Pages

InfoLinks

PM Lee Hsien Loong at the 74th Session of the United Nations General Assembly

National Statement by PM Lee Hsien Loong at the 74th Session of the United Nations General Assembly on 27 September 2019

Leaders have a duty to youth to act on climate change: PM Lee
It is about their futures during their lifetimes, he tells world leaders at UN General Assembly
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Straits Times, 28 Sep 2019

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has called on world leaders to act on climate change, saying that they owe young people a responsibility to do so.

It is an issue the young are seized with, "and rightfully so, because it is about their futures during their lifetimes", he said in a speech yesterday at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

PM Lee was among several leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta, who have highlighted the issue this week as leaders from 193 countries gathered here to discuss important global challenges.

It was PM Lee's first address at the UN General Assembly since becoming prime minister in 2004.

And in presenting Singapore's national statement to the UN, he also dwelt on multilateralism and championing the rules-based international system, which he said was essential for dealing with "wicked" problems, such as climate change and eradicating poverty.

These problems cannot be solved by a single country alone, he said, calling on the UN members to support the multilateral approach and "push harder against the tide" of isolationist and protectionist sentiments.

"A rules-based multilateral system is still far preferable to any other way to secure peace and prosperity, and to solve global problems," he said.

One such challenge is climate change. PM Lee acknowledged the hundreds of thousands of young people who demonstrated peacefully all over the world last week, including in Singapore at Hong Lim Park, to demand action from governments to slow the warming of the earth and the rising of the seas.

"We owe them a responsibility to act, and they deserve our full support," he said. "It is the responsibility of our generation to leave future generations with a habitable planet, both through mitigation and adaptation."

In Singapore, where climate change is an existential issue, significant measures have been rolled out to reduce emissions, he noted.



PM Lee had outlined them on Monday at the UN Climate Action Summit. These range from a carbon tax, the first in South-east Asia, to working with the UN to offer technical assistance to other countries.

Singapore will also collaborate with partners to better understand climate change and its impact through research and institutions such as the Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre. The centre, set up in 1993, is headquartered in Singapore.

Using a variety of data sources including satellite imagery and computer models, it supports national meteorological centres in the region in predicting weather and the climate as well as to monitor and assess land and forest fires, plus the occurrence of transboundary smoke haze for South-east Asia.

But most importantly, he said, "we have to inculcate in our populations the mindset that each one of us has a responsibility to live sustainably and in harmony with the environment".

While Singapore will do its part to limit global warming to 1.5 deg C above pre-industrial levels, the key threshold for avoiding catastrophic climate change, it is under no illusion that the target will be easy to achieve, he added.

"Even if we do make it, the problem will not be completely solved, because that will only slow down the rise in sea levels, but will not stop it. But we must try our best, and over time, all countries will have to do more to mitigate climate change," PM Lee said.













Multilateralism not an option but a necessity: PM Lee
Nations need to work together on complex problems like climate change
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Straits Times, 28 Sep 2019

The strategic balance of the world is shifting and countries are now less keen on globalisation and multilateralism, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said yesterday at a gathering of world leaders in New York.

Yet, this rules-based order and cooperative approach is not an option but a necessity, he told the United Nations General Assembly.

PM Lee called on his fellow leaders to push harder against the tide of isolationism and adapt multilateralism for today's world, given the necessity of working together to deal with complex global problems like climate change.

For small countries especially, multilateral institutions, systems and laws are critical because they impose responsibilities on all countries and create a stable environment for all, he said.

But the tide is turning against multilateralism.

Nationalist, isolationist and protectionist sentiments have intensified in many countries, giving rise to inward-looking policies, he said.

"More countries are keen to enhance their international roles and are competing fiercely for influence. At the same time, the global consensus on the benefits of globalisation has eroded and support for multilateralism has declined."

The Prime Minister traced how developed countries progressed in the last 70 years because they opened up their markets and benefited from access to other new markets for their industrial products, such as aircraft and machine tools.

Many developing countries in Africa and Latin America are making the same journey now, but at a time when there is a strong pushback against an open, integrated global economy, he noted.

"If global markets become less open, and conditions for trade and investment become more uncertain and disorderly, their progress will become much harder," he said, adding that it was very difficult for any country to develop and progress on its own.



PM Lee acknowledged that there were serious weaknesses in post-war multilateral institutions, citing the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The WTO has found it increasingly difficult to reach meaningful trade agreements because any deal requires full consensus among its 164 member countries, which have hugely diverse interests and philosophies, he said.

"But the solution should be to reform these institutions, rather than to bypass or dispense with them," said the Prime Minister.

Meanwhile, in the absence of reform, countries have started drawing up new regional mechanisms and frameworks for cooperation.

He gave such examples as the Asean-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a reworked version of the mega trade deal that the United States quit in 2017.

"These regional or plurilateral arrangements may be second best to multilateral ones, but in an imperfect world, they address real needs and help us progress step by step."

The key is to keep these arrangements open and inclusive, for other countries to join when they are ready, he said.



PM Lee also referred to concerns that the US and Chinese economies, locked in a protracted trade war, were heading down a path of decoupling into separate supply chains and economic blocs, forcing the global economy into two camps.

"We need to avoid creating rival economic blocs," he said, and forcing countries to choose sides.

PM Lee's message echoed that of several others, including German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, who said that only by working together would countries have a future.

French President Emmanuel Macron also called for a stronger, more pragmatic multilateralism, saying there were no solutions without cooperation.

"The crises we are experiencing are not resolved by nationalist withdrawal," said Mr Macron.

But their sentiments stood at stark odds with that of US President Donald Trump, who said on Tuesday that leaders should look inwards and put their own countries first.

"The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots," Mr Trump said.
















Singaporeans have to be prepared for rough weather ahead: PM Lee Hsien Loong
US-China trade tensions likely to persist, but Singapore ready to deal with challenges, he says
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Sunday Times, 29 Sep 2019

Singaporeans have to be prepared for rough weather ahead for some time to come, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, warning that there was no quick resolution to ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China.

Fresh from a week of meetings with world leaders in New York, where he led Singapore's delegation to the United Nations, PM Lee gave this sobering assessment in an interview with Singapore media on Friday.

Neither the US nor China expects a quick breakthrough in the trade war and this uncertainty is dampening investment, business confidence and consumer spending throughout the world, he said.

"It's one of the factors why our GDP growth this year is lower. We still hope for something positive but (it) will likely be less than 1 per cent," he said. Last month, the official growth forecast for Singapore was cut to between zero growth and 1 per cent for this year.

Singapore's economy grew 0.6 per cent in the first half of this year.

The next 10 years will be more complicated than the last, he said. "They are not temporary issues which can blow away. You sign a document, a US-China trade agreement, and then that's the end of the matter. These are very deep conflicts of interest," he said.



The same was true of action to mitigate climate change. "There is no magic, no 100 per cent safety net. You press this button, you sign this paper and you are safe for 100 years. There is no such solution."

Singaporeans must also be mindful of the trends and problems happening around them to better understand their own situation, said PM Lee, such as, for instance, the impeachment proceedings against US President Donald Trump, which would have an impact on Singapore.

But compared with the other countries in the world, Singapore is better prepared to deal with the challenges ahead, he said.

