Singapore the Closer
Image courtesy of Mike Enerio on Unsplash
Amid rapidly escalating tensions between the United States and China, many countries around the world find themselves holding their breaths in anticipation of the course that these contentions will take. Amidst this uncertainty, Singapore, a small nation caught between both powers has emerged as a potential mediator of possible conflict. Citing Taiwan as the most probable reason for a possible military or geopolitical conflict, Singapore has offered its intellectual leadership and cited its involvement as being not only ideal but a necessity to maintaining peace in the Indo-Pacific–a bold assertion, and one that raises questions pertaining to its viability.
Given the fierce military competition between the United States and China, Singapore’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vivian Balakrishnan’s statement, “The key missing ingredient in this relationship, from the perspective of a dispassionate third country, is that there is a lack of strategic trust… the ultimate focal point for this is the Taiwan Straits, which is the reddest of red lines for Beijing.” holds merit. The reference to the strategic distrust between the United States is one, but information dominance is considered. United States Air Force Officer Craig Neuman stresses the importance of information dominance in determining the success of any conflict between the United States and China, and their respective commitments to attaining this dominance. He asserts that both nations continue to maintain a “belief in the power of speed, first strike and information advantage”. This understanding is particularly invaluable when evaluating how likely the prospect of nuclear war is. Regarding the use of nuclear weaponry, the Chinese government maintains a No First Use policy, which, while encouraging, is no doubt the source of much skepticism regarding the credibility of this claim. In-line with this skepticism, Neuman argues for the acute possibility that the Chinese government may violate this policy should the Taiwan issue escalate, such that nuclear weaponry may be used to “[shock] the United States into conflict termination”.
Given such a hand, Singapore’s potential as a mediator is certainly invaluable. However, it is simultaneously important to evaluate the extent of Singapore’s neutrality. Singaporean Minister of Home Affairs and Law K. Shanmugam asserts that, for Singapore, the concept of neutrality is “more viable than joining one side or other”, such that Singapore’s best strategy would be to “counsel responsible leadership”. However, despite the claim that it is a “dispassionate third country”, Singapore continues to depend on China as its premier trading partner, with its exports to China surpassing its exports to the United States. In fact, in 2021, Singapore exports to China amounted to US$67.69 Billion whereas its exports to the United States amounted to only US$39.28 Billion. It is important to note, however, that despite the significant gap in exports Singapore does harbor a strong desire to maintain its resplendent trading agreements with both the United States and China, as seen by Singapore Minister Gan Kim Yong’s claim that, “Singapore… has always wanted to do business with both.” This predilection is observed on a social level as well, as seen in a 2022 poll conducted by the Pew Research Center which reported that an overwhelming 67 percent of Singaporeans viewed China positively. This, coupled with Singapore’s evident geographic proximity to China, as compared to its proximity to the United States, lends credence to the question of whether–not simply in the event of mediation, but leading up to mediation–Singapore would truly remain impartial, or demonstrate a covert inclination toward Chinese interets.
Taking into account these arguments, while Singapore certainly presents a compelling case for mediation between the United States and China, given its apparent need for both, its propositioned neutrality cannot help but garner calls for greater scrutiny in awarding it such a consequential responsibility. It is therefore imperative to consider, in such an information-degraded environment, as Neuman puts it, how much information Singapore actually possesses and how it intends to make up for the incomplete information approaching mediation, and imperfect information post-mediation. How does Singapore intend to barter its agency in face of its limited structure? As such, Singapore’s pertinence should by no measure be understated, but neither should it be overstated. After all, there is only so much that Singapore can do, and ultimately, that it will do.
More From Our Writers
