In a world of big states, S'pore punches above its weight with canny foreign policy
By Tommy Koh, Published The Straits Times, 6 Jan 2013
Life for small states has never been easy. It was much harder before the founding of the United Nations in 1945. In the pre-UN world, the fate of small states was often decided by the big states of their region or of the world. Thus, it was not uncommon for the concert of powers to arbitrarily decide to alter the boundaries of small states or incorporate parts of small states into the territories of their bigger neighbours. In extreme cases, some small states simply disappeared as a result of being forcibly incorporated into the territory of a bigger neighbour. This happened to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which were incorporated by Stalin against their will into the Soviet Union.
Since the founding of the UN, the world has become a relatively safer place for small states. The UN Charter, the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly are, however, unable to prevent a big state from invading a small state. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, the United States invaded Grenada and Iraq, Russia invaded Georgia, just to give a few examples.
Iraq invaded and attempted to incorporate Kuwait into Iraq. Kuwait was liberated by a coalition of like-minded states, led by the US, with the approval of the UN Security Council. Kuwait was fortunate in that it is the world's 10th largest oil producer. In each of the other cases, the invasions were the subject of deliberations, either in the Security Council or the General Assembly or both. The invasions were condemned by the Parliament of Man. The UN's capacity to prevent or rectify the aggression of big states against small states is, however, uncertain and limited. The bottom line is that small states continue to live in a dangerous world.
Be proactive
One hallmark of Singapore's foreign policy is that, although a small state, we are not passive. On the contrary, we are hyper-proactive. Small states, like small boys, are expected to be silent, passive and compliant. Small states are seldom given a seat at the top table. Small states are seldom consulted by the big states. They are usually told what to do by the big states. The norm is for small states to be reactive rather than proactive - to be the subject of the actions of the big states instead of being the actors and to accept their fate as small states. Singapore has defied the norm by being a proactive state. Let me cite three examples.
First, during the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, Singapore found that the negotiations were being dominated by the coastal states and the great powers. In order to gain leverage, Singapore took the initiative to establish a new grouping called the Group of Landlocked and Geographically Disadvantaged States. It united the landlocked states and coastal countries which, like Singapore, were hemmed in by their neighbours. The group consisted of about one-third of the member states participating in the conference. This gave us a voice and a weight which we would not have had otherwise.
A second example is the initiative which Singapore took at the UN, in 1992, to form the Forum of Small States (FOSS). The forum consists of 105 out of the 193 UN members. The criterion for membership is a population below 10 million. The forum has proven itself as an effective platform of small states. FOSS recently celebrated its 20th anniversary. The President of the UN General Assembly, the Secretary-General of the UN and the US Secretary of State were among the guests who spoke at the forum. Singapore is the chairman of FOSS and the founder is Ambassador Chew Tai Soo.
Third, following the creation of G-20, consisting of 20 major advanced and emerging economies of the world, Singapore feared that the interests of other states would not be taken into account. In response to this danger, Singapore took the initiative to establish a group of like-minded states, called the Global Governance Group or 3G. The group has succeeded in insisting on a linkage between G-20 and the UN and has submitted policy papers to G-20 for its consideration. As convener of 3G, Singapore has been invited to attend several G-20 meetings. The founder of 3G is Ambassador Vanu Gopala Menon, and the group has 30 members from all regions of the world.
Be not afraid
Another unique feature of Singapore's foreign policy is that it is not afraid to stand up for its interests. Small states are usually reluctant to take on a bigger opponent. Singapore has no such fear. Let me cite a few examples.
First, in 1972, a young Permanent Representative to the UN, Professor S. Jayakumar, decided to take on very formidable opponents at the UN and prevailed against the odds.
Let me explain the facts. At that time, many coastal states, led by the Latin-Americans, were unilaterally making extensive claims to the sea. Some wanted the territorial sea to be expanded from three miles (4.8km) to 200 miles. Others wanted very extensive fisheries zones. In 1972, the US Geographer had published a report showing that the majority of the UN member states would not benefit from such extensive claims.
This prompted Prof Jayakumar to submit a draft resolution to the UN General Assembly requesting the Secretary-General to study how the various proposals put forward by the coastal states would impact on mankind's interests. The draft resolution was vehemently opposed by the powerful coastal states. France, Canada and Malta jointly submitted an amendment which, if adopted, would have killed the resolution. In the UN, it is called a "killer amendment". Miraculously, the vote was 46 in favour, 46 against, with 27 abstentions. Under the UN's rules of procedure, the amendment failed to be adopted by one vote. The resolution was adopted. Singapore's victory made the UN take notice of this small state and its effective diplomacy.
Second, Vietnam invaded and occupied Cambodia in December 1978. The five Asean countries decided to oppose Vietnam's action, not because it supported the odious Khmer Rouge regime, but because it would set a dangerous precedent.
The fight in the UN General Assembly in 1979 was a cliffhanger. By taking on Vietnam, Asean was taking on the whole Soviet bloc as well as the leadership of the Non-Aligned Movement, including India. Many of our friends thought our cause was hopeless. Contrary to such expectations, Asean prevailed. Eventually, when the Cold War ended, Vietnam agreed to withdraw from Cambodia and to seek a negotiated solution to the conflict. This resulted in the Paris Agreements of 1991.
Third, I would refer to Prof Jayakumar's book, Diplomacy: A Singapore Experience. In it, he discussed several cases in which Singapore came under tremendous pressure from the big powers, such as the US, China, Britain and the European Union. In each case, Singapore refused to yield. Singapore has shown that although we live in an unequal world, successful small countries can maintain their dignity and not give in to the unreasonable pressure of the big states.
Be law-abiding
The third and most unique feature of Singapore's foreign policy is the priority we accord to international law. Most scholars of international affairs are puzzled by Singapore's behaviour. Singapore's leaders, from Mr Lee Kuan Yew to the present, use a vocabulary which suggests that Singapore adheres to the Realist school, which takes a cold-eyed, unsentimental view of the world. The Realist worships power and is usually dismissive of other considerations. How can a Realist state attach so much importance to international law?
Singapore's ideology is actually not Realism, but Pragmatism. Our adherence to international law is based upon utility and not morality. Small states are better off in a world ruled by law than in a lawless world. Small states benefit from a world order in which interactions between states are based upon international law and not power. It levels the playing field. It holds all states accountable by the same rules.
This is also the reason why Singapore is a strong believer in referring disputes, which cannot be resolved by negotiations, to international modalities of dispute settlement, such as conciliation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication. Small states have a better chance of winning a dispute with a bigger state in a court of law than in a contest of strength.
Singapore's adherence to international law in its foreign policy has served Singapore well. This is true in our relations with our neighbours, such as Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. This is also true in our relations with the major powers.
Let me conclude. Singapore is a small state. Our leaders like to say that in the ocean of life, the big fish eat small fish and the small fish eat shrimp.
Singapore's first prime minister, Mr Lee, once described Singapore as a poisonous shrimp. I prefer to see Singapore as a small fish. It is, however, an extraordinary small fish. It has organised the small fish to band together for their mutual protection. It is a fast and agile swimmer and can out-swim many big fish. The world is, however, a dangerous place and small fish will always be vulnerable to the big predators of the ocean.
The writer, a former dean of the Law Faculty of the National University of Singapore, calls himself an "accidental diplomat". He was Singapore's Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in 1968, and a diplomat for over four decades. This is an excerpt of an article that will run in the March-April 2013 issue of Commentary, a publication of the NUS Society.
No comments:
Post a Comment