"We are more united, we are more cohesive, we have more resources, we're better able to train our people and to deliver results and be competitive," he said.

Singapore's leaders must also address practical issues which people are concerned about, working together with them to find solutions so that "people can see that 'I do have a path forward'", he added.

"If we don't tackle the problem and we just explain that it's rough weather, I think that will not cut a lot of ice with Singaporeans. But if we do the best with our own problems in Singapore, people can see things are getting better," he said.

For instance, income inequality in Singapore has "probably improved" in the last 10 years if government measures such as the Workfare Income Supplement for older low-wage workers, MediShield Life and the upcoming CareShield Life disability insurance scheme are taken into account.

PM Lee noted that people are also anxious over the cost of living "because there are things which they feel they need, which are not quite within reach". Singapore tackles these concerns by making sure that good public transport, healthcare and housing are available and affordable, he added.

At a reception attended by 350 Singaporeans in New York on Friday evening, he said the Government's job of providing for these needs had been "not bad".

"If you try to buy a flat in Manhattan, you'll know that housing prices in Singapore are quite reasonable," he said, to laughter.

"How do we cope with all these uncertainties in the world? The answer is to stay together and deal with them as one," he added, noting it was how Singapore had made it thus far. "What now looks like an escalator for 50-something years was not an escalator; it was a very tough climb. So if you look ahead and think it looks tough, just remember, you got here... so I think we can keep on working and we will get there."

While in New York, PM Lee met Mr Trump and signed a memorandum of understanding allowing American forces to use Singapore's air and naval bases for another 15 years, until 2035.

He also spoke on climate change at the UN, and hosted a reception for leaders of the Forum of Small States, a grouping Singapore initiated and which it works with closely.

PM Lee left New York on Friday evening for Armenia, where he will make the first official visit to the Eurasian country by a Singapore prime minister.





























4G leaders ready for general election: PM Lee Hsien Loong
He says they are familiar with the problems, having been in politics for some time
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Sunday Times, 29 Sep 2019

The People's Action Party's (PAP) fourth-generation political leaders are ready for the upcoming general election and are preparing for the challenges facing Singapore, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Friday.

"We are ready at any time," he said when asked whether the party leadership was primed for the election, which must be held by April 2021.



Earlier this month, the Elections Department said the committee reviewing Singapore's electoral boundaries had been convened, the first formality on the road to the general election.

PM Lee, who is the PAP's secretary-general, was speaking to Singapore reporters after his speech at the United Nations General Assembly.

In the interview, he said Singapore was up for some rough weather ahead and that leaders had to deal with practical problems such as ensuring housing and healthcare affordability.

Singaporeans, he added, must stay together to pull through.

The fourth-generation leaders are familiar with the issues, having been in politics for some time, said PM Lee.

"Before that, many of them have been in the public service for some time. So they are familiar with the problems."



However, there was no amount of preparation that could make anybody 100 per cent ready until they were actually in the hot seat, in charge and making decisions, he added.

"One great advantage they have is that we will all work together to support them and to make sure that they succeed, whether they are old or whether they are young. We want them to succeed. They are the Singapore team," said PM Lee.

"It's not just the team of leaders but really the team of younger ministers as well as these younger Singaporeans whom they've got to form a bond with, and mutual confidence."

He added: "And if we can work together, then we can see through the rough weather ahead... Therefore, let us all get together and support the Singapore team, wear the same badge and we pull in the same direction. We are better off than nearly any other country in the world."











Government on the side of youth concerned about climate change: PM Lee Hsien Loong
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent, The Sunday Times, 29 Sep 2019

Singapore's Government is on the side of young people concerned about climate change, a problem that will have major consequences for billions of people if not slowed down, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on Friday.

"We are on their side, because this is something that is going to happen in their lives and is going to affect them," he told Singapore reporters in an interview at the end of his week-long work trip to New York.

"It is very much something on young people's minds - this demonstration of young people around the world. And even in Singapore, there was quite a big group at Hong Lim Park, and Desmond Lee (Minister for Social and Family Development) went down and chatted with them," he added.

Adapting to and mitigating climate change was a major theme of the Prime Minister's visit, during which he headed Singapore's delegation to the United Nations General Assembly and gave a speech on Singapore's strategy on climate change at the UN Climate Action Summit.



"Today, Singapore is already palpably warmer than what Singapore was 30 to 40 years ago," he said.

Research by the Meteorological Service Singapore earlier this year showed that January, traditionally Singapore's coolest month, is now warmer than a typical July of the 1970s.

"In other words, our coolest months now are hotter than our warmest months 40 years ago, about half my lifetime," said PM Lee.

"But half a lifetime from now, if global warming is not slowed down, the difference will be even sharper and the consequences will be even greater for us," he added.

The whole ecosystem would be drastically changed with implications for disease, water sustainability, food and drought, worsened by the speed of the change, he said.

"If it happens over 300, 400, 500 years, then human society has time to change, and gradually adapt to it... But if it happens within one lifetime, affecting seven to eight billion people, it is not so easy. And therefore we have to work."

Apart from reducing its carbon emissions, Singapore must also encourage others in the global community to work at mitigation and to collectively reduce the impact of human activity on the ecosystem, he added.

PM Lee said it was a pity that the US withdrew from the 2015 Paris Agreement, which aims to reduce global emissions and curb global warming to 1.5 deg C above pre-industrial levels, noting that the participation of the world's largest economy in this effort is important.

But there are other strands of opinion in the US apart from the Trump administration's, the Prime Minister noted, pointing to specific states with their own climate action plans.

He did not elaborate, but California, for instance, has set stricter standards on greenhouse gas emissions from cars even though President Donald Trump is on a drive to roll back federal regulations on emissions.

Said PM Lee: "Quite many of them have aggressive climate plans on emissions reduction, as well as some adaptation (to climate change). And I think they will have some influence on the world. It's not as effective as the United States wholeheartedly participating, but it's not insignificant."
















PM Lee Hsien Loong at the Forum of Small States (FOSS) Reception on 25 September 2019

PM Lee urges small nations to team up to amplify their influence
He makes case for closer cooperation to leaders and ministers from about 40 countries
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2019

If small states do not manage their external relations carefully, their freedom to determine their own destinies could be severely restricted even if they remain sovereign or independent in name, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Such realities are the reason small states must work together to advance their common interests and amplify their influence in the world, PM Lee said on Wednesday at a reception for leaders of small states at Singapore's Permanent Mission to the United Nations.

The countries represented are part of the Forum of Small States (FOSS), an informal grouping started by Singapore almost 30 years ago to make common cause together. From an initial headcount of 16 states, the club has grown to 107 members, well over half the membership of the United Nations.

PM Lee, who is in New York until today for the UN General Assembly and other meetings, made the case for closer cooperation between small states to the leaders and ministers from around 40 countries.



The club has grown over the years, he said, because the fundamental realities and vulnerabilities of small states have not changed.

"Our economies are smaller and more exposed to fluctuations in the global economy. More importantly, our margin of error is much narrower than for big states, which can absorb multiple hits," he added.

"If there is a war, we lack the strategic depth to defend ourselves. If we suffer an extreme weather event, we can take years to rebuild and recover."

