New York Times pays damages to Singapore's leaders

(Reuters) - The New York Times Co apologized to Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew on Wednesday and paid S$160,000 ($114,000) in damages for an article about Asian political dynasties.

An apology in the opinion section of the New York Times' website said that any inference that Lee Hsien Loong "did not achieve his position through merit," was unintended.

The article, entitled "All in the Family," was published on February 15 in the International Herald Tribune (IHT), the global edition of The New York Times.

Lee Hsien Loong is the son of independent Singapore's first leader, Lee Kuan Yew. The New York Times also apologized to Goh Chok Tong, who succeeded the older Lee as prime minister.

Davinder Singh, the lawyer acting for the leaders, told Reuters that the IHT's publisher, editor of global editions, and the article's author, Philip Bowring, also agreed to pay damages of S$60,000 to Lee Hsien Loong, and S$50,000 each to Goh Chok Tong and Lee Kuan Yew, as well as pay their legal costs.

Singh said the article was "libellous" and the Singapore leaders had demanded an apology, damages and costs.

He said it was in breach of an undertaking made by both the publisher of the IHT and Bowring in 1994 that they would not make further similar defamatory allegations to those made in an article by Bowring in the IHT in that year called "The Claims about Asian Values Don't Usually Bear Scrutiny," for which the IHT and Bowring also paid damages and costs to the three leaders.

A spokesman for The New York Times Co declined to comment beyond the apology, while Bowring did not respond to a Reuters query for comment.

Singapore's leaders have in the past sued and won damages, or out-of-court settlements, from opposition politicians and foreign media including the International Herald Tribune, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg and The Economist.

Singapore, considered to have the lowest political risk among Asian nations by many risk consultancies, is a hub for manufacturers, banks and expatriates, who value its stability. The ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has governed for 50 years.

Singapore was ranked 133rd among 175 countries in the World Press Freedom Index 2009 by Reporters Without Borders.

(Reporting by Neil Chatterjee in Singapore and Tiffany Wu in New York; Editing by Nick Macfie and Raju Gopalakrishnan)

Here's the Times' apology, printed today:

In 1994, Philip Bowring, a contributor to the International Herald Tribune's op-ed page, agreed as part of an undertaking with the leaders of the government of Singapore that he would not say or imply that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had attained his position through nepotism practiced by his father Lee Kuan Yew. In a February 15, 2010, article, Mr. Bowring nonetheless included these two men in a list of Asian political dynasties, which may have been understood by readers to infer that the younger Mr. Lee did not achieve his position through merit. We wish to state clearly that this inference was not intended. We apologize to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong for any distress or embarrassment caused by any breach of the undertaking and the article.

Source:Reuters

A Nod For Lim Kit Siang

Hantu Laut

I'll make an exception this time and give Lim Kit Siang a nod to his article here.

It's true, Minister of Health Liow Tiong Lai should take responsibility and resign his post.He has shown total incompetence, indifference and showed no concern at all on the worsening health care in Sabah.

The crisis is not new, it is over two years now and nothing has been done to stop the shuttling of patients from one hospital to another.

On one of his visits here the Prime Minister has assured Sabahans that he would make immediate allocation to resolve the health care crisis in Sabah.

The money might be there but what's the point if you have a minister who can only provide lip service and not the health care service that Sabahans have been deprived of for a long time.In spite of the much talked about takeover of SMC nothing significant has happened.

PM Najib should take personal interest in the crisis if he wants his fixed deposit intact.Better do it fast before Sabahans decide to tukaron bangkad.

It is poor Sabahans that suffered most and if the PM didn't already know, that's where most votes come from.Ignore it at your own perils.

Maybe, Najib should do a first, sack the man.

Of Federal Neglect And Timber Towkays

Hantu Laut

Lim Kit Siang wrote "2013 in three years’ time mark Sabah’s 50th anniversary in the formation of Malaysia. It is appropriate in preparing for the occasion to seriously assess whether the dreams of Sabahans and Sarawakians in 1963 to form Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed." In other words should we stay in Malaysia?

Is Kit Siang suggesting that we should consider cessation from the Federation if we are not happy with how we have been treated all these years and to seriously assess whether our dreams to form Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed or have we been given full citizenship rights? Is he suggesting that we have been cheated by the West Malaysians in general and Federal leaders in particular.

I do agree with Kit Siang that Sabah have been lagging behind other states in Malaysia due to neglect, corruptions and ineptitude of its leaders to deal with Federal leaders who wore superiority tags on their sleeves. Sabah development was also much hindered by bureaucratic red tape at the Federal level.Where Federal funded projects are concerned concept and design are done from the chairs in Kuala Lumpur without taking into consideration the local conditions and local sentiments.If anything can go wrong, it will.

