新加坡会发生军人政变吗？ ?
http://zaobao.com/yl/yl061007_502.html
● 吴俊刚
By Goh Choon Kang
新加坡会发生军人政变吗？这样的问题，必定令人感到突兀。但内阁资政李光耀不久前所说的一番话，却可以让我们有很大的想象空间。
9月15日中午时分，李资政在莱佛士城举行的首届“莱佛士论坛”发言并同与会者对话。同在台上的美国前财政部长萨默斯提了一个问题，想知道李资政对40年后的新加坡的期望。我想这是个委婉的提法，真正的问题是，新加坡在后李光耀时代，会是个什么样子？
在回应时，李资政强调，他所希望的并不是保存人民行动党，而是延续所建立起来的体制，因为，这个体制是新加坡生存之所赖。
在谈到新加坡的民选总统制时，他指出，如果没有这个制度，一旦出现反常的选举结果，一个烂的政府上台，可能两三年内，军队就必须介入制止它(掠夺国家储备)。而一旦这样的事发生，民选政府的制度必然会被摧毁。
没人想到，三天之后，泰国就发生了军人政变。达信首相的民选政府一下子被推翻。真是无巧不成书，政变就好像是要为上述的谈话提供佐证。不过，相信大多数国人仍会觉得，新加坡发生军人政变是难以想象的事情。可是，让我们再想想，40年毕竟是很长的时间，谁说得准绝对不会发生？
政治动乱往往为军人发动政变提供了最好的借口，泰国是一个活生生的例子。日前，泰国驻新加坡大使特地写信给报馆，引述一项民调说，有84%的人支持这回的“政治变革”，很明显是要为政变辩护。然而，民主发展到必须由军人来“接管”，无论如何是一种倒退。政变至少也说明这个民主是不健全的，不牢固的，不可持续的。大多数的泰国人果真都支持政变，所凸显的事实只有一个：泰国民主并没有带来善政，在泰人心目中，达信政府也不是个贤能的政府。
因此，新加坡截至目前为止所享有的政治稳定和善政能否长久持续，如何持续，是个很值得我们思考的问题。过去四十几年来的政治持续稳定，说明我们做对了很多重要的事，我们目前的制度或模式也是行之有效的。因此，我们享有良好的政治(善政)，这表现在政府执政能力强、高度廉洁、法纪严明、经济繁荣、民生安定、社会和谐、公义伸张。
善政则是源自贤才依法治国，推行符合国家和人民利益的政策。在政治上，这是一种良性的循环，同泰国过去七十几年来的政治，形成强烈的对照。所以，要确保良好制度的持续，我们首先必须做的是设法维护唯贤和唯才的政治传统，保护廉洁不贪的政治生态。贪腐是政治之癌，也是民主的天敌，放眼世界各地，失败的民主，几乎都和贪腐脱离不了关系。
我们应该做的第二件事，是加强和完善各种制衡和防范机制，同时，使国人都服膺廉洁政治，使廉洁成为我们的一种生存方式，一种根深蒂固的公德。只有加强制度建设，加强公德的培养，我们才能确保后李时代不会“人亡政息”，可能出现的政党轮替、政权更迭，不会引起政治动荡和破坏政治稳定，更不会有军人政变发生。
・作者为《联合早报》评论员。
A military coup in S'pore?
A military coup in S'pore? Many will no doubt be taken aback by such a question. Recent comments by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, however, provide much room for imagination.
Last month, MM Lee spoke at the first Raffles Forum held at Raffles City and also fielded questions from the audience.
Former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who shared the stage with MM Lee, also had a question - he wanted to know what MM Lee hoped Singapore would be 40 years from now.
Prof Summers was being tactful. I think the real question he had in mind was: What would Singapore be like in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era?
In response, MM Lee stressed that his hope is not to preserve PAP but the system which has been built up over the years and which works as Singapore's survival depends on it.
MM Lee also spoke on the Elected Presidency. He said that without it, two to three years after a rogue government comes to power due to a freak election result, the army would have to come in to stop it from plundering the country's reserves. And once this happens, the system of elected government would be destroyed.
