Globalisation has not failed. The most important event in 2001 was not 9/11. It was China's entry into the World Trade Organisation.

Q FOR ALL ITS BENEFITS, WHERE HAS GLOBALISATION FAILED KEY DOMESTIC CONSTITUENCIES AND WHY?

A Globalisation has not failed.

All discussions on globalisation are distorted because Western analysts focus on the roughly 15 per cent of the world's population who live in the West. They ignore the 85 per cent who are the rest.

The last 30 years of human history have been the best 30 years that the rest have enjoyed. Why? The answer is globalization.

The rise of the middle class in Asia has spread wealth, faith in the possibility of fair international institutions and a stabilising rules-based system that benefits the majority of humanity.

So why is there a perception that globalisation has failed?

The simple answer is that Western elites who enjoyed the fruits of globalisation did not share them with their Western masses.

Even worse, they did not prepare their populations for the disruptive change caused by the spread of globalisation.

In a forthcoming book, I explain how (Donald) Trump and Brexit are the result of this failure. In it, I write:

"Instead of reacting thoughtfully and intelligently (to the 9/11 attack in 2001), the prevailing intellectual hubris led to the disastrous decision to invade Iraq. America has the world's best universities and think-tanks, as well as the most globally influential professors and pundits. Yet none of them told their fellow citizens that the most important event in 2001 was not 9/11. It was China's entry into the World Trade Organisation. The entry of almost a billion workers into the global trading system would obviously result in massive 'creative destruction' and the loss of many jobs in the West."

This, to cut a long story short, was one major reason why Trump and Brexit happened 15 years later in 2016.

The working-class populations could feel directly what their elites couldn't feel. Their lives were being disrupted by fundamental changes taking place in the world order, and their leaders had done nothing to explain to them what was happening or to mitigate the damage.

Given this, there is a solution. We need honest and courageous leaders in the West who tell their populations hard truths, like Lee Kuan Yew did here in Singapore. The West, both America and Europe, can certainly compete. However, they have to make major adjustments. For example, no more 35-hour week in France; no more agricultural subsidies in Europe; no more lifelong pension benefits after 55. You get the message.

Kishore Mahbubani's interview with Nathan Gardels, The WorldPost   

Globalism is at a crossroads. It is time for Asia to stand up for free and fair trade, reap the full benefits of globalisation, and shape the new global agenda.

SPEECH BY EMERITUS SENIOR MINISTER GOH CHOK TONG AT THE 23^RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE FUTURE OF ASIA: “GLOBALISM AT A CROSSROADS – ASIA’S NEXT MOVE”

5 JUNE 2017

“SHAPING ASIA’S FUTURE – WHO WILL TAKE THE LEAD?

1                Globalism, loosely defined as taking into account the interests of the world and not just a nation’s own, is at a crossroads.  There are strong forces pushing back globalism and free trade in the US, the UK and other parts of Europe.  Deep-seated anger over growing income inequality, unemployment, and the influx of immigrants – both legal and illegal – have come to a boil.  America’s withdrawal from the Paris Accord on Climate Change aggravates the divide over the status quo.  This shift away from globalism is not in Asia’s interest. 

So I ask two questions: what can Asia do and who will take the lead in shaping Asia’s future?

Global Context – Setting the Scene

2                The benefits of free trade are widely seen and felt.  However, insufficient attention was paid to the tail risks of globalisation.  These risks include the loss of jobs and wage stagnation for large segments of the population, and widening income inequality.  These pains have been exacerbated in recent years by financial crises, sluggish and uneven growth in developed economies, and disruptive technologies.

3                US President Donald Trump’s campaign slogan of putting “America First” resonated with many in the context of this social and economic fallout.  Many voters firmly believed that globalisation was working only for the established and not for them.  They bought the populist rhetoric that competition from lower-cost emerging economies stole their jobs and depressed their incomes.

4                The “Me First” phenomenon is not necessarily inward-looking, protectionist or anti-free trade.  But it is a fundamental shift away from multilateralism towards bilateral engagement.  At its heart, is a hub-and-spokes strategy which enables a big economy to bilaterally exercise its bargaining power over smaller economies.  It is like a yokozuna, a grand champion sumo wrestler, taking on smaller-sized wrestlers one at a time.

5                When global leadership goes missing, the “Me First” attitude in international relations may mutate into a “Me Only”. 

If that happens, it unravels international cooperation needed to address transboundary challenges such as financial crises, money laundering, climate change, public health epidemics and terrorism. 