For instance, rising sea levels threaten the very existence of island states, said PM Lee.

He cited Hurricane Dorian - which devastated Bahamas earlier this month, killing over 50 people and leaving 1,500 missing - as a grim reminder of this vulnerability.

Few small states have also survived long in history. "Unlike larger and more powerful countries, we do not set the agenda or decide the mega-trends. If Singapore disappears tomorrow, the world will continue on probably just fine," he said.

However, small states also have their own advantages that they can seize on. For one thing, they can respond more nimbly and adapt more easily to changing circumstances, said PM Lee. "Our sense of insecurity and even paranoia are also constructive as they motivate us to deal more decisively with challenges and threats," he said.

They are also less hampered by regional interests and differences, or multiple levels of government, that bigger countries must grapple with.

But small states must work together to have more influence in the world and advance their shared interests, he said, pointing to this as the reason for their strong commitment to the UN.

"Small states can and must make a contribution to the work of the UN because it is in our interest to have a strong UN and a sound and stable multilateral system," he said.

FOSS members chair five of the six main committees of the General Assembly this year, he noted. Many small states have also served on the UN Security Council or hope to do so. "We look forward to working with all of you fellow small states to speak with a louder voice, to continue to advocate for a rules-based system, and to find enduring solutions for the challenges that affect all of us," said PM Lee.



Professor Tijjani Muhammad-Bande of Nigeria, who is this year's President of the UN General Assembly, said in a speech that small states were a source of stability for the international system. "When we look at current geopolitical calculations, the voice of calm really comes from smaller states," he said.

The reception featured food and drink from Singapore, including pineapple tarts, satay and even Tiger beer, and nations present included island states like Barbados and Vanuatu, as well as Gambia, Moldova and Norway. All have populations of under 10 million.

Earlier in the day, PM Lee met Barbados Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley and exchanged views on the warm relations between their countries, said the Prime Minister's Office. They discussed issues of common interest, such as education and civil service training, and reaffirmed their commitment to working together as small island states to address climate change.










Smaller states urge support for rules-based global order
30-member Global Governance Group warns against rise of protectionism, trade conflicts
By Charissa Yong, US Correspondent In New York, The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2019

An informal group of 30 smaller states has spoken out against the rise of protectionism and trade conflicts at an annual meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, stressing that an open, predictable, rules-based international order remains important for continued growth, peace and prosperity.

This international order includes the multilateral trading system as embodied by the World Trade Organisation, said the Global Governance Group (3G) in a statement on Wednesday.

The group added that it was important for multilateral forums to be inclusive when seeking to set global standards, and for international organisations to have universal membership.

The 3G was formed in 2009 to influence the Group of 20 (G-20) countries to take into account the interests of smaller countries affected by its decisions, and is regularly represented at its summits.

Its members include Singapore, the group's convenor, as well as Kuwait, Peru and Rwanda.

The coalition held its 12th ministerial meeting in New York on Wednesday, inviting the previous, present and incoming presidents of the G-20 - Argentina, Japan and Saudi Arabia - to discuss the key challenges facing the international community and efforts to address these issues.

During the meeting, Japan - the current G-20 president - briefed the 3G's ministers on the outcome of the June G-20 summit in Osaka, the statement read.

The ministers welcomed the G-20's commitment to pursuing strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive growth, and to significantly reduce marine plastic litter pollution, the statement added.

It added that the 3G ministers also applauded the G-20's resolve to address inequalities, and welcomed its commitment to moving towards achieving sustainable universal health coverage.

The ministers also looked forward to continuing to work with the G-20 under Saudi Arabia's presidency next year, and welcomed its early efforts to reach out to a broad range of countries and groups, including those who were not members of the G-20.

"They encouraged Saudi Arabia to continue the G-20's strong commitment to engage the 3G, as well as other regional and international organisations, in particular the United Nations," according to the statement.




Heng Swee Keat on the Singapore economy: CNA938 interview

No need for extraordinary budget at this stage: Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat on Singapore economy
By Tang See Lit, ChannelNewsAsia, 27 Sep 2019

While there are various scenarios in which the Government is ready to step in to support the economy, it does not see the need for an “extraordinary budget" at this stage, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said on Friday (Sep 27).

Nevertheless, the Government is closely monitoring how the economy will pan out by the end of the year, and is prepared to take action when necessary, he said during an interview with CNA938.



Mr Heng, who is also Finance Minister, was responding to a question about the state of the Singapore economy and the measures that the Government has in place should it decide to step in.

Currently, while there are increasing downside risks to growth, some sectors have continued to do well.

These include the information and communications technology, financial services and insurance services sectors. Even within the electronics sector, some segments like data storage have also seen growth, Mr Heng said.

“But how the whole economy will pan out by the end of the year is something we are watching very closely and are prepared to take action when needed,” he added.

This as Singapore remains part of the global economy and is “very dependent” on trade and external demand.

“This trade tension is not helping. In fact the International Monetary Fund has cut global forecasts several times, which is quite unprecedented. It’s (a) much more uncertain state today,” he said.

Mr Heng pointed to monetary and fiscal policies that the Government can turn to when it comes to counter-cyclical measures.



For the former, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) is “weighing very carefully as to what is the appropriate exchange rate and they will be announcing this as part of the regular monetary cycle”.

In terms of fiscal policy, Mr Heng said: “Depending on the state of the economy, we have various scenarios in which we are ready to step in when the time comes. I do not foresee a need for an extraordinary budget at this stage.” 

But more importantly, these will have to go alongside structural policies given how the global economy is seeing a combination of cyclical and structural changes. 

“Many other economies also want to do better and therefore they are making changes and reforming their economy. When our trading partners make changes, we too must upgrade otherwise we will be left behind.

“So we have a whole range of important structural policies and in particular, helping our workers learn new skills and working together with companies to restructure jobs so our workers can do better,” he said.



ON 4G LEADERSHIP, ELECTIONS

During the nearly hour-long interview on Friday morning, Mr Heng was asked about a range of issues, including living costs in Singapore with an impending hike in the Goods and Services Tax, his journey in politics thus far as well as his leadership style.

I think we already have a very good team,” he said in response to a question from CNA938’s Arnold Gay on the qualities that he is looking out for as he forms the fourth-generation leadership team.

“Many of us have been working together when I entered politics in 2011 but at the same time, I am hoping for more to join us,” added Mr Heng, citing commitment to Singapore as a criteria and his hopes to assemble “a diverse group with experience”.

When asked how the next Cabinet reshuffle could play out given this vision that he has, Mr Heng said he and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong “have been discussing some of these issues quite regularly”.

Mr Lee has also been “sharing quite a lot of his views” with him.

“We are in discussions and when the time comes, he will announce it. But it’s progressing well and I am happy with the progress that we're making,” said Mr Heng.



As to when the next General Election might take place, Mr Heng would only say that “it’s coming nearer each day” before going on to stress the need for “constructive politics” in Singapore.

“I think the most important issue to address is: What are the issues that Singaporeans like to see tackled in the coming years? What is our strategy for taking Singapore forward?

“It is easy for anyone to say you’re not doing enough on this (and) that but I think what we need is constructive politics in Singapore, which is that I offer this vision of where Singapore is going to go and Singaporeans decide first and foremost do I like that? Second, are you able to get it done? It’s not making empty promises,” he added.