By coincidence and as if to give credence to MM Lee's comments, three days after the September 15 forum, Thailand's military staged a coup to overthrow the government of prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
It is hard for most Singaporeans to imagine a coup in Singapore. Then again, 40 years is a long time; no one can say for sure that it will not happen.
Political turmoil often offers the best excuse for the military to launch a coup. What happened in Thailand is a good example.
Apparently to justify the coup, in a recent letter to the press, Thailand's Ambassador to Singapore quoted a survey which showed that 84 per cent of Thais supported this round of "political change".
Nevertheless, the development is undeniably a regression when the military has to "take over" from an elected government.
At the very least, the coup suggests that the country's democratic system is unsound and unsustainable.
Even if it is true that most Thais supported the coup, it merely highlights the fact that Thailand's democratic system has not brought about good governance. And that in the eyes of most Thais, the Thaksin government was not a virtuous and able one either.
This is why it is important that we ask ourselves whether the political stability and good governance that we have enjoyed so far can be sustained and what we can do to sustain them.
Over four decades of political stability is proof that we have done many important things right and our system or model is an effective one.
Hence the good governance that we enjoy which is evident in our able and clean government, a prosperous economy, law and order and a harmonious as well as fair and just society.
Good governance is a result of having the right people to govern according to law and to implement policies that will benefit the country and people.
Politically, ours is a virtuous circle that is in stark contrast to political developments in Thailand in the last 70 over years.
To preserve the good system we have, we must, first and foremost, uphold our tradition of meritocracy and safeguard our incorruptible political environment.
Graft, like "cancer", is the natural enemy of democracy. A look at failed democratic systems around the world will show us that corruption is often a root cause.
Next, we must strengthen mechanisms of checks and balances and prevention. We must also subscribe to the idea of clean politics and make it a way of living and a deeply entrenched moral value.
Only through promoting public morality and consolidating our system can we ensure that it is preserved in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era and that in the event that an alternative party comes to power, there will be no political unrest and instability, let alone a military coup.
The writer is a leader writer of Lianhe Zaobao. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.
http://zaobao.com/yl/yl061007_502.html
● 吴俊刚
By Goh Choon Kang
新加坡会发生军人政变吗？这样的问题，必定令人感到突兀。但内阁资政李光耀不久前所说的一番话，却可以让我们有很大的想象空间。
9月15日中午时分，李资政在莱佛士城举行的首届“莱佛士论坛”发言并同与会者对话。同在台上的美国前财政部长萨默斯提了一个问题，想知道李资政对40年后的新加坡的期望。我想这是个委婉的提法，真正的问题是，新加坡在后李光耀时代，会是个什么样子？
在回应时，李资政强调，他所希望的并不是保存人民行动党，而是延续所建立起来的体制，因为，这个体制是新加坡生存之所赖。
在谈到新加坡的民选总统制时，他指出，如果没有这个制度，一旦出现反常的选举结果，一个烂的政府上台，可能两三年内，军队就必须介入制止它(掠夺国家储备)。而一旦这样的事发生，民选政府的制度必然会被摧毁。
没人想到，三天之后，泰国就发生了军人政变。达信首相的民选政府一下子被推翻。真是无巧不成书，政变就好像是要为上述的谈话提供佐证。不过，相信大多数国人仍会觉得，新加坡发生军人政变是难以想象的事情。可是，让我们再想想，40年毕竟是很长的时间，谁说得准绝对不会发生？
政治动乱往往为军人发动政变提供了最好的借口，泰国是一个活生生的例子。日前，泰国驻新加坡大使特地写信给报馆，引述一项民调说，有84%的人支持这回的“政治变革”，很明显是要为政变辩护。然而，民主发展到必须由军人来“接管”，无论如何是一种倒退。政变至少也说明这个民主是不健全的，不牢固的，不可持续的。大多数的泰国人果真都支持政变，所凸显的事实只有一个：泰国民主并没有带来善政，在泰人心目中，达信政府也不是个贤能的政府。
因此，新加坡截至目前为止所享有的政治稳定和善政能否长久持续，如何持续，是个很值得我们思考的问题。过去四十几年来的政治持续稳定，说明我们做对了很多重要的事，我们目前的制度或模式也是行之有效的。因此，我们享有良好的政治(善政)，这表现在政府执政能力强、高度廉洁、法纪严明、经济繁荣、民生安定、社会和谐、公义伸张。
善政则是源自贤才依法治国，推行符合国家和人民利益的政策。在政治上，这是一种良性的循环，同泰国过去七十几年来的政治，形成强烈的对照。所以，要确保良好制度的持续，我们首先必须做的是设法维护唯贤和唯才的政治传统，保护廉洁不贪的政治生态。贪腐是政治之癌，也是民主的天敌，放眼世界各地，失败的民主，几乎都和贪腐脱离不了关系。
我们应该做的第二件事，是加强和完善各种制衡和防范机制，同时，使国人都服膺廉洁政治，使廉洁成为我们的一种生存方式，一种根深蒂固的公德。只有加强制度建设，加强公德的培养，我们才能确保后李时代不会“人亡政息”，可能出现的政党轮替、政权更迭，不会引起政治动荡和破坏政治稳定，更不会有军人政变发生。
・作者为《联合早报》评论员。
A military coup in S'pore?
