public spending, even though tax receipts decreased.

Budget deficits had to be financed through loans from the money markets. That these loans could be obtained at relatively low rates - since they were made in euros, not, say, drachmas - did nothing to discourage the profligacy.

The Greeks eventually became the most extreme example of this decline, going further and further into the red.

To be fair, the community as a whole also has to bear some responsibility, since there were rules under the Stability and Growth Pact that allowed for sanctions on governments that ran repeated deficits. But these sanctions were never imposed on any country.

For some time, experts with boundless optimism hoped that these governments could close the competitive gap with stronger nations like Germany by cutting welfare programmes, reforming tax collection, liberalising labour market rules or making their people work longer. But it did not happen.

The situation finally began to unravel with the global financial crisis of 2008.

Easy credit dried up and the markets’ falling confidence in the credit-worthiness of governments like Greece’s caused their borrowing rates to soar.

Germany and the European Central Bank were forced to intervene with bailouts to stop the debt crisis from spreading throughout the already crestfallen euro zone.

As at June 2013, the euro community has avoided catastrophe by throwing enough money at the problem.

But the 17 governments need to face up to the more difficult question of what to do to address the fundamental contradiction in the euro project - monetary integration without fiscal integration.

They might try to postpone this for some time, but they know they cannot do so indefinitely or history will repeat itself and another crisis will come along, requiring bigger bailouts, which, if push comes to shove, the Germans will probably have to underwrite.

Prompt action is far better than procrastination, especially since further down the road, as memory of the pain and panic of the debt crisis fades in the minds of voters, the political will to act decisively is also likely to wilt."

Saturday 25 June 2016

Euro zone cannot be saved, says Mr Lee Kuan Yew back in 2011



Former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew believes the euro zone cannot be saved, although the collapse of the currency union will be 'a very painful business'.

He said European leaders will try very hard to keep the euro zone from collapsing as this would be "an admission that their aspiration of one Europe is not achievable."

"But I do not see it being saved. But they'll try and keep it going."

Tuesday 21 June 2016

Life and personal accident insurance coverage for both full-time and operationally ready national servicemen by Mindef and MHA




This applies to Servicemen in the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), Singapore Police Force (SPF) and
Singapore Civil Defence Force

It will take effect on July 1.

Mindef and MHA will fully pay for $150,000 group term life and $150,000 group personal accident insurance coverage during the servicemen's full-time national service or reservist duties.

Senior Minister of State for Defence Ong Ye Kung announced this in Parliament in April.

The same insurance coverage will also be extended to regulars in Mindef/SAF and the Home Team (Uniformed Officer) during their period of employment.

National Service (NS) volunteers from the SAF Volunteer Corps, SPF Voluntary Special Constabulary and Civil Defence Auxiliary Unit will also be granted the same insurance coverage during their official duties.

Those under the scheme who wish to further insure themselves outside these periods or insure their dependants can purchase additional coverage on a voluntary basis at "competitive premiums", the authorities said.

MHA director of NS Affairs Directorate Colonel (Ret) Rupert Gwee said: "This group insurance is one of the many ways in which we look after the well-being of our officers, whether they are regulars, national servicemen or volunteers, as they go about their duties to keep Singapore safe and secure."

NS HOME Awards




Have you heard of NS HOME Awards for National Servicemen?

NS HOME stands for N-ational S-ervice HO-using, M-edical and E-ducation.

And NS HOME Awards recognise Singaporean NSmen at each of three significant milestones during their NS journey.

The three milestones of a NSman's NS journey are:

1. Completion of full-time NS
2. Mid-point of ORNS Training Cycle
3. Completion of ORNS Training Cycle

At each of these 3 milestones, eligible NSmen will each receive $5,000.

NSmen who are commanders (ranks of Third Sergeant and above for SAF NSmen and Sergeant and above for HomeTeam NSmen) will receive $500 more; that is $5,500, at each milestone to recognise the heavier responsibilities they shoulder.