Mr Heng also touched on Singapore’s long-standing identity as a multi-racial and multi-religious society.

“The pledge that our children take every day – regardless of race, language or religion – it’s a very important aspect of our society. Let’s keep it,” he said.

However, this is “always a work in progress” as misunderstandings can happen very easily.

“First and foremost, misunderstandings can happen even between the closest people – a husband and a wife – but when it takes on racial religious dimension, it can be dangerous," he said.

"So it is important for our leaders to promote deeper understanding and appreciation of diversity, and value of that diversity.”



On new areas such as LGBTQ and green activism, and how the Government is thinking of uniting these different views, Mr Heng said many societies around the world are seeing increasing polarisation when single issues dominate the national discussion.

This is “a very dangerous trend and it can be a fault line”, he said, noting that Singapore must “work doubly hard” to make sure these do not become fault lines.

“Depending on the issues at hand, the key is to come together and say what we can agree on and what we cannot agree on,” he said.

With that, there has to be a much stronger emphasis on partnership moving forward, said Mr Heng.

“By looking at what we all have in common, what we want to pursue, we can help each other realise our aspirations better. Working together is always better than working alone.

“In that way, I think the Singapore society can continue to make progress in the years ahead.”

After his interview, Mr Heng unveiled a plaque to mark the launch of CNA938.



























Singapore needs laws to tackle foreign interference in domestic matters: Law Minister K. Shanmugam

Such interference is an age-old affair, but the Internet has revolutionised this, he says at RSIS Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures
By Adrian Lim, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Sep 2019

Singapore needs laws to counter any foreign attempts to influence its domestic politics and public opinion, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

Pointing out that foreign powers have all along sought to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries, Mr Shanmugam said the Internet has revolutionised this process.

Such interference can be even more deadly than military force in undermining a country's politics and stability, and every state has the right to protect its national security, he said.

In Singapore's case, its laws should give the Government powers to tackle foreign interference attempts through targeted, surgical interventions, and to investigate and respond expeditiously to hostile information campaigns.

It must also have the power to get information in order to investigate the provenance of content, to see the extent to which it is foreign influenced and respond appropriately, he added.

Such legislation needs to be able to deal with a diverse range of threats, such as the flow of funds, and interference during and outside election periods, Mr Shanmugam stressed.



When it comes to addressing hostile information campaigns online, it cannot be left to technology companies to regulate themselves, he told a conference on foreign interference tactics and countermeasures organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

"We may also need to consider how we restrict foreign participation in the leadership of specific organisations... that are closely involved in our political landscape," he said. "This is similar to our position on foreign participation in cause-based public assemblies and processions."

In his 45-minute speech, Mr Shanmugam outlined examples of how foreign interference has taken place at home and globally, including in the 2016 United States election.

He also spelled out the various methods which foreign interference can take, such as the use of diplomatic channels to subvert and interfere with other states.

The media can also be used, such as via secret funding and control of the publications, and in other cases, having agents use the cover of journalists themselves.

States have also been known to target cause-based movements in other places, mobilising activists in order to advance foreign countries' interests, said Mr Shanmugam.

He noted that foreign interference has been turbo-charged because of the Internet and the almost limitless possibilities it has opened up.

Hostile information campaigns can identify the "protest potential" of any population of the target country, he said. The campaigns seek to create protests which deepen divisions among different groups, and get people to distrust institutions.

But it is the combination of online hostile information campaigns, and offline activities, such as foreign-controlled media and agents of influence, that is extremely toxic and powerful, said Mr Shanmugam.

He cited the example of how this took place in Ukraine, where a foreign country built a narrative that the government was fascist and corrupt. He also cited how online campaigning and falsehoods during the vote on Brexit played on people's anti-Muslim and xenophobic sentiments.

"All that hasn't happened in its full glory in Singapore. But it can happen. Some of it has happened," he said.



The minister said there are attempts to combine the different approaches of foreign interference, and outlined how a group of local activists met Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad last year to urge him to bring democracy to Singapore. Two of them - historian Thum Ping Tjin and freelance journalist Kirsten Han - also started New Naratif, which is funded by a foreign foundation and has received foreign contributions.

He also noted that The Online Citizen website has employed foreigners to write almost exclusively negative articles on Singapore matters, including inflammatory pieces that seek to fracture social cohesion.

"Foreign interference is an age-old threat which has adapted to modern technology," he said. "This is an issue of sovereignty and national security. The governments have to lead from the front, and we need to ensure that we have the right tools to fight this threat".










Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures

The Online Citizen hired foreigners to pen negative articles, says Shanmugam
These include inflammatory content seeking to fracture social cohesion in Singapore: Minister
By Linette Lai, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Sep 2019

The Online Citizen (TOC) website has employed foreigners, including Malaysians, to write almost exclusively negative articles on social and political matters in Singapore, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

These include inflammatory articles that seek to fracture social cohesion, he said in a speech on foreign interference in domestic politics and the need for governments to take measures to counter the threat.

The minister highlighted two articles which he said were written by a Malaysian woman named Rubaashini Shunmuganathan who, based on publicly available information, is living in Shah Alam, near Kuala Lumpur.

The first article called for Singaporean civil servants to follow the example of their Hong Kong counterparts in protesting.

The second made allegations about Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and this has led to a civil suit by PM Lee, who says they are false attacks against his character and fitness to hold office.

Of this article, Mr Shanmugam said: "I am not commenting on the legal merits of the article since it is the subject of a lawsuit, only that a foreigner, staying in Malaysia, writes these things for a Singapore site to target a Singapore audience."

He added: "Who controls her? Who pays her? What is her purpose? All these are legitimate questions. Most readers would just assume this was by a genuine Singaporean contributor."



He said that only five of The Online Citizen's 14 administrators are said to be based in Singapore. "Nine are outside - four are in Malaysia, two are in Indonesia. We don't know who they are. Are they Singaporeans? Are they foreigners?"

The minister was speaking at the opening of a one-day Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures held at Parkroyal on Beach Road hotel. It was organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

Mr Shanmugam also spoke of how a group of local activists, including historian Thum Ping Tjin and freelance journalist Kirsten Han, had met Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad last year and urged him to bring democracy to Singapore, among other countries.

In a Facebook post after the meeting, Dr Thum said he had urged Tun Dr Mahathir to "take leadership in South-east Asia for the promotion of democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and freedom of information".

Dr Thum and Ms Han also set up an organisation, New Naratif, which was funded by a foreign foundation and received other foreign contributions as well, said Mr Shanmugam.

Ms Han has also said Singapore has failed compared with Hong Kong because people do not go on the streets to march, "and she wants to change that, through classes run by New Naratif", he added.

"Everyone is entitled to their views, however reasonable or unreasonable. But my primary point is: Is it right for foreign funding to be received in order to advance these viewpoints?" the minister said.



He noted that there are responsible media organisations - both Singaporean and foreign - which employ foreigners. The assumption is that the media will have some ethics, but this can of course be exploited, he said. "But they are subject to a framework, foreign as well as Singaporean," he said. "In every country, there is a framework for how the media behaves."

