Hi Friends,
Reading the article below brings back memories of events that seem just a heart-beat away.
When Havel, Walesa, Tutu and Mandela stood up against the onslaught of tyranny, no one gave them any chance of success.
Yet, the Czech republic, Poland and South Africa are now free and democratic countries able to help other countries break free from their shackles of slavery, in whatever form they take.
Burma, take heart. Evil does not always triumph!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
NB: Incidentally, Singaporean Chia Thye Poh was the second longest political detainee after my all-time hero Nelson Mandela.
Ex-Dissidents Hopeful for Myanmar
Saturday September 29, 2007 5:31 PM
By WILLIAM J. KOLE
Associated Press Writer
Lech Walesa and Desmond Tutu speak of solidarity. Vaclav Havel hopes for another ``Velvet Revolution.'' Wei Jingsheng warns of a bloody sequel to Tiananmen Square.
Some of the globe's most prominent former dissidents - acutely aware of what can go right and wrong when a repressed society attempts to shake off tyranny - see shades of their own past struggles in Myanmar's drama.
In interviews with The Associated Press and other media, they offered insight and advice to the Buddhist monks and pro-democracy protesters who have defied Myanmar's military government - and to the world leaders and ordinary people watching it all unfold.
``If there's not enough international pressure, and China offers support in the background, then there will very likely be in Myanmar something like Tiananmen Square: a big massacre,'' Wei, China's best-known ex-dissident, told the AP in a phone interview from the U.S., where he lives in exile.
Hundreds, possibly thousands, were killed in 1989 when the Chinese army cleared the Beijing square of pro-democracy protests.
Wei, who spent 17 years in Chinese prisons for challenging the communist monopoly on power, called for more international pressure on Myanmar's ruling junta and on China for its perceived backing of the regime.
Walesa, who founded Poland's pro-democracy Solidarity movement and became the nation's first post-communist president, said the only hope for Myanmar's monks and activists was to stick together - and for the world to rally around their cause.
``My advice for them is to build their own internal solidarity and to make efforts to win international solidarity,'' he said in an AP interview.
But Myanmar in 2007 is markedly different from eastern Europe two decades ago.
Isolated under a regime that has crushed dissent for the past 45 years, the country formerly named Burma missed out completely on the wave of reform and revolution that swept through the world in the late 1980s.
In 1989, when Havel's followers packed Prague's Wenceslas Square to denounce a regime he famously mocked as ``Absurdistan,'' their sheer numbers and determination prevailed over truncheons and tear gas.
When demonstrators tried the same thing in Myanmar in 1988, thousands were gunned down.
``If they have no solidarity today, they will lose and will have to approach the issue many times again,'' Walesa said.
Yet ``even if they fail, the price (they pay) will speed up the process,'' he added.
The Nobel Peace Prize winner, who marshaled tens of thousands of workers in 1980s strikes at Gdansk's gritty shipyard, says the showdown in Myanmar has rekindled a little of his own old fire.
``Maybe I will join in, too,'' Walesa said. ``I will certainly do something because I cannot remain indifferent. ... I like to win.''
Fellow laureate Tutu, who won his Nobel Prize for his role in South Africa's anti-apartheid movement, was preparing to join a march in Sweden protesting events in Myanmar when he spoke by telephone to the AP Friday.
``In South Africa we had rolling mass action that covered the action taken by the people. We also had an alliance of faith-based organizations,'' Tutu said. In Myanmar, ``the important thing is that religious leaders have now put their lives on the lines and I admire them for that.''
Tutu said he would call on China to use its ``very powerful leverage'' on Myanmar's leaders. If China did not respond, he said he would join calls to boycott the Beijing Olympics.
Havel, the playwright-turned-president whose nonviolent movement toppled totalitarian rule in Czechoslovakia, said he's also ready to go to Myanmar if opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi emerges from longtime house arrest and takes power.
``You can't imagine how happy I would be to travel there as soon as possible,'' Havel, now 70, told the Czech newspaper Mlada Fronta Dnes.
Two years ago, Havel joined the Dalai Lama and other dignitaries to write a poignant letter decrying Suu Kyi's ordeal. ``Neither walls nor weapons can silence even the most isolated voice of courage and truth,'' it said.
But today, asked about the specter of heavy bloodshed, he responded: ``I am afraid.''
Tutu said of Suu Kyi: ``I hope she knows how much the world supports her. She is a remarkable woman.''
In another letter last week, Nobel literature laureate Nadine Gordimer, known for her works about the inhumanity of apartheid in her native South Africa, appealed to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to do something ``in the name of shared humanity.''
``No one anywhere in our world who respects the sanctity of life, justice and the freedom of people to demand reconciliation of conflict through peaceful means can turn aside from the spectacle of Burma,'' she said.