Servicemen who enlist on or after 1 Dec 2011 and complete their full-time NS (NSF) on or after 1 Dec 2013 will be eligible for the first milestone of the NS HOME Awards. NSmen who reach the mid-point of their Operationally Ready National Service (ORNS) training cycle or complete their ORNS training cycle on or after 1 Apr 2014 will be eligible for the awards.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/faqs/faqNSHOMEAWARDS.html#.V2jWWdfxSnM

Friday 17 June 2016

Ex-ST Editor Han Fook Kwang on what it was like to work with Mr Lee Kuan Yew



"Once he had decided to do something, whether it was writing a book or securing Singapore's future, he was impossible to shake off.

"When he called me one night in August 2008 to do another book, I wasn't thrilled at the prospect. I was then the editor of The Straits Times, with my hands full running the paper. The editor's job was demanding, the hours long, and I did not relish doing another book on top of that.

"But it was impossible to say no after he said he had only two to three years left and he wanted to put across his views on some of the issues that troubled him: the call for more political openness, the backlash against foreigners and the challenges facing Singapore in a rapidly changing world.

"Given his failing health, it might well be his last book. When I took some time to get back to him on the concept of the book, he urged haste, telling me in an e-mail: 'Don't let the grass grow under your feet.'

"Finally, when we had settled on how the book should be done, he was impatient to start, and wrote: 'Try it the way you propose. Outline the subjects to be covered and draft a few chapters. Then, let's try your vigorous probing and challenging of my positions.'

"The book, Hard Truths To Keep Singapore Going, was two years in the making. When we finally launched it in 2011, his health had deteriorated significantly after the death of his wife.

"Indeed, he loomed large in my professional life."

ST Photo: Mr Han looking on as then Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, with his wife Kwa Geok Choo, took part in a webchat organized by ST for Mr Lee to field questions for his new book, From Third World To First, in 2000.

Thursday 16 June 2016

Orlando Shooting: what US can learn from Singapore




I am a naturalised Singapore citizen, having surrendered my United States passport in 2010. I have resided here for 31 years, marrying into a local family in 1988.

There are so many reasons to count my blessings that I am permitted to live in Singapore as a member of a diverse and enlightened community.

Consider two recent incidents which are dominating the headlines in the US media - the lenient jail sentence given to a Stanford freshman convicted of rape, and the mass shooting in Orlando which claimed 50 lives ("Storm over Stanford rape"; Sunday, and "50 dead in worst mass shooting in US history"; Monday).

My younger American self would have focused on the perpetrators, absorbing all the sordid details about their depraved backgrounds.

However, living in Singapore has changed my perspectives and outlook radically.

My reaction today is to focus on the pain and suffering of the victims, while questioning what actions societies can take to prevent these catastrophes.

The US might do well to consider some measures that Singapore has implemented.

In the rape case, if the man had been convicted here, he would likely have been given a longer jail sentence and, perhaps, even multiple strokes of the cane.

After completing his sentence, he would have better prospects of rehabilitation and re-entry into society.

He may not have to live with the stigma of registering as a sex offender, as he would in the US, but the incarceration and punishment would be more commensurate with the gravity of his crime.

In the shooting case, we are reminded of how Singapore has been spared the painful ordeals of schoolyard massacres, random gun-related violence and armed crime, due to its prohibition of firearms.

Capital punishment has proven an effective deterrent and our country is free of lobbyists, zealots, hunters and gun collectors who claim the right to brandish automatic weapons.

We mourn and remember the victims in Stanford and Orlando, and we remain grateful for the institutions which ensure that we, Singaporeans, live in a reasonably just and safe country.

John Driscoll

http://bit.ly/1UkxQeV

Monday 13 June 2016

Dealing with cyber threats: taking the disconnection route



 By deciding to delink some computers from the Internet, the Singapore Government has effectively signalled that, faced with unquantifiable risks, one prudent course is simply to roll back technology. And in that respect, Singapore may be a trend-setter, for other governments are also mulling over similar approaches.