A military coup in S'pore? Many will no doubt be taken aback by such a question. Recent comments by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, however, provide much room for imagination.
Last month, MM Lee spoke at the first Raffles Forum held at Raffles City and also fielded questions from the audience.
Former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who shared the stage with MM Lee, also had a question - he wanted to know what MM Lee hoped Singapore would be 40 years from now.
Prof Summers was being tactful. I think the real question he had in mind was: What would Singapore be like in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era?
In response, MM Lee stressed that his hope is not to preserve PAP but the system which has been built up over the years and which works as Singapore's survival depends on it.
MM Lee also spoke on the Elected Presidency. He said that without it, two to three years after a rogue government comes to power due to a freak election result, the army would have to come in to stop it from plundering the country's reserves. And once this happens, the system of elected government would be destroyed.
By coincidence and as if to give credence to MM Lee's comments, three days after the September 15 forum, Thailand's military staged a coup to overthrow the government of prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
It is hard for most Singaporeans to imagine a coup in Singapore. Then again, 40 years is a long time; no one can say for sure that it will not happen.
Political turmoil often offers the best excuse for the military to launch a coup. What happened in Thailand is a good example.
Apparently to justify the coup, in a recent letter to the press, Thailand's Ambassador to Singapore quoted a survey which showed that 84 per cent of Thais supported this round of "political change".
Nevertheless, the development is undeniably a regression when the military has to "take over" from an elected government.
At the very least, the coup suggests that the country's democratic system is unsound and unsustainable.
Even if it is true that most Thais supported the coup, it merely highlights the fact that Thailand's democratic system has not brought about good governance. And that in the eyes of most Thais, the Thaksin government was not a virtuous and able one either.
This is why it is important that we ask ourselves whether the political stability and good governance that we have enjoyed so far can be sustained and what we can do to sustain them.
Over four decades of political stability is proof that we have done many important things right and our system or model is an effective one.
Hence the good governance that we enjoy which is evident in our able and clean government, a prosperous economy, law and order and a harmonious as well as fair and just society.
Good governance is a result of having the right people to govern according to law and to implement policies that will benefit the country and people.
Politically, ours is a virtuous circle that is in stark contrast to political developments in Thailand in the last 70 over years.
To preserve the good system we have, we must, first and foremost, uphold our tradition of meritocracy and safeguard our incorruptible political environment.
Graft, like "cancer", is the natural enemy of democracy. A look at failed democratic systems around the world will show us that corruption is often a root cause.
Next, we must strengthen mechanisms of checks and balances and prevention. We must also subscribe to the idea of clean politics and make it a way of living and a deeply entrenched moral value.
Only through promoting public morality and consolidating our system can we ensure that it is preserved in the post-Lee Kuan Yew era and that in the event that an alternative party comes to power, there will be no political unrest and instability, let alone a military coup.
The writer is a leader writer of Lianhe Zaobao. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.