But some online news sites tap anonymous contributors, leaving them open to being used as tools by foreign interests to publish inflammatory articles that attack and deepen divisions in a country.

"They have no interest in sociopolitical stability in a country," he said. "Their only interest is to get eyeballs."

TOC website's chief editor Terry Xu, responding to the minister's speech yesterday, said all articles are directed, and subsequently approved, by him.

"Nothing goes unvetted by me," he said in an article posted on TOC's Facebook page.

He added that there is no law against hiring foreigners, and the website has not received any foreign funding.

"If one is to observe the series of Facebook posts and now, the Law Minister's comments, one can easily come to a conclusion that there is a collaborated campaign to discredit TOC."

Mr Shanmugam also spoke on the need for countries to regulate the online space, noting that some technology companies have called for self-regulation. "Can tech companies be left to self-regulate, in the absence of legislation? I think the clear answer is no," he said.

"The most diplomatic way of saying it is that the responses have been varied so far to the challenges that have come out: From denying that there are problems, to taking some reasonably effective steps."

Part of the problem is that the business models of such companies militate against proper self-regulation. The more content and users such sites have, the more user attention they can sell to advertisers, he said.

"Removing fake users, removing fake accounts, investigating coordinated inauthentic behaviour - these are all costly," he said. "The tech companies are in a position of conflict, where their business interests often conflict with what needs to be done in the broader society's interests."

And whether it is in companies or in states, proper frameworks exist to deal with such conflicts of interest. The person or institution in a position of conflict does not get to decide what the response should be, he added.

"It cannot be different for tech companies. There is no difference in principle," Mr Shanmugam said.










TOC episode underlines need to be wary of sources of news reports

It was reported that the article published by The Online Citizen (TOC) website, that is the subject of a civil suit by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, was written by a Malaysian who, based on publicly available information, is residing in Malaysia (TOC hired foreigners to pen negative articles, says Shanmugam, Sept 26).

Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said it was written by a Malaysian woman named Rubaashini Shunmuganathan.

Reports on Facebook surfaced that the writer had adopted a pen name "Kiara Xavier" for her TOC articles.

These revelations raise a few questions.

First, the use of a pen name. From a layman's perspective, this appears to be a departure from the norms adopted by established and credible news outlets which avoid the use of pen names to ensure that writers are held accountable for what they write.



In the light of the suit against TOC, would the writer of the report be liable as well? By extension, are we to also assume that the other writers in TOC are also using pseudonyms?

Second, one wonders whether foreign writers are directed by TOC editor Terry Xu, or if they operate independently. If they operate independently, it then begs the question if this is a form of foreign influence or intervention, as articles were written under the cloak of a pseudonym by people with no socio-cultural understanding of living in Singapore, and seemingly were out to stir disaffection in our community.

This episode thus reinforces the need for Singaporeans to generally be aware of the sources of the news consumed, both online and in print, and to always maintain a healthy dose of scepticism over what is read.

Hanafi Muhammad Ismail
ST Forum, 27 Sep 2019
















Examples of foreign interference in the course of history and in Singapore
By Linette Lai, Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Sep 2019

Active interference by one state in the affairs of another is an age-old problem that goes back centuries, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

But now, the Internet age has allowed countries to destabilise others without the need for conventional warfare, through the use of hostile information campaigns, he added.

Mr Shanmugam, who was speaking at the Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures, gave several historical examples of how foreign interference has destabilised states.

CHINA'S WARRING STATES PERIOD

Led by General Yue Yi, the state of Yan conquered most of the state of Qi in 284BC. But five years later, Yan's king died.

Tian Dan, a general from the conquered state, bribed Yan officials to spread rumours that Yue Yi wanted to become the new king.

Yue Yi was forced to flee for his life, and Tian Dan subsequently recaptured Qi's former territory.

ROME AND GREECE

Nearly 2,000 years ago, Greek politicians appealed to the Roman authorities to adjudicate conflicts in a bid to destroy their domestic opponents and court favour with the rising superpower.

Years later, the Achaean League - a confederation of Greek city-states - emerged. But some Achaean politicians started lobbying Rome to prop up pro-Roman allies in Greek states. When Sparta wanted to secede from the league, these groups appealed to Rome to intervene.

Over time, Greek independence became diluted and the Greeks eventually fell to Roman rule.

SINGAPORE HERALD AND EASTERN SUN NEWSPAPERS

In the 1970s, two newspapers shut down after it was revealed that they had taken foreign funding.

The Singapore Herald pushed an anti-government line and also published articles against national service. It took money from overseas sources, including a Malaysian politician.

The Eastern Sun was shut down after it was found to have worked with a news agency of communist China and received money from it.

In the words of then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, that funding meant the paper "would not oppose the People's Republic of China on major issues and would remain neutral on minor ones".

THE HENDRICKSON AFFAIR

In the late 1980s, American diplomat Hank Hendrickson encouraged a group of Singaporean lawyers to enter opposition politics, contesting elections against the People's Action Party.

One of them was then Law Society president Francis Seow, who was assured of refuge in the United States if he ran into difficulties with the Singapore Government.

Mr Hendrickson was eventually expelled from Singapore after he was found to have meddled in domestic politics.

2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

In the run-up to the 2016 US presidential election, a foreign troll factory conducted a disinformation campaign on various social media platforms, including Twitter and Facebook.

These companies were slow to acknowledge the problem and rectify issues. For example, it was only in late 2017 that Facebook publicly acknowledged there had been foreign interference on its platform leading up to the election.

It estimated that between 2015 and 2017, about 126 million people received content from this troll factory and its associated accounts.

THE HUANG JING INCIDENT

In 2017, Singapore expelled an academic at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. Dr Huang Jing was in contact with foreign intelligence groups and agents, and used his position at the school to engage prominent and influential Singaporeans.

He also tried to influence senior public officials in Singapore and change its foreign policy, as well as recruit others to help him. Dr Huang is an American citizen who is originally from China.





New Naratif says it doesn't allow foreign editorial intervention
By Grace Ho, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2019

The co-founder and editor-in-chief of New Naratif Kirsten Han has said the media platform accepts foreign grant money but denied that contributors influence its editorial decisions.

She was responding to Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam's comments on Wednesday at a conference on foreign interference, where he said online news sites that receive foreign funding could be used as tools to advance foreign interests.

He also said Ms Han had stated on video that Singapore has failed compared with Hong Kong because 500,000 people do not march on the streets and that she wants to change that through classes run by New Naratif, which describes itself as a movement for democracy and free expression in the region.

In a blog post yesterday, she said New Naratif is supported by membership, donations and grants. It accepts foreign grant money "following applications through the proper channels". She added: "We don't take money if the funder wants to influence or control our editorial or operational decisions."

She said she and co-founder Thum Ping Tjin "publish regular transparency reports where we openly talk about our achievements and challenges, and share full financial statements so people can see what money we have and how we spent it".

She said her references to Hong Kong in her November 2016 speech, at a forum on civil disobedience and social movements, were taken out of context.

She was reported to have said that a social movement is "all the work that goes into potentially one day having 500,000 people in the streets".

In her post, Ms Han said that her point was that "'500,000 people on the streets' is not a useful KPI (key performance indicator) to use in measuring the strength and maturity of a country's civil society - the communities, the networks, and the solidarity between them are far more important".