... For it is by now abundantly clear that many of the current strategies designed to ensure computer security and vital data integrity are not working, that the entire subject requires a fundamental reappraisal, and that going back to basics, to a period when not all computer systems were interlinked, is a useful way to launch this rethink.

THE NEW CYBERWAR THREATS

China is often identified as the originator of many cyber intrusions, allegedly tolerated or even encouraged by its government. The US and Britain were also revealed as key operators in this field. But as security experts know, the real global leader is Russia; its stealthy operators are regarded as the true "gold standard" in cyber warfare.

Meanwhile, government vulnerabilities increase all the time, since much of every nation's critical national infrastructure - banks, all utility installations, roads and aircraft traffic control systems to name but a few - ultimately depend on interlinked computer systems.

It's not for nothing that Mr Leon Panetta, who served as President Obama's defence secretary and chief of the Central Intelligence Agency, once prophesied that America's "next Pearl Harbour" military surprise "could very well be a cyber attack".

As the ultimate custodians of their nations' biggest collections of data in almost every field, governments are also targeted by malicious organisations and criminal individuals.

And although protecting the secrecy of communications and data has been a problem for centuries, it is particularly so today, for in the era when information was stored on paper, a security leak would have involved the loss of a few pages of sensitive data. But today, the smallest of security mishaps results in the exposure of, literally, millions of pieces of information.

There are plenty of such mega-disaster examples, from every continent.

Last year, the US Office of Personnel Management, the agency that manages America's federal civil service, admitted that the files of 21.5 million people were stolen from its servers.

Earlier this year, every registered voter in the Philippines became vulnerable to fraud after the entire database of the Philippines' Commission on Elections was compromised.

That won't come as a shock to the people of Turkey, where servers belonging to the Interior Ministry leaked the personal records of 49.5 million citizens, or to people in Greece, where highly sensitive personal information on nine million people - 86 per cent of the local population - was stolen.

And then, there are the major security breaches perpetrated by hostile governments seeking information, such as last year's theft of e-mails from the servers of the US State Department which was so clever that America's National Security Agency needed months before it succeeded in evicting the intruders from its servers.

Or are the intruders still there? How does one know for sure that the US State Department's servers are clear of previous intrusions, or uninfected by fresh ones?

One of the fundamental problems with enforcing cyber security in any government machinery is that the people who have the technical knowledge and responsibility for policing the integrity of the structures are often not the ones to decide how these systems are ultimately used, while officials higher up who do make decisions about how their systems are deployed seldom have the detailed technical knowledge.

'RETRO' SOLUTIONS

The result is an almost perpetual ignorance loop, as ministers and politicians know that their systems are inherently insecure, but are resigned to continue using them since they are unable to quantify the risks involved. And the risks may be huge: as American journalist Fred Kaplan points out in his recently published book Dark Territory: The Secret History Of Cyber War, whenever the US military stages war games in which experts are invited to hack into its systems, "they always get in".

By deciding to delink some computers from the Internet, the Singapore Government has effectively signalled that, faced with unquantifiable risks, one prudent course is simply to roll back technology. And in that respect, Singapore may be a trend-setter, for other governments are also mulling over similar approaches.

A handful of highly sensitive computer systems operated by the British government are already permanently disconnected from the Internet, or connected to an internal network whose physical integrity is entirely contained within one office.

The Russian intelligence services also revealed a few years ago that some of their most classified materials will continue to be generated by old-fashioned typewriters.

More significantly, members of the US Senate's Intelligence Committee currently looking at ways to protect America's critical national infrastructure are examining a new Bill which will compel the US energy grid to replace some key computer- connected structures with "analogue and human-operated systems", as Senator Martin Heinrich, one of the new legislation's drafters, puts it. "A 'retro' approach has shown promise as a safeguard against cyber attacks," he told fellow US lawmakers.