---
Associated Press writers John Leicester in Paris, Monika Scislowska in Warsaw, Poland, Celean Jacobson in Johannesburg, South Africa and Karel Janicek in Prague, Czech Republic, contributed to this report.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Saturday, September 29, 2007
ASEAN's rebuke of Burma welcomed but more action needed
Hi Friends,
I welcome ASEAN's Foreign Ministers' condemnation of Burma.
Although ministers "expressing their revulsion" may seem like just words and a lot of hot air to many, it is unprecedented as ASEAN has a reputation for being an old boys club where politicians meet regularly in exotic resorts and pat each other on the shoulders with self-congratulatory compliments and a cup of tea.
I hope that this collective expression of regret is but a start of a proactive political bloc where member countries (including Singapore) which deviate from universal norms of human rights and decency are taken to task.
I know this is more an illusion than truth, but it is credible start. It is nevertheless only the start.
Let us watch carefully to see how ASEAN behaves if UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari comes back empty-handed ( or if he is allowed in at all) and when the despots of Rangoon continue to brutalise their own civilians.
Nothing short of full freedom and democracy and the military returning to the barracks would be acceptable to ASEAN as that is the bare minimum required by Burma's people. They deserve no less.
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Japanese journalist shot dead at close range: video (see above pictures)
TOKYO - MYANMAR troops shoved down a Japanese journalist and shot him dead at close range, television footage broadcast on Friday appeared to show.
Japan's Fuji Television showed footage of soldiers charging after demonstrators on Thursday as they clamped down on protests in Myanmar's commercial hub Yangon.
A helmeted soldier appeared to push to the ground a man identified as video-journalist Kenji Nagai, who was wearing knee-length shorts and sandals.
As the man lies sprawled on his back, clutching his video camera in his right hand, a loud bang is heard, with a soldier pointing a rifle right in front of him.
The soldier then races on, chasing after demonstrators.
Fuji Television said the footage showed that Nagai was killed intentionally, not by a stray bullet.
'This soldier probably pushed Mr Nagai first. This soldier then seemed to shoot him, judging from the angle of his gun,' Koichi Ito, a former member of the Japanese police's special rapid attack squad, told the private network, which did not say how it obtained the footage.
Nagai, 50, a video-journalist for Tokyo-based APF News, who had years of experience covering dangerous hotspots, was the first foreigner killed in Myanmar's crackdown.
Japan, which has cordial relations with Myanmar, has said it will protest the killing and investigate if he was killed intentionally. But it said it will not cut off aid to the military-run nation.
Chief government spokesman Nobutaka Machimura said on Friday that a Japanese embassy doctor confirmed a bullet entered Nagai's body from the lower right side of his chest, pierced his heart and exited from his back. -- AFP
ASEAN calls on Myanmar to stop using violence on protestersPosted: 28 September 2007 0100 hrs
UNITED NATIONS : Southeast Asian nations rounded on fellow member Myanmar on Thursday, demanding the ruling military stop using violence against pro-democracy protesters after nine people were killed.
As security forces swept through Myanmar's main city on Thursday arresting hundreds in a brutal crackdown on the ninth straight day of protests, world outrage mounted with the US slapping sanctions on 14 Myanmar leaders.
UN leaders were told by Myanmar officials that UN chief Ban Ki-moon's special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, would be granted a visa to visit the country.
"The secretary general has been informed that his special envoy will be welcome in Myanmar," spokeswoman Marie Okabe said. "He is pleased."
But ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which has long had a policy of non-interference in the affairs of Myanmar, had unusually sharp words for its fellow member at a meeting at the United Nations.
"They were appalled to receive reports of automatic weapons being used and demanded that the Myanmar government immediately desist from the use of violence against demonstrators," Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo said.
The ministers "expressed their revulsion" over reports that the demonstrations in Myanmar "are being suppressed by violent force and that there has been a number of fatalities," he said, after chairing the meeting.
They "strongly" urged Myanmar to exercise utmost restraint and seek a political solution and wanted the ruling junta to resume national reconciliation with all parties and work towards a "peaceful" transition to democracy.
The unfolding drama on the streets of Yangon has dominated the agenda of the UN General Assembly here, and prompted calls from around the world for Myanmar to lay down their arms.
At least 50,000 people, many of them youths and students, swarmed into Yangon on Thursday undeterred by the deaths the day before of at least four protesters, including three Buddhist monks, and repeatedly defied orders to disperse.
In six hours of chaotic protests, Myanmar state media said nine people were killed, including a Japanese journalist, and another 11 protesters injured including one woman.
US President George W. Bush on Thursday said the world must press Myanmar's military rulers to end the violent crackdown and urged the junta to cooperate fully with UN envoy Gambari.