"These are the things that you need regardless of whether you have 500,000 people on the streets to protest or not... But you're still going to need a mature and resilient civil society to be part of a functioning democracy."

In his conference speech, Mr Shanmugam said when referencing New Naratif: "Everyone is entitled to their views, however reasonable or unreasonable. My primary point is that - is it right for foreign funding to be received in order to advance these viewpoints?"

He noted that some online news sites tap anonymous contributors, leaving them open to being used as tools by foreign interests to publish inflammatory articles that deepen divisions in a country. "They have no interest in sociopolitical stability within a country," he said. "Their only interest is in eyeballs."






Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures

Experts look at measures to fend off foreign interference
By Grace Ho, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 26 Sep 2019

Small states cannot fend off foreign interference alone as it "takes a network to defeat a network", an expert said yesterday at the Conference on Foreign Interference Tactics and Countermeasures.

In the same way that investors carry out public-private partnerships, governments need to enlist the support of other individuals and non-governmental organisations, Mr Jakub Janda, director of the European Values Centre for Security Policy, said during a panel discussion.

He outlined four steps governments can take to defend themselves: Document and increase understanding of the threat, mobilise self-defence through ambassador-level envoys and strengthen civil society, build resilience by regulating technology giants and funding digital and media literacy programmes in schools, and deter and punish by using sanctions and expulsions.

One example he gave was that of Australia's foreign interference laws passed last year. They make it a criminal offence to interfere in elections, provide intelligence to foreign governments and even steal trade secrets.

His fellow panellist, Associate Professor Taylor Owen of Canada's McGill University, said the bigger threat to national security is not the law-breaking behaviour of people, but the vulnerabilities in a country's information infrastructure, which is often outsourced to private organisations.

"This has left us open to manipulation," he said, citing fake activist campaigns and exploiting social divisions as some of the tools used by foreign organisations to create public confusion and anger.

To address this, the Canadian government passed the Elections Modernisation Act last year. It requires platforms such as Facebook, Google and Twitter to maintain a registry of political and issue advertising during the election period.

Canadian universities have also been monitoring the media ecosystem and surveying voter behaviour towards Web content, he said.

"It is important to look at the nature of information itself - how do people come to know things during an election, and how are those things vulnerable to interference?"

But people's views on the right policy response can be hard to change. "We can correct people's belief on the existence of climate change, but it is much harder to convince them of the need for carbon tax," said Prof Owen.

This is worsened by the use of private online spaces such as encrypted messaging platforms. "The mood of much of the debate in private spaces... is a really wicked problem for receiving information, good or bad, during an election."





More collaboration needed to fight digital threats: Panel
By Rei Kurohi, The Straits Times, 26 Sep 2019

Social media giant Twitter has banned 1.5 million accounts linked to terrorists since 2015, its senior director of public policy in Asia-Pacific Kathleen Reen said yesterday.

The lessons learnt since have helped it to successfully drive those "bad actors" away from its platform, she added.

Similarly, Facebook's cyber security policy lead Saleela Khanum Salahuddin said its response to information or influence operations improves each time it disrupts an instance of foreign interference.

Its success makes it harder for the operatives to engage in the same tactics of foreign influence, she added.

But both were quick to add that they cannot combat digital threats and misinformation alone.

They were part of a four-person panel speaking about defending the online space from foreign interference at a conference organised by the Nanyang Technological University's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

The panel also included Ms Renee DiResta, technical research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory, and Mr Fergus Hanson, director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's International Cyber Policy Centre.

All four said that governments, private companies and civil society need to collaborate more to counter foreign interference.

"One of the things we seek to encourage is legitimate, authoritative voices being more active on public platforms," said Ms Reen. "We often see governments that are very concerned about these issues but somewhat reticent to join in these conversations."

Facebook's Ms Salahuddin agreed, adding that collaboration is "the only way to get ahead".

She said there has been a growing trend of "information operations for hire" in recent years, especially in Asia. Facebook received a tip-off about one such operation in an Asia-Pacific country from a political candidate who was running for office.

"He came to us and said he was approached by a digital marketing firm that offered to build up fake online engagement for him," said Ms Salahuddin. "It was because of that tip that we were able to identify, investigate and disrupt an information-operations-for-hire project."

Ms DiResta said one approach to curtailing an information operation is to define and understand its phases. These include: conception and coordination, content creation, dissemination campaigns involving the infiltration of legitimate communities, and "crossing the chasm" to mainstream media.

Ms DiResta added that understanding this can be helpful in identifying where to intercede and disrupt an operation earlier as most are discovered only when they start to trend online.

"That is way too late for us to be thinking about defending the cognitive space. We need to be thinking about how we can move up this value chain and intercede at the creation or the community infiltration phases."

Mr Hanson said democratic governments should consider publicly funding political campaigns and cyber defences for political parties to protect them from financial influence and cyber attacks.

In some countries such as Norway, political parties are publicly funded. Last year, 76.2 per cent of all funding for Norwegian political parties came from government grants, according to Norway's statistics bureau.





Facebook rolls out measures to boost advertising transparency ahead of Singapore's general election
Advertisers must confirm their identity and say who is behind ads, among other measures
By Malavika Menon, The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2019

Socio-political advertising on Facebook and Instagram will face greater scrutiny as Singapore heads towards a general election.

This follows Facebook's announcement yesterday of measures to bring greater transparency to its platforms here.

The social media giant's measures will take effect immediately, with advertisers being required to confirm their identity and location, and disclose who is responsible for the advertisements.

The authorisation process will cover advertisers who run ads on issues such as civil and social rights, immigration, crime, political values and governance.

Facebook had first put in place the requirements in June, starting with more than 50 countries. It had said then: "We are expanding proactive enforcement on these ads to countries where elections or regulations are approaching, starting with Ukraine, Singapore, Canada and Argentina."

Facebook's latest move comes after Singapore's Elections Department's announcement on Sept 4 that the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee was convened last month. The next general election has to be held by April 2021.



Singapore's Protection From Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, which was passed in May but is not in force yet, includes a provision on political advertising.

Under the law, technology companies will be subject to a code of practice which may require digital advertising intermediaries to disclose the sponsor and other information linked to paid political ads communicated in Singapore.

Yesterday's announcement by Facebook comes on the heels of Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam's speech on Wednesday on why Singapore needs laws to counter foreign attempts to influence its domestic politics and public opinion. The minister, who was speaking at a conference on foreign interference tactics, cited cases of foreign meddling in Singapore and other countries, like in the United States' 2016 presidential election.

He said the Government wants to work with technology companies as partners to address the problem.

Facebook's public policy director for global elections, Ms Katie Harbath, said the advertisement transparency tools rolled out by her company will enable advertisers to get authorised, place "paid for by" disclaimers on their ads and keep their ads in an ad library for seven years.

"Starting today, we are making this a requirement in Singapore and will begin proactively enforcing our policy on ads about social issues, elections and politics," she added.

Elaborating, Facebook said an advertiser can select itself, a page it runs or its organisation to appear in the "paid for by" disclaimer. It also has to give extra information such as a phone number, e-mail or website if it chooses to use its organisation or page name in the disclaimer.