None of these "retro" initiatives offers impregnable security, for old technology has its own vulnerabilities. Keyboards of typewriters can be eavesdropped, allowing the text of what is being typed to be recorded, as Soviet intelligence proved during the 1970s, when it successfully planted such eavesdropping devices in US diplomatic offices. And the information stored on computers not connected to the Internet can also be hacked or pilfered wirelessly.

So, the real significance of Singapore's decision is that it forces decision-makers to have another look at the balance between the efficiency of electronic systems and the dangers they entail. Yet the decision to downgrade on the use of technology is not the solution but merely a solution, and a temporary one at that, pending a better understanding of these risks and opportunities.

For, as computer pioneer Willis Ware also accurately pointed out decades ago, ultimately "the only completely secure computer is a computer that no one can use".

- Excerpt

http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/states-seek-solutions-to-deal-with-cyber-threat

Saturday 11 June 2016

Why the icy Arctic matters to Singapore



Our decision in 2011 to apply for observer status in the Arctic Council took many people by surprise, as the connection between Singapore and the Arctic region is not readily apparent.

...We are driven by our desire to deepen our understanding of the Arctic as global warming and rising sea levels will have a profound and direct impact on low-lying Singapore.

As a low-lying coastal nation, Singapore is especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Much of Singapore lies only 15m above sea level, while 30 per cent of the island is less than 5m above sea level.

If global temperatures continue to rise, many parts of Singapore could eventually be submerged under the water. Singapore has started making preparations to adapt to the impact of a rise in sea levels. For example, Nicoll Drive, which runs for 1km along Changi Beach, is being raised by up to 0.8m. In 2011, the minimum height for land reclamation projects was raised from 3-4 m above the mean sea level. At the same time, a warmer Arctic will result in the opening of new water channels, which will significantly reduce travel time between Asia and Europe by two or three weeks.

The possibility of the Arctic sea routes becoming a seasonal complement to traditional trade routes therefore presents Singapore with both challenges as well as opportunities.

On the one hand, Singapore has one of the world’s busiest ports and these new routes are likely to change maritime transportation patterns.

At the same time, our marine industry has built up strong credentials in sectors such as shipbuilding and repair, offshore engineering, and marine support services, and we are well-placed to provide enabling technology for Arctic development.

Some of our companies are developing Arctic capabilities to leverage on the economic potential of the region. For example, Keppel Corporation has constructed a number of ice-class vessels, including the first icebreakers built in Asia in 2008, and is now working with oil majors and drilling contractors to develop the world’s first Arctic-grade, environmentally-friendly “green” rig.

If countries do not look at the possible global challenges that may emerge 30 to 50 years down the road, their eventual preparations would be inadequate to deal with these challenges when they do strike.

One of Singapore’s key strengths is our ability to scan the horizon and start preparing solutions to these challenges, sometimes 50 to a hundred years before they surface. If we lose this important survival instinct, we will become history when the challenges strike us in our face.

Excerpt of interview of Sam Tan by TODAY
--------------------------

Sam Tan has personally attended the Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (CPAR) in 2012 in Akureyri, Iceland and 2014 in Whitehorse, Canada; the Arctic Circle Assembly in Reykjavik, Iceland in 2013 and 2014; the Arctic Frontiers Conference in Tromso, Norway in 2015 and January 2016, and most recently the Arctic Circle Greenland Forum in Nuuk last month.

http://www.todayonline.com/world/why-icy-arctic-matters-spore

Tuesday 7 June 2016

GENEROUS HOUSING GRANTS!


Do you know that housing grants are actually very generous?

Up to 80k for the lowest income group if you apply for a BTO in a non-mature estate.

Now you know why a 2-room flexi flat can cost just a few thousand dollars.

A 2-room flexi flat at West Plains@Bukit Batok (non-mature estate), for example, costs from just $5k with grants.