The outcome is anarchy and failure of the international system as we know it.  The last time this happened, we had two world wars.

6                This brings me to my next point – what can and will Asia do? 

Will Asia stay the course and fly the banner of globalisation, free trade and economic integration? 

Can Asia spin a multilateral web of free trade agreements and achieve better outcomes than a bilateral hub-and-spokes approach in growing economies and building a better world?

Asia’s Next Move

7                Asia has benefited immensely from an open and inclusive international economic order.  Trade has benefited our people.  Reduced barriers to trade opened up foreign markets, leading to rapid economic growth.  Foreign investments provided much-needed jobs.

8                Greater interdependence amongst countries produce peace and balanced benefits through mutual cooperation. 

In a hub-and-spokes relationship however, the benefits are likely to be asymmetrical. 

For Asia, whose tumultuous history and consequent trust deficit sometimes impede bilateral working relationship, multilateralism fosters peace and a shared prosperous future. 

An interdependent, multilateral web of countries will require respect for one another, the rule of law and give-and-take cooperation, as opposed to a hub-and-spokes arrangement where might, i.e. the hub, calls the shots.

9                In my opinion, Asia is well placed to champion free trade and further integration.

Free Trade Agreements

10                A number of high-profile free trade agreements are on the table.  The most ambitious is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).  It is a high-quality agreement that would raise the standards for trade and investment, strengthen trade linkages, promote growth and create jobs in all TPP countries.  However, the US has withdrawn from it.  While the remaining TPP-11 Parties are naturally disappointed, given that the agreement had represented a carefully negotiated balance of benefits, we hope to welcome the US back when it is ready.  Meanwhile, Japan, as the largest remaining economy in the TPP, has stepped forward to work with other like-minded TPP members to explore ways to carry the initiative forward.

11                There is also the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).  Broadly, the RCEP differs from the TPP in two dimensions –membership and aspiration.  The RCEP will bring together ASEAN and its six FTA partners, namely Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea.  Together, these 16 countries encompass 45% of the world’s population and a third of the global GDP.  Compared to the TPP, the scope of the RCEP is narrower.  But the agreement is nevertheless ambitious.

Asian Leadership

12                Now comes the crucial question.  Who in Asia will champion free trade and economic integration? 

As two of the world’s largest economies, the responsibility naturally falls on Japan and China.  But they must lead in tandem and not as rivals.

Japan

13                Historically, opening up has not been an easy process for Japan.  It started only in 1853, with the arrival of US Commodore Matthew Perry’s “Black Ships” in Tokyo Bay seeking trade between the US and Japan.  Fleets from other Western countries followed suit.  Although Japan was reluctant at the time, it proved to be a master at reinventing itself and turning a seemingly adverse situation to its advantage.  The Meiji Restoration girded Japan’s industrialisation.  Foreign trade took off in full force.  This same openness and resilience enabled the Japanese people to rebuild their country from the ashes of the Second World War.  Japan’s rapid development spurred growth in the broader Asia-Pacific region, providing not only foreign direct investment but ideas and inspiration on how Asian countries could achieve industrialisation and economic development.

14                Today, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is leading Japan to assume an increasingly proactive role on the global stage.  In what will prove to be another historic milestone for Japan, PM Abe overcame domestic reluctance to make the bold and visionary decision to join the TPP.  He wants Japan to maintain an outward orientation, and will play a crucial leadership role in pushing forward the TPP.  Besides this, Japan has prioritised efforts aimed at boosting physical and economic connectivity in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific, for example with its Partnership for Quality Infrastructure initiatives and Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy.

China

15                For some parts of its history, China too was reluctant to open up.  China then considered itself the centre of the world, self-sufficient and not needing much investment from others.  During the Qing Dynasty, Emperor Qianlong rebuffed England’s attempts to engage China in trade.  He rejected the bountiful gifts of English products and labelled them as “tribute” instead.  It took several centuries, and a far-sighted and courageous leader like Deng Xiaoping, to open China to the outside world in 1978.  That decision changed the course of China and Asia.

16                Now, China has become a vocal proponent of free trade.  President Xi Jinping gave an impassioned defence of the liberal international economic order in his keynote speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year.  Through initiatives such as the “Belt and Road” and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, China has expressed willingness to lead global economic integration.

17                Is the Belt and Road another hub-and-spokes strategy?  Is it a “China First” strategy?  Chinese leaders have made it clear that it is not their intention.