"I call on all nations that have influence with the regime to join us in supporting the aspirations of the Burmese people and to tell the Burmese junta to cease using force on its own people, who are peacefully expressing their desire for change," he said in a statement.
The US administration also ordered a freeze on the assets of Myanmar's military leader and 13 other senior officials.
"We are today imposing sanctions against senior officials of the government of Burma," said Adam Szubin, director of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control.
Beleaguered Myanmar Foreign Minister U Nyan Win had skipped the ASEAN meeting at the last minute, instead sending his representative Thaung Tun, a senior government official, an ASEAN diplomat told AFP.
Thaung Tun mostly looked down as Yeo addressed reporters afterwards in his capacity as chairman of the ASEAN standing committee.
Yeo also said Nyan Win had informed them Myanmar would issue a visa to Gambari, and said ASEAN ministers urged Myanmar to grant him "full access" to all parties, including Nobel peace laureate and democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been under house arrest for most of the past 17 years.
ASEAN also warned Myanmar that the bloody crisis was having "a serious impact on the reputation and credibility of ASEAN."
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said meanwhile the ASEAN stand was a victory for the thousands of demonstrators.
"This is a success for democracy and this is a success for the demonstrators in Myanmar," he told reporters in New York.
Japan, a top donor to Myanmar, had summoned the Myanmar's ambassador in Tokyo on Thursday to protest against the crackdown while South Korea urged Myanmar to refrain from suppressing the protesters.
The ASEAN ministers were scheduled to hold talks with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in New York later in the day. - AFP/de
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Burma’s despotic regime has crossed the line
Hi Friends,
Henceforth, I will refer to the nation of Myanmar in its original name of Burma as a sign of protest.
In my mind, I had drawn a line in the sand and this line is when the military regime uses brutal and lethal force to resolve this impasse.
The line has been crossed.
The news from Burma’s cities is that hundreds of monks have been arrested overnight, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been moved to a notorious prison, and many have been maimed or killed.
It is clear that this military dictatorship does not seek reconciliation through negotiations or dialogue.
Even economic sanctions do not work with the military leaders because they will always have the first bite of the country’s treasury’s “cherry” as they pass the resultant economic hardship to the people. This makes the people more disenfranchised and bitter. The people then rise up again only to be beaten into submission for another 20 years. The unending circle of life?
Is this the Burmese people’s karma? Although we are not the ones to wield the rods that beat the monks and nuns, we are just as culpable if we do not do our utmost to help them or bring attention to their plight!
What can we do? Or as one anonymous blogger commented on my blog (rather insultingly) that “talk is cheap” and that as Burma is but 3 hours flight away I should perhaps go there to provide medical cover for the protesters ( ? to show that I am more than just talk).
I take his point that we are helpless and what we can do now seem so futile. Perhaps he is the typical risk-averse Singaporean who cannot be counted on to support any cause unless the outcome is 100% certain. The risk-averse “rational” Singaporean?
Our politicians ( Singapore’s and ASEAN’s ) have already stated their views.
Foreign Minister and current Chairman of ASEAN said that Asean had to take a "very realistic position to keep Myanmar within the Asean family because it is in everybody's interest" to do so, including neighbouring China and India.
When asked what Asean would do if the junta became increasingly repressive, he said: "If national reconciliation is not possible and there is repression and violence where many people die, then it is a new situation all over again. Asean can issue statements and Asean can shed tears.
"But at that point in time, it will be a fight within Myanmar itself." Translated to street English- " You are on your own, babe"
Unlike our politicians, we can speak the truth and call a despot a despot- not worrying whether we will have sand when Indonesia starts the embargo of sand exports again nor worry that supporting peaceful protest in Burma will mean that we can no longer tell others to “mind their own business “ when they express support for Singapore’s own nascent pro-democracy forces.
All of us ordinary citizens of Singapore can speak the truth and we should.
Hear this ,Burma’s despots- "Please go back to your barracks. Let your people live peaceful, normal lives. Let them choose their own leaders by universal suffrage!"
Peace,
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
NB: Link to singaporepatriot.blogspot.com's posts on the Suppression in Burma and why ASEAN and Singapore should take immediate action now!
Henceforth, I will refer to the nation of Myanmar in its original name of Burma as a sign of protest.
In my mind, I had drawn a line in the sand and this line is when the military regime uses brutal and lethal force to resolve this impasse.
The line has been crossed.
The news from Burma’s cities is that hundreds of monks have been arrested overnight, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been moved to a notorious prison, and many have been maimed or killed.
It is clear that this military dictatorship does not seek reconciliation through negotiations or dialogue.
Even economic sanctions do not work with the military leaders because they will always have the first bite of the country’s treasury’s “cherry” as they pass the resultant economic hardship to the people. This makes the people more disenfranchised and bitter. The people then rise up again only to be beaten into submission for another 20 years. The unending circle of life?