No mistake.

What most people also do not realize is that these housing grants are more than just a discount on the price of the BTO that you buy. They become money in your CPF.


 http://www.hdb.gov.sg/cs/infoweb/residential/buying-a-flat/new/first-timer-applicants

 http://esales.hdb.gov.sg/hdbvsf/eampu02p.nsf/0/16FEBBTO_page_2402/$FILE/about0.html

Saturday 4 June 2016

SPEECH BY THEN PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, White House State Dinner, Oct 8, 1985




Prime Minister Lee and Mrs. Lee, honored guests who are here tonight, Nancy and I welcome you to the White House.

It was a great pleasure for me today to renew a valued friendship with Prime Minister Lee. I first met the Prime Minister on a trip that I took on behest of President Nixon. And when we stopped in Singapore, I was amazed at the dynamic society that I found there. How could a country with such a small area and few resources be making such strides? And then I met Prime Minister Lee, and my questions were answered. He is a man of principle and vision. His leadership has provided the vigorous and creative people of Singapore the means to move ahead, to achieve, and to build.

Singapore's experience has been in stark contrast to developing countries where political power has been derived from terror and brute force. Instead, Prime Minister Lee's authority has rested on his capacity to mold the opinion of his countrymen and build consensus. He has used his position to free the talents and energy of his people so they could be channeled into constructive, society-building activity. Fortunately, Prime Minister Lee's sound judgment does not stop at the water's edge. American leaders, including this one, have frequently benefited from his wise counsel. Our meetings today were no less beneficial. Our exchange was cordial, reflecting a mutuality of interests and a harmony of views.

Mr. Prime Minister, I want to express my personal admiration for your recognition of the contributions America makes to world peace. As the world's most powerful democracy, our people carry a heavy military and diplomatic burden and often thankless task. But you have demonstrated an appreciation and understanding that makes it all worthwhile. This spirit of mutual respect was evidenced in our meetings today. None of this should be reason for surprise. Our two peoples may, at first glance, seem worlds apart, both in geographic location and culture; but a closer look reveals that Singapore and the United States are nations made up of hardworking immigrants and their descendants, who came to a new homeland to improve their lot and build a decent life for their families. We're both democratic nations committed to peace and to the preservation of human liberty. And these bonds are being bolstered by continued cultural and educational exchanges and, of course, the many commercial ties between our peoples.

Mr. Prime Minister, we're aware that your people are now faced with severe challenges brought on by international economic conditions. The United States faced economic adversity not long ago; tough decisions had to be made. It's heartening to see that you're moving forward, Mr. Prime Minister, with an eye toward the long-run well-being of your people. I understand full well this is not always easy to do, but I want you and your citizens to know that the people of the United States want you to succeed and prosper. Our meetings today confirmed again the people of Singapore, as we say here, are our kind of people.

So, would you all join me in toasting the people of Singapore and the distinguished leader, Prime Minister Lee, and Mrs. Lee.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=37878

Friday 3 June 2016

LKY: World Statesman of the First Rank according to Richard Nixon



In making his toast, then President Richard Nixon described founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew as a WORLD STATESMAN OF THE FIRST RANK who:

(1) ran Singapore well "with respect for the great traditions of FREEDOM" and

(2) helped US to "develop the kinds of policies that will maintain a world in which freedom can survive for larger countries like the United States and for smaller countries like Singapore".

White House State Dinner in honour of Lee Kuan Yew on April 10 1973.

Four Things About The White House State Dinners


Founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew was hosted to three White House State Dinners during his time as Prime Minister - 1973, 1975 and 1985.

Four things about the White House State Dinners

1. ORIGIN


When it was first initiated in the 19th century, the term “State Dinner” was used to denote any affair that honoured the President’s Cabinet, Congress, or other dignitaries.