18                At the Belt and Road Forum last month, President Xi summed up very aptly the call for Asia’s future.  He said, “We should embrace the outside world with an open mind, uphold the multilateral trading regime, and advance the building of free trade areas.”  To this end, the Belt and Road Initiative provides the physical connectivity that will support the overarching free trade agreements in the region and beyond.  Put simply, the Belt and Road together with free trade agreements can potentially advance multilateral trade and globalisation.  It integrates the region, as opposed to dividing it.

 Important Relationships

19                The most important relationships in Asia are between China and the US and Japan and the US.  But I think a third relationship, namely Japan-China, is just as important. 

If Japan-China relations can move towards greater trust and cooperation, there will be a mutually-reinforcing effect on the other key bilateral relationships in the region.  It will pave the way for the Japan-China-US trilateral relationship to become one of the world’s most important.  A strong trilateral relationship would be an important force for stability and a driver of continued economic growth and prosperity for both the region and the world.

20                It is hence important that Japan and China lead Asia in tandem towards greater integration. 

It will not work as well if only one country leads the charge.  If both countries provide competitive but divergent leadership, it will be destabilising.  It is far better to spin an interdependent multilateral network, a web, with many paths connecting different points.

21                Of course, the US’ continued engagement of Asia is integral to the region’s prosperity.  It has been in the region for over 70 years as an Asia-Pacific power.  I am heartened that the Trump Administration has signalled its continued strong commitment to the region – not just Northeast Asia, but Southeast Asia and ASEAN as well.  President Trump’s attendance at the APEC Economic Leaders’ Summit, East Asia Summit and ASEAN-US Summit later this year, will build on the region’s ties with the US.

22                There is also India, soon to have the world’s largest population.  It has a young population.  It has opened its economy since the early 1990s.  It is reforming its economy and has been growing by more than 7 percent per year in recent years.  If it continues with its reforms, it has the potential to be another mega economy.  India is a member of RCEP.  It can contribute to the integration of Asia by actively supporting an early conclusion of RCEP.

Negative Consequences of Globalisation

23                However, even as we push for economic integration, Asia must learn from the populist and nationalistic sentiments that we are witnessing today in the West.  Such sentiments arising from the negative consequences of globalisation may one day reach Asia.

24                For now, Japan’s low income inequality, and its society’s relative homogeneity and strong national and cultural identity, serve as buffers.  As for China, although inequality is relatively high, the risk is offset by good growth prospects and the emergence of a new middle class.  National governments will have to ensure that benefits from globalisation are distributed equitably and inclusively.

 ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific

25                Small countries too can play an important catalytic role in advancing globalisation and free trade.  They are non-threatening.  They are outward-looking in order to remain relevant to the world.  They can propose creative ideas without raising suspicions of an ulterior motive.  But they need to advance their interests based on principles and not take sides based on a patron-client relationship.

26                Back in 2002 at the APEC Summit in Mexico, three small countries, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore agreed to launch the Pacific-3.  Three years later, Brunei joined to form the P4.  P4 provided the foundation for the TPP.

27                As an aside, I claim credit for having persuaded then-Japanese Finance Minister Kiichi Miyazawa on the value of free trade agreements for Japan, and to negotiate the Japan-Singapore Economic Partnership Agreement with us.  This Agreement, signed in 2002, was Japan’s first free trade agreement.  It is time to upgrade the Partnership Agreement to ensure that it remains relevant to businesses from both sides.

28                ASEAN, of course, will play its part to further economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region.  ASEAN celebrates its 50^thanniversary this year.  It is intensifying efforts to achieve deeper economic integration through the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC).  This has reduced barriers to trade and promoted economic growth for the member countries.  ASEAN is also committed to achieving a high-quality RCEP agreement that will bring substantive economic benefits for the region.  ASEAN is not stopping here – it is looking to deepen integration even further, looking at cross-border and emerging issues ahead of the AEC blueprint in 2025.

Conclusion

29                Ladies and Gentlemen, globalism is at a crossroads.  It is time for Asia to stand up for free and fair trade, reap the full benefits of globalisation, and shape the new global agenda.

30                Asia needs to do its utmost to take our prosperity to the next level.  With strong leaders working together, we can achieve this.

                Thank you.

MHA's Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report 2017: Singapore cited as target in jihadist's publications and videos

A counter-terrorism exercise at Bishan's Junction 8 Mall on Oct 17, 2016. ISIS remains the most significant threat to Singapore, and has targeted it, MHA said in its terrorism threat report released on Thursday (June 1).