A good example of Murphy's Law is the design of flyovers in Kota Kinabalu.It is a telling sign of the arrogance and irresponsibility of the Federal civil servants.It's like being given half-cooked food to eat.Sabah only deserved half a flyover and half of everything else.Like everything else all Federal projects get the same half-dosage treatment.

Try visit the KK Court House and you be amazed what a maze you are in.It has the worst interior design in the universe looking more like a maze rather than a court house.The same goes with the new mini Putrajaya.It's look beautiful on the outside but inside is a grim reminder of a dysfunctional building.

Approved projects are often slowed down by funding that comes in trickles, half-opened tap, distrusting Sabahans to handle Federal funds.The health care system, like everything else that has a Federal label on it, is not caring enough to the health of Sabahans.There was no forward planning.It's ad hoc and hocus pocus.

The Federal government can only see five years ahead, that's why they have what they called the 'Five-Year Plan'.Should have been named the 'Myopic Five Year Plan.' Five years in the 'Stone Age' may be a long time but five years in the 'Jet Age' is as fast as the blink of an eye.

Sabah has this thing called political jinx.From the days of Chief Minister Tun Mustapha Harun the raping of Sabah natural resources has not ceased.It was the start of a long series of timber politics and the rapes of Sabah forests and her other resources by greedy politicians and their cronies.

Mustapha was running wild and running his own fiefdom using Sabah's rich timber resources to finance his prodigal lifestyle.He was the only Malaysian leader who had the use of personal jet paid for by the state.Even the then Prime Minister Tengku Abdul Rahman didn't have one. Sabah was rich.Kota Kinabalu has more Mercs on the roads than Kuala Lumpur then.

Timber politics continued under Berjaya. Harris was seen as a saviour that saved Sabah from the excesses of Mustapha.The increased economic activities during his time did not stop corruptions either.Under Harris, Sabah prospered a little and was the epitome of multiracial politics.That didn't last long either.The sacking of Joseph Pairin from the cabinet that culminated in massive losses suffered by Harris and his other party candidates in state elections put an end to multiracial politics in Sabah.

Under Joseph Pairin Kitingan, the entire state fell into disrepair, prolonged economic inactivity almost bankrupted the state.It was a government that spent more time drinking themselves to death rather than working to develop the state.The state lost most of its arable land during this period.Vast tract of lands were given to cronies which were later sold to plantation companies from West Malaysia.Most of the big oil palm plantations in Sabah are owned by West Malaysian companies.Nothing wrong with that if they plough back some of the profits to other investments in Sabah.They didn't.All profits are kept for the benefits of the shareholders.Very little of those money came back to Sabah.

Kit Siang asked how come the richest state can be reduced to become the poorest state in Malaysia?

Kit Siang should also ask the timber towkays of Sabah of the early days and the politicians that have been hand in glove with them not only to rape the forests but also allowed those crooked businessmen to under declare prices and cheat on payment of royalties.One of the biggest operator at that time reputedly can, out of every 10 shipments, avoided paying royalties on at least 5 shipments.We are talking million of ringgit of lost revenue every month.It was estimated that the state lost between RM200/300 million a year to crooked timber towkays.

One of the greatest injustices done to Sabah's economy were done by the timber towkays of Sabah who parked most of their money in Hong Kong by under declaring prices and under paying royalties.Asked them about the millions they kept in Hong Kong during their timber heydays.Ask how much have they reinvested in Sabah?Ask those corrupt forestry officers how much timber royalties were lost through cheating, corruptions and collaboration involving them and the towkays.

Through hard work, deception and crooked ways many have become filthy rich and some have died of old age and handed over their wealth to their children.

So, it is not just the Federal government to be blamed, Sabahans themselves have inflicted serious injury to the state economic health by their greed and dishonesty.

For Kit Siang, if he didn't already know, we are better off in Malaysia than being swallowed by Indonesia or the Philippines which was what the British feared would happen if we were left on our own.

Lees And The Shahs Of Iran:The Day After Tomorrow

By Abdul Gafoor, Social Correspondent

When Pahlavi Shah’s neglect of the Iranian people grew worse in the late 60s and early 70s, it resulted in the growth of various forms of dissident groups. There were communists, socialists, leftists and Islamists. As Pahlavi Shah and his control machine was all too powerful, the various dissident groups were united on one objective which was to oust the Shah. Given the numbers and popularity the Islamists rose to become the principal force in ousting the Shahs and they formed the next government.

As mentioned in the earlier article, the severe deterioration of socio-economic conditions of people in Singapore has led to so many variety of dissident groups being born in the last few years. Today we have the queer groups, leftists, democrats, socialists, worker activists, reformists and Christian right. The last group has indeed rattled PAP that even the PM made them the main topic of national day rally speech.