In 1874, President Ulysses S Grant changed the meaning of the term when he welcomed King David Kalakua of the Kingdom of Hawaii. These days, state dinners are grand affairs hosted to welcome a visiting head of state or government.

2. INTENSE PREPARATIONS


A state dinner requires months of preparation, sometimes a minimum of six months. Thorough research is conducted to celebrate the guest of honour’s country, culture, and preferences. Hallmarks of American culture are also chosen, often by the First Lady, and these considerations are translated — with approval by the First Lady, State Department and White House Social Secretary — into invitations, menus, guest lists and entertainment.

White House state dinners are not only lavish affairs, they’re “bigger than the biggest weddings,” former White House chef Walter Scheib once said. “State dinners (are) not just an opportunity to show off American hospitality,” he wrote in his book White House Chef: Eleven Years, Two Presidents, One Kitchen. “They are a chance to parade American food and wine before the world.”

3. RARE EVENT


Under President Obama, State Dinners have become quite rare. He and the First Lady have held only 11 state dinners thus far, beginning with then-Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in 2009. The Obama’s most recent State Dinner was an unusual joint affair: With the five leaders of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.

Among modern-day US presidents, Mr Harry Truman was said to have held the least number of State Dinners — just six in about eight years, while Mr Lyndon Johnson’s record of 54 State Dinners in 62 months has yet to be surpassed.

4. HIGH COSTS


The general price tag of a State Dinner is US$500,000 (S$687,736.20). In 2015, it cost about US$590,000 (S$810,877.94) to remodel the White House’s State Dining Room, the venue for the event.

But costs can often vary. According to the Washington Examiner, the Obama White House reportedly spent nearly US$1 million on the State Dinner for Mexico’s then-president Felipe Calderon, which included a performance by Beyonce.

Source: TODAY

SPEECH BY PRESIDENT GERALD FORD: White House State Dinner 1975 in honour of then PM Lee Kuan Yew




WE ARE here, all of us this evening, to welcome to Washington the very distinguished Prime Minister and Mrs. Lee of Singapore, and we are delighted to have both of you here, Mr. Prime Minister and Mrs. Lee.

Regrettably, I have not yet had the opportunity, Mr. Prime Minister, to visit Singapore, and unfortunately, until this morning, I had never had the opportunity to get acquainted with you and to exchange views with you. But obviously, because of your reputation and your country's reputation, I have known both of you.

And I must say that the reputation of both the country and yourself is carried very far throughout the world. In its brief existence, Mr. Prime Minister, a decade of independence, Singapore has compiled a tremendous reputation and record of accomplishment.

Asian traditions have blended in this case very successfully with modern technology to produce a prosperous and a very progressive society without sacrificing a distinctive cultural heritage.

Singapore has built for itself a position of great respect and influence in Southeast Asia and throughout the rest of the world, and I have noticed that in my many contacts with other leaders in the Commonwealth as well as elsewhere.

As the principal architect of this success, the Prime Minister has become widely known, not only for what Singapore has accomplished under his leadership but also for his very broad grasp of international relationships.

Over the last decade, he has achieved a very special status among world leaders for his very thoughtful and his articulate interpretations of world events. He is a man of vision whose views are very relevant to world issues and whose advice is widely sought.

When the Prime Minister speaks, we-all listen most carefully for good and sufficient reasons, and we come away from those experiences far wiser.

And I am especially pleased that we have an opportunity to exchange views with the Prime Minister at this time. We have had a tragedy in Indochina. It is affecting all of the countries in Southeast Asia, as well as all of us who are deeply concerned for the future of Southeast Asia and for the cause of freedom. It has made the problems of Southeast Asia much more difficult. But let me say without reservation, we are determined to deal affirmatively with those problems, and we will deal with them.

The Prime Minister's visit gives us the benefit of his experience and his wisdom in assessing the current situation in that part of the world. It also gives me the opportunity to assure him that our commitments in Southeast Asia and elsewhere, if I might add, are honored and will be honored, and that our concern for the security and for the welfare of free nations in Southeast Asia is undiminished.