ST PHOTO: SEAH KWANG PENG

Singapore was specifically targeted by terrorist groups in the past year and the terrorism threat to the country remains the highest in recent years, the Ministry of Home Affairs said in its Singapore Terrorism Threat Assessment Report 2017, released on Thursday (June 1).

Here are eight key takeaways from MHA's report.

1. ISIS is the biggest terror threat to Singapore in recent years

ISIS, or the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, has posed the most significant threat to Singapore for the last few years, even though threats from groups like Al Qaeda (AQ) and the Jemaah Islamiah (JI) remain.

ISIS has already plotted to carry out two attacks against Singapore that the authorities are aware of.

Last year, there was reliable information that foreign ISIS militants were considering carrying out an attack in Singapore in the first half of 2016. The Singapore authorities acted swiftly but discreetly to mitigate the threat.

In August last year, the Indonesian authorities foiled a plot by a Batam-based terrorist group called Katibah Gonggong Rebus, acting on the instructions of Bahrun Naim, an Indonesian ISIS militant based in Syria.

                              From Tanjong Uma, a residential area in Batam, one can see the view of Marina Bay, including Marina Bay Sands,

                                                                    on a clear day. PHOTO: ST FILE

They had planned to launch a rocket attack against the Marina Bay Sands (MBS) integrated resort, and considered using a hill or an outer island of Batam as a launch point, but were arrested by Indonesian authorities before they could do so.

2. Singapore is a key target of terrorist groups

A member of the Iraqi forces walks past a mural bearing the logo of ISIS in a tunnel that was used as a training centre by the terrorists on March 1, 2017. PHOTO: AFP

Singapore has taken part in international coalitions against terrorism, and represents many things that ISIS is against - Singapore is a secular democracy, host to many economic and commercial interests belonging to Western nations that ISIS considers "infidels".

Singapore has been cited as a target in jihadist publications and videos, by both ISIS and other groups.

One Arabic publication titled The Fall Of The Idol: External Action And Individual Jihad, circulated online around October last year, named two entities in Singapore as potential targets in the wider bid to bring down the United States and Western interests by attacking the international economy.

Following the publication, the security agencies have worked with these entities to enhance their security measures.

An ISIS publication released in September 2015 also named Singapore (among other countries) as a member of the "crusader coalition" which ISIS was fighting against. A May 2016 ISIS video named Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines as countries infiltrated by "disbelievers" and threatened action against the "tyrants" of these countries.

3. Threat from home-grown, self-radicalised lone actors in Singapore

Volunteers from different nationalities, seen here on the outskirts of Kirkuk in Iraq, who have joined Kurdish forces fighting against ISIS militants. PHOTO: REUTERS

Like other countries, Singapore faces the risk of an attack by individuals who are radicalised by the propaganda of ISIS and seek to heed the call of the group to carry out attacks where they live.

Two Singaporeans have gone to Syria to join in the conflict with their respective families. There is also a significant rise in the number of radicalised Singaporeans detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

Between 2007 and 2014, 11 radicalised Singaporeans were dealt with under the ISA. In contrast, since 2015, there have already been 14 Singaporeans who were radicalised by ISIS who had to be dealt with under the ISA.

Among the recently detained Singaporeans, two of them said that they were prepared to carry out attacks in Singapore on behalf of ISIS.

One of them said he wanted to assassinate the President and Prime Minister of Singapore so that the country would become leaderless and could be turned into an Islamic state under the "ISIS caliphate".

If he was unable to carry out these plans, he planned instead to carry out attacks in public places in order to strike fear within our society, using easily available weapons such as knives.

Although there have previously been self-radicalising individuals in Singapore, ISIS' influence is well beyond what other terrorist groups, including AQ and JI, have ever been able to muster, MHA said.

4. The threat from radicalised foreigners living in Singapore

The eight Bangladeshi nationals who were detained under Singapore's Internal Security Act for planning terror attacks back home. PHOTO: MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

There was a significant increase in the number of radicalised Singaporeans and foreigners in Singapore since 2015.

Since late 2015, some 40 Bangladeshi nationals in Singapore were found to have been radicalised, supporting the use of violence to pursue their extremist ideology.

Several of them were planning to carry out armed violence against the government in Bangladesh.

Although there was no indication that they planned to carry out attacks in Singapore, one of those arrested - the leader of the group calling itself Islamic State In Bangladesh - admitted that he would carry out attacks anywhere if directed by ISIS.

All the Bangladeshi nationals have since been repatriated to Bangladesh except for six who are currently serving sentences in Singapore for terrorism financing offences.