"Authorisations may take a few weeks to complete," she added.

Once authorised, advertisers will have their ads placed in an ad library for seven years, including their disclaimer information.

The ad library would include information about each ad, including its range of impressions. People can also learn about the ad's demographic information, such as the age, gender and location of those who saw the ad. Facebook will also launch an ad library report in the next few weeks to give less tech-savvy people information about ads on social issues, elections or politics.

Acknowledging Facebook's potential to give people a voice regardless of their age or political beliefs, Ms Harbath said: "We will continue to refine and improve our policies and tools as part of our commitment to help protect the integrity of elections in Singapore and around the world."

Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan said the initiatives would add a much-needed dose of transparency and accountability to political advertising on Facebook. While political advertising is not yet a key feature of socio-political discourse in Singapore, its potential to shape public opinion and influence public discourse is real and could be powerful, said the former Nominated MP.

"As advertisers on Facebook now cannot remain anonymous, advertisers can be held accountable, legally and politically, for the political speech and positions they are taking. In this regard, it can help to reduce blatant falsehoods," he said.

But in a sophisticated operation, a foreign entity can place political ads through proxies and third parties, he added. "There will be the need for legislation to require political advertisers to be Singaporeans or Singapore-based entities."

Mr Shanmugam has said that technology companies cannot be relied on to self-regulate and counter hostile information campaigns online.

When contacted, a People's Action Party spokesman said it will comply with Facebook's new requirements which, it added, would not impact its use of the platform.

The Singapore Democratic Party said it posts only material by its members, so the new rules will not affect it. But the wait for an ad to be approved will hamper its electoral campaign, it added.

The Progress Singapore Party said: "This aligns well with the PSP agenda for political institutions and their affiliates to deliver better transparency, accountability and independence. We at the PSP believe Singapore politics is for Singaporeans."

Additional reporting by Fabian Koh





Foreign meddling - why new laws are needed against an ancient threat: Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam
The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2019

The threat is age-old but the Internet has turbo-charged states' abilities to undermine others. Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam highlights the dangers in a speech on Wednesday at a conference on foreign interference tactics and countermeasures organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. Here are edited excerpts of his address:

What is foreign interference? What are the methods, what is happening now?

Essentially, foreign interference is when a country, external agencies or people try to shape the behaviour, actions and policies of a target country.

This sort of foreign interference is age-old, and it is a basic principle of international relations.

We can find examples in China for many of these things. During the Warring States Period, we have the State of Yan. It was led by the brilliant General Yue Yi and he conquered most of the state of Qi by 284BC. King Zhao of Yan died five years later in 279BC. The opposing general saw an opportunity - that maybe he could bribe Yan officials and pass on the rumour that General Yue Yi was plotting to take over the Kingdom of Qi - to create discord between the newly installed King and his most effective general. Creating suspicion worked. General Yue Yi was dismissed and was forced to flee. Yan's forces were weakened and they were eventually driven away.

And we move over to the superpower around the 2nd century BC - Rome.

If we look at Rome and Greece in those times, Greek politicians were constantly quarrelling. They began to appeal to Roman politicians and authorities, to gain in both intra-polis conflicts and inter-polis conflicts. To court favour with the superpower Rome, some Achaean politicians also started to undermine the Achaean League's unity. They lobbied Roman senators to intervene in Greek affairs and prop up pro-Roman collaborators in Greek states, 2,000 plus years ago. When Sparta wanted to secede from the Achaean League, pro-Roman embassies appealed to Rome to intervene. Over time, the independence of the Greeks was diluted. Rome was, of course, very happy to do all of these. The collective resolve of the Greeks weakened. This eventually led to the conquest of Greece.



Active interference in another country's affairs is a given in international relations. Collaborators within a country, working with foreign interests, is also a given, knowingly as well as unknowingly. And if you look at methods of such interference, it has taken a variety of forms.

To start with, at the highest level, we have diplomatic channels. Often legitimate because you use diplomacy to bring across viewpoints and persuade other countries. But, of course, these channels can also be used to subvert and interfere with other states. And frankly, there are no angels in this business. So let's drop the hypocrisy. Many big countries do this to smaller countries and to one another. We have been the subject of such favours from China, from Russia, from the United States and the UK. Second, using covert agents of influence, under the control of intelligence agencies. You have recent reports from Australia and New Zealand. From Australia, there have been reports of attempts to fund a senator and control him.

Ourselves, just two years ago, we expelled Dr Huang Jing, an agent of influence. He was a professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, and was in contact with foreign intelligence organisations and agents. He used his position at the school to engage prominent and influential Singaporeans. He told them he had "privileged information". He tried to influence senior public officials. He tried to change and manage Singapore's foreign policy. He also recruited others to help him.

Third, is the media. A key node through which foreign states can exert influence over domestic public opinion and in some cases, through the secret funding and control of publications. In other cases, having agents use the cover of journalists themselves.

In the 1970s in Singapore, we had two such operations involving our newspapers, The Eastern Sun and The Singapore Herald. The Eastern Sun worked with a news agency of communist China and received funding from them. The Singapore Herald took money from foreign sources - a Malaysian politician. It pushed an anti-government line and was also stridently against national service, which was a key pillar in defending Singapore. The Singapore Herald continuously ran articles against national service.

More recently, we have received reports again from Australia and New Zealand of newspapers which receive money from overseas and push foreign countries' viewpoints.

Another way of doing this, non-governmental organisations (NGOs). States have been known to target cause-based movements in other states. But the whole concept has been, in a sense, turbo-charged and revolutionised because the Internet has opened up limitless possibilities to advance these interests.

THE GERASIMOV DOCTRINE

There is a military doctrine developed for the Internet age - it is called the Gerasimov Doctrine, named after the Russian military Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov. He has said the "Rules of War" have been redefined, like using non-kinetic military measures such as hostile information campaigns (HICs). What they can do is identify what they call the "protest potential" of any population of a target country, then create protests, deepen divisions and increase hostility among the different groups, and get them to distrust institutions. In that country, trust in institutions and systems gets damaged, and the people lose faith in democracy as a whole.

The Gerasimov Doctrine states that these non-kinetic measures, done through the Internet, can in many cases exceed the power of force and weapons. And you don't need conventional warfare. You exploit the protest potential, keep the population in the country in a constant state of turmoil and ineffectiveness, and degrade their ability to deal with it - including their own economic issues or external threats. That is how you bring down a country.

Wars no longer need to be declared because the internal opposition is created as a "permanently operating front" in the target country. The fault lines are also exploited by bad actors, both internal and external, on hot-button issues. They tap legitimate sentiments, they target reasonable people. They use legitimate news outlets as conduits. They convert disinformation into mainstream information, they enlist what Lenin famously called "useful idiots" to the cause.

The Internet has made HICs cheap, easy and effective to mount. There is a growing commercial industry which supports all of this. Last year, the Parliamentary Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods was given some of the going rates for tools and services: You want one million Instagram likes - only US$18 (S$25). You want 100 Twitter followers, likes or retweets - 34 US cents. You want 100 YouTube subscribers - 66 US cents. You want to use online propaganda to instigate a street protest in the US - US$200,000. You can do it.