Mr. Prime Minister and Mrs. Lee, it is a great pleasure for Mrs. Ford and myself to have you here with us this evening and at last to have an opportunity to have an acquaintanceship and a fine evening with you. Both Mrs. Ford and I have looked forward to this for some time.

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you now to raise your glasses .and join with me in offering a toast to the Prime Minister of Singapore and to Mrs. Lee.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4904

#rememberingLeeKuanYew
#proudtobeSingaporean
#ThankfulAndGrateful
#WeWillNotForget

White House State Dinner 1973: SPEECH BY PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON in the exchange of toasts between President Richard Nixon and PM Lee Kuan Yew

"Singapore is the best run country in the world." And here is the man who runs it. 

 




Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Vice President, ladies and gentlemen:

We have welcomed many very distinguished guests in this room, and I would say that none is more deserving of our respect and of being honored, as we honor him tonight, than the Prime Minister and, I may say, his wife.

I recall the occasions that we have met previously in his country and also here, and I recall also the enormous impression that the Prime Minister has made on various emissaries from the United States who have visited his country. The Vice President and Mrs. Agnew have had the opportunity to visit Singapore, Secretary Rogers and Mrs. Rogers. I have not, since coming into this office.

I think perhaps the best summary of the attitude of all of those who have visited Singapore during the past 3 to 4 years, since I have been having rather regular reports on the situation, was when Secretary Connally returned from his trip around the world when he was Secretary of the Treasury. He came into my office and said, "Singapore is the best run country in the world." And here is the man who runs it.

I would add to that, however, by saying that the best run country in the world could mean a country that was run very well without freedom, because I suppose that if you look at countries around the world, those that have the least obvious problems are those that have no freedom, and therefore, it would be the best run.

And the Prime Minister tonight deserves our honor and our respect, because in this relatively new country with a very old history and a very able people, he has been able to run it well, but run it with respect for the great traditions of freedom which our two countries both adhere to, and for this, we all, of course, hold him in very high regard.

On the two previous occasions he has been here since I have been in this office, he came alone, and, consequently, on one occasion we had a stag dinner. This time, fortunately, he brought Mrs. Lee with him. Now, I had read something about their courtship. I knew that, like Secretary Rogers and Mrs. Rogers, they had gone to school together, they had both graduated from law school in the same class, and so tonight, very early in the evening, when you saw me turning to Mrs. Lee, I said, "Mrs. Lee, tell me, is it true that you were number one in the class at Cambridge Law School and your husband was number two?" And she said, "Mr. President, do you think he would have married me if that were the case?"

But I probed further, and I found that, as a matter of fact, Mrs. Lee, our distinguished guest, did receive a first at Cambridge Law School. Her husband did also, but like a very loyal wife, she said, "He had a first with a star after his name, and that is something very special."

But the purpose of that is simply to say that we are very happy here to welcome our distinguished guests because of their personal qualities, because of their great ability, and because of the leadership they have given to their own country.

I would only add this: In the talks that I have had with the Prime Minister, in 1967 when we first met--at a time that neither he nor I had any idea that we would be meeting again today in this place---but in any event, in 1967 when we first met, on the other two occasions, what has impressed me enormously has been his profound understanding, not just of his own country and not just of Southeast Asia, of which his own country is a very important part, but of the entire world scene. In other words, we honor tonight and we welcome here a world statesman of the first rank, who has contributed, with his intelligence, with his understanding, to all of, us, in helping us to develop the kinds of policies that will maintain a world in which freedom can survive for larger countries like the United States and for smaller countries like Singapore.

There is no more articulate and intelligent spokesman for what I would call free societies in the world than the Prime Minister of Singapore, and for that reason I know all of you will want to join me in raising your glasses to Prime Minister Lee. Prime Minister Lee.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3802

#rememberingLeeKuanYew
#proudandimpressed