Just like how the various dissident groups in Iran during the late 1970s converged with a common goal to oust the government, there does seem to be a trend of slow convergence amongst the various dissident groups in Singapore which is expected to gain pace in five to ten years time during which time as MM Lee predicted they are likely to create a political tsunami at the 2021 elections.

The interesting question is which group is likely to rise to the top to form the government then. Given the trend of religious ritualism (which i will not define as religiousity nor as spirituality) increasing rapidly amongst Singaporeans, there is a strong likelihood that we may see the emergence of religion based parties within now and ten years time. These parties are likely to be an Islamic party inspired by PAS, Hindu party inspired by Hindraf and Buddhist party inspired by the recent uprising of Burmese Buddhist monks who are likely to re-emerge again in time to come. One can expect these three parties to form a coalition with the Christian Right party/parties.

In other words in the 2021 election, the defining moment of post 1965 electoral history will be likely to be shaped by the victory of a coalition of religion based parties in very much similarity of how the Islamic clerics ousted the Shah in 1979. Democratic parliamentary elections are all about popularity and such a coalition without doubt can garner at least 50% of the votes. Leftists, socialists, queer groups, reformists, democrats, labour activists, womens groups etc could emerge as a potential another coalition but this coalition represent the interests of at the most a quarter of the population.

Should such an outcome materialise in 2021 election, the PAP will be convinced to send in the army and/or influence senior public servants not to cooperate with the new government. We can then see a similar turbulent transition as what we see in Thailand and Malaysia today. However in those two countries, the aftermath of the turbulent times is likely to be a normalisation. However in the case of Singapore, we are more likely to see the political turbulence to be prolonged like in Iran.

This whole analysis that I am putting forth can only be vaildated by time. My purpose is not put forth a sensational picture of what could happen. I simply want to illustrate the undesirable high risks that country with underdeveloped political system faces in long term if it blindly only focuses on short term political stability. Some idiosyncratic political observers may boast about 50 years of single party rule in Singapore being a source of political stability, failing to realize itself is a source of political instability for the next 50 years.

When Pahlavi Shah’s neglect of the Iranian people grew worse in the late 60s and early 70s, it resulted in the growth of various forms of dissident groups. There were communists, socialists, leftists and Islamists. As Pahlavi Shah and his control machine was all too powerful, the various dissident groups were united on one objective which was to oust the Shah. Given the numbers and popularity the Islamists rose to become the principal force in ousting the Shahs and they formed the next government.

As mentioned in the earlier article, the severe deterioration of socio-economic conditions of people in Singapore has led to so many variety of dissident groups being born in the last few years. Today we have the queer groups, leftists, democrats, socialists, worker activists, reformists and Christian right. The last group has indeed rattled PAP that even the PM made them the main topic of national day rally speech.

Just like how the various dissident groups in Iran during the late 1970s converged with a common goal to oust the government, there does seem to be a trend of slow convergence amongst the various dissident groups in Singapore which is expected to gain pace in five to ten years time during which time as MM Lee predicted they are likely to create a political tsunami at the 2021 elections.

The interesting question is which group is likely to rise to the top to form the government then. Given the trend of religious ritualism (which i will not define as religiousity nor as spirituality) increasing rapidly amongst Singaporeans, there is a strong likelihood that we may see the emergence of religion based parties within now and ten years time. These parties are likely to be an Islamic party inspired by PAS, Hindu party inspired by Hindraf and Buddhist party inspired by the recent uprising of Burmese Buddhist monks who are likely to re-emerge again in time to come. One can expect these three parties to form a coalition with the Christian Right party/parties.

In other words in the 2021 election, the defining moment of post 1965 electoral history will be likely to be shaped by the victory of a coalition of religion based parties in very much similarity of how the Islamic clerics ousted the Shah in 1979. Democratic parliamentary elections are all about popularity and such a coalition without doubt can garner at least 50% of the votes. Leftists, socialists, queer groups, reformists, democrats, labour activists, womens groups etc could emerge as a potential another coalition but this coalition represent the interests of at the most a quarter of the population.

Should such an outcome materialise in 2021 election, the PAP will be convinced to send in the army and/or influence senior public servants not to cooperate with the new government. We can then see a similar turbulent transition as what we see in Thailand and Malaysia today. However in those two countries, the aftermath of the turbulent times is likely to be a normalisation. However in the case of Singapore, we are more likely to see the political turbulence to be prolonged like in Iran.

This whole analysis that I am putting forth can only be vaildated by time. My purpose is not put forth a sensational picture of what could happen. I simply want to illustrate the undesirable high risks that country with underdeveloped political system faces in long term if it blindly only focuses on short term political stability. Some idiosyncratic political observers may boast about 50 years of single party rule in Singapore being a source of political stability, failing to realize itself is a source of political instability for the next 50 years.

About the Author:

Abdul Gafoor is a researcher based in the United Kingdom

Source:The Temasek Review