Since 2015, eight Indonesian domestic helpers in Singapore were also investigated and deported after they were found to be radicalised.

None of them had any plans to carry out acts of violence here at the time they were investigated but their radicalisation and association with terrorists overseas were of security concern.

5. ISIS a significant threat in the region

Filipino government troops conduct patrol on a reclaimed former Maute stronghold in Marawi City, Mindanao Island, southern Philippines, on May 30, 2017, as fighting between Islamist militants and government forces continues. PHOTO: EPA

ISIS has been linked to several attacks across South-east Asia, including the first ISIS-claimed attack in a suicide-bombing-cum-shooting in Jakarta, Indonesia, in January last year (2016), and the grenade attack carried out on a nightspot in Puchong, on the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in June last year.

In the Philippines, a group in southern Philippines which calls itself IS EastAsia claims to be the de facto ISIS group in this region.

In January last year, the ISIS leadership in Syria said that the leader of this group, Isnilon Hapilon, was the "overall emir in the Philippines".

In recent times, there are indications that the group is seeking to expand its operations beyond its strongholds in southern Philippines.

The group's recent siege of Marawi City also attests to their potential to turn Mindanao into an ISIS wilayat or province for South-east Asian militants.

If this entity proliferates into a regional network, as the JI had done previously, the terrorism threat will deepen further in South-east Asia.

On top of this, regional militant groups are likely to evolve.

In Indonesia, militants from the pro-ISIS umbrella group Jamaah Anshorut Daulah (JAD) had previously used low explosive devices in attacks in 2016, but have recently begun to assemble homemade bombs using high explosive materials.

JI has also been building up its capabilities by conducting militant training and attempting to acquire weapons.

6. Authorities' response to regional threat

Indonesian police officers secure the area outside a house after a terror raid in Bandung, West Java, Indonesia, on May 26, 2017. PHOTO: EPA

Authorities in the various South-east Asian countries have stepped up counter-terrorism efforts, resulting in more plots uncovered and more militants arrested.

According to media reports, Malaysian authorities disrupted four plots and arrested 85 militants in 2015. In 2016, they disrupted seven plots and arrested 119 militants.

Over in Indonesia, authorities disrupted nine plots and arrested 65 militants in 2015, and disrupted 15 plots and arrested over 150 militants in 2016.

The Indonesian and Philippine authorities have put pressure on pro-ISIS militants in Poso and the southern Philippines, with some key leaders killed or injured. Nevertheless, the threat continues to increase.

7. Prognosis: No credible intelligence of imminent attack on Singapore, but security agencies on high alert

Security personnel patrolling at Marina Bay Sands Expo and Convention Centre on May 22, 2017. PHOTO: ST FILE

MHA concluded in its report that while there is no credible intelligence of an imminent attack at this point in time, Singapore's security agencies remain on high vigilance.

Radicalised individuals, particularly, are a grave security concern, as they might heed calls by ISIS to carry out lone-wolf attacks.

They can use everyday items as weapons and do not need sophisticated tools - such attacks are hard to prevent and can happen quickly without much warning.

Another concern is an increased flow of returning fighters to South-east Asia as ISIS loses ground in Syria and Iraq. These fighters are likely to be more skilled in attack tactics, more ideologically motivated, and able to access wider terror networks and links formed in Syria and Iraq.

Released terrorist prisoners in the region are also a concern. They may return to terrorism if they have not been de-radicalised. Around 200 terrorist prisoners in the region will be released from prison over the next two years.

8. What can Singaporeans do?

The SGSecure national movement was officially launched by PM Lee Hsien Loong on Sept 24, 2016, at the Singapore University of Technology and Design. PHOTO: ST FILE

MHA in its report said a strong community response to the terrorist threat is critical given the high likelihood of an attack, and that is why the SGSecure movement was launched in September 2016 to sensitise, train and mobilise the community in the fight against terror.

One way the community can help is in detecting and reporting radicalised individuals. Friends and family are often the first to notice tell-tale behavioural changes and are best-placed to counsel the possibly self-radicalised individuals before they step off the precipice, or to alert the authorities if they are unable to rein in the individuals.

In some of the self-radicalisation cases Singapore has detected previously, there were friends and family members who knowingly withheld information from the authorities. This is usually because they denied there was a problem or because they believed misguidedly that they were protecting their loved ones.

The opposite is true - by alerting the authorities to signs of radicalisation early, friends and family members are in fact helping to save them from harming themselves and those around them.

This article was published by The Straits Times, 1 June 2017