Princeton University did a count of large-scale online "foreign influence efforts" from 2013 to 2018. They found 53 distinct instances, targeting 24 different countries.

The combination of these online HICs and the offline activities - foreign-controlled media/sites, agents of influence, NGOs, groups of citizens who fan the flames, knowingly and unknowingly - all of this combined is extremely toxic, extremely powerful.

If you look at Brexit - surveys by King's College London suggested that 40 per cent of Britons still believe Britain sends £350 million (S$597 million) a week to the European Union. Nearly a third still believe that areas of Britain are controlled by syariah law, and there are no-go areas for non-Muslims. And these people overwhelmingly voted for Brexit, and there was a marginal victory for Brexit, about 4 per cent.

NEW NARATIF AND TOC

All of that hasn't happened in its full glory in Singapore, but it can. Some of it has already happened. And we also see some nascent attempts to combine the different approaches. I will give you one example.

A group of activists met Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad last year.

Historian Thum Ping Tjin urged him to bring democracy to Singapore; among other countries. Dr Thum also said Singapore should become part of Malaysia and celebrate Independence on Sept 16, Malaysia Day. Dr Thum and his partner Kirsten Han, who also met Tun Dr Mahathir, set up an organisation called New Naratif, which is significantly funded by a foreign foundation and has received other foreign contributions as well.

Ms Han, on video, has said Singapore has failed compared with Hong Kong because 500,000 people don't go out on the streets to march, unlike Hong Kong. She wants to change that, through classes run by New Naratif.

This will seem ridiculous on so many levels, but we can leave that aside because everyone is entitled to their views, however reasonable or unreasonable. My primary point is that is it right for foreign funding to be received in order to advance these viewpoints? That's the question that should be posed.

There is The Online Citizen (TOC), an online news site which targets Singaporeans. TOC uses foreigners, including Malaysians, and employs them to write almost exclusively negative articles on Singapore's social and political matters, including inflammatory articles that seek to fracture social cohesion.

They supported a call for Singapore civil servants to follow the example of Hong Kong civil servants in protesting. They made allegations about Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, which has led to a civil suit by PM Lee, and falsely attacked his character and fitness to hold office. These two articles are by a Malaysian who, based on publicly available information, is said to be in Shah Alam, near Kuala Lumpur. I am not commenting on the legal merits of the article since it is the subject of a lawsuit. Only that a foreigner, living in Malaysia, wrote these things for a Singapore site, to target a Singapore audience. Telling Singapore civil servants to protest and calling into question the Prime Minister's integrity. She has written many other articles to try and influence viewpoints within Singapore. Who controls her? Who pays her? What is her purpose? These are all legitimate questions. Appearing on the Internet, on TOC, most readers would just assume that this was by a genuine Singaporean contributor.

There are many other Malaysian writers as well on TOC. It is said that for TOC, out of 14 administrators, only five are located in Singapore. Nine are outside. Four in Malaysia and two in Indonesia. We don't know who they are. Are they Singaporeans? Are they foreigners?

There is a grey area here. For responsible media, both Singaporean and those employing foreigners, there would be the assumption that they will have some ethics. Of course that can be exploited, but they are subject to a framework. In every country, there is a framework for how media behaves.

For online news sites, there are anonymous writers where no one knows who they are. Their motivations and who is paying them is unknown. For all you know, they could be foreigners, as we see in the case of TOC.

Writing inflammatory stuff and having no interest in social and political stability within the country. Their only interest is to get eyeballs and if they are under the influence of other agencies, they can easily be used as tools for foreign interests. Such sites have been used by foreign countries to attack and deepen divisions.

THE RESPONSES

Some, in particular tech companies, suggest self-regulation.

The question is, can tech companies be left to self-regulate in the absence of legislation? I think the clear answer is no.

Part of the issue is that their business model militates against proper self-regulation. The more users, the more content there is on their platforms, the more user attention they can sell to advertisers, the more their profits.

Removing fake users, removing fake accounts, investigating coordinated inauthentic behaviour - these are all costly. The tech companies are in a position of conflict where their business interests often conflict with what needs to be done in the broader society's interests.

Within countries, there will be laws that deal with how, in specific industries, conflicts of interest ought to be resolved. It cannot be any different for tech companies. There is no difference in principle as to why they should be different.

We, as a Government, would like to work with the tech companies. Tech companies are our partners, they are not our opponents. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg himself has said in March that regulation is necessary, and that this is beyond the tech companies. But he also says there needs to be global standards agreed to by all the countries for such legislation.

Would you expect the US, Russia and China, for a start, to agree on common standards for what is not acceptable? And what the common standards ought to be? Suggestions that there can be legislation are welcome, but suggestions that such legislation should be based on universal common standards, I think, are not very practical. The different social, political and cultural contexts in each country will make a broad international agreement nearly impossible.

The state cannot take a hands-off approach. I think it is useful to look at what some countries have done.

France has introduced an Information Manipulation Law. The law mandates transparency over social media platforms' algorithms and election advertising. It allows the French national broadcasting agency to suspend television channels "controlled by a foreign state or under the influence" of that state if they deliberately disseminate false information likely to affect the integrity of elections.

In Germany, you have the Network Enforcement Act. It compels social networks to monitor and remove illegal online content. And I quote, "obviously illegal" hate speech and other postings must be removed within 24 hours of receiving a notification, or the platforms may face fines.

Australia passed a package of new laws very quickly last year, which were aimed at preventing foreign interference. It includes restrictions on foreigners making political donations, stronger espionage laws, tougher penalties, and a requirement that agents or lobbyists who represent foreign nations or entities must register their interests.

Israel has put in transparency requirements for NGOs receiving more than half of their funding from foreign state sources.

We put in legislation - the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act that deals with falsehoods. That's a framework for encouraging discussion based on facts. It allows corrections to be carried, requires corrections to be carried, if there are falsehoods which affect public interest. But it doesn't deal with HICs.

It wasn't intended to deal with HICs because well-done HICs don't just depend on falsehoods - it would be an entire apparatus targeting a target country using a mixture of falsehoods.

HOW TO TACKLE DIVERSE THREATS

I have said separately that we will put in legislation to deal with HICs, and I think we need to do that. If you look at what powers would be necessary to counter foreign interference, which includes HICs, it will have to give the Government powers to make targeted, surgical interventions to investigate and respond expeditiously to HICs.

Which also means getting the information so that we are able to investigate the provenance of content to see whether and to what extent it is foreign interference, and to have the appropriate response.

France's law targets falsehoods during elections. But HICs use a range of content, not just falsehoods, and it's not usually restricted to just election periods.

HICs, as the Gerasimov Doctrine makes clear, is where you constantly keep the other society off balance by increasing and exploiting the "protest potential".

So the legislation needs to be able to deal with this diverse range of threats, including the flow of funds. And we may also need to consider how we restrict foreign participation in the leadership of specific organisations, and say Singaporeans are fine, but to what extent should foreigners be there? They are closely involved in our political landscape.

I would like to leave you two thoughts: First, foreign interference is an age-old threat, which has adapted to modern technology, and states must be able to deal with these threats. Second, this is an issue of sovereignty and national security. The Government has to lead from the front, and we need to ensure we have the right tools to fight this threat.