Is this the Burmese people’s karma? Although we are not the ones to wield the rods that beat the monks and nuns, we are just as culpable if we do not do our utmost to help them or bring attention to their plight!
What can we do? Or as one anonymous blogger commented on my blog (rather insultingly) that “talk is cheap” and that as Burma is but 3 hours flight away I should perhaps go there to provide medical cover for the protesters ( ? to show that I am more than just talk).
I take his point that we are helpless and what we can do now seem so futile. Perhaps he is the typical risk-averse Singaporean who cannot be counted on to support any cause unless the outcome is 100% certain. The risk-averse “rational” Singaporean?
Our politicians ( Singapore’s and ASEAN’s ) have already stated their views.
Foreign Minister and current Chairman of ASEAN said that Asean had to take a "very realistic position to keep Myanmar within the Asean family because it is in everybody's interest" to do so, including neighbouring China and India.
When asked what Asean would do if the junta became increasingly repressive, he said: "If national reconciliation is not possible and there is repression and violence where many people die, then it is a new situation all over again. Asean can issue statements and Asean can shed tears.
"But at that point in time, it will be a fight within Myanmar itself." Translated to street English- " You are on your own, babe"
Unlike our politicians, we can speak the truth and call a despot a despot- not worrying whether we will have sand when Indonesia starts the embargo of sand exports again nor worry that supporting peaceful protest in Burma will mean that we can no longer tell others to “mind their own business “ when they express support for Singapore’s own nascent pro-democracy forces.
All of us ordinary citizens of Singapore can speak the truth and we should.
Hear this ,Burma’s despots- "Please go back to your barracks. Let your people live peaceful, normal lives. Let them choose their own leaders by universal suffrage!"
Peace,
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
NB: Link to singaporepatriot.blogspot.com's posts on the Suppression in Burma and why ASEAN and Singapore should take immediate action now!
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Myanmar needs our support… but the silence is deafening!
Hi friends,
Some of us have heard of the Prague Spring.
It was in 1958 when the then Czechoslovakia, had a unique opportunity to liberalise politically even though it was still part of the communist Warsaw Pact.
Alexander Dubcek briefly wrested power from pro-Soviet politicians and from January till August of that fateful year, Czechoslovakians had illusions of democracy and political freedom.
This short-lived “spring” tragically ended with invasion by the Warsaw Pact forces. The rest of the world just stood and watched.
There are similar names of places and countries where thousands and even millions perished whilst the world just stood and watched.
Srebrenica, Rwanda, Cambodia, Sabra and Shatila, Soweto and now Myanmar?
ASEAN has used the excuse of the "principle of non-interference" to wash its hands off the affairs of the Myanmar people.
Are we going to just sit on our hands and wait for the makings of another “Killing fields” before guilt forces all of us to act?
Is it not exceedingly obvious that the vast majority of Myanmar people want to be freed from the yoke of oppression, represented by the military junta? They have been denied freedom and democracy for far too long.
Bloggers, your silence is deafening!
Are we content to just concern ourselves with narrow issues affecting our personal lives while barely 3 hours away, our South-east Asian brethren are fighting for their lives even while I speak?
For sure, any posts about gay rights (pro or against) or about CPF and longevity would get all of us hot under the collars, but not articles about poor and far-off Myanmar.
Sad but that’s life. Uniquely Singapore?
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
ASEAN under pressure to act as Myanmar protests mountPosted: 25 September 2007 1425 hrs (AFP/Channelnewsasia)
KUALA LUMPUR : Southeast Asian nations have long been reluctant to confront their reviled neighbour Myanmar, but as protests mount in Yangon, observers say they risk losing credibility if they fail to act.
In the 10 years since it joined the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Myanmar has proved a major headache for the budding democracies of the region, who have been admonished by the west for failing to press for reforms.
"By any normal global international standards, ASEAN hasn't done much. I suspect many of the policymakers in Kuala Lumpur or Singapore or Jakarta or Manila will admit to that," said Hiro Katsumata from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
"But this is not surprising because ASEAN needs Myanmar more than Myanmar needs ASEAN," he said, adding that the region feared the resource-rich nation could turn its back on the grouping in favour of closer ties with China.
In the face of the bravery of more than 100,000 people who stood alongside Buddhist monks in the streets of Myanmar's biggest city on Monday, regional governments are now facing loud calls to show their support.
"ASEAN can obviously do a lot more -- it's just a question of whether they want to. And with this internal protest and defiance of the people, it would be shameful if they kept quiet," said Malaysian lawmaker Zaid Ibrahim.
"They should use all their diplomacy and power and influence to pressure the regime," said Zaid, president of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Caucus, which was formed in 2004 to push for democratic reform in Myanmar.
Zaid said he was sure that although the ruling generals had not yet done anything to halt a week of street protests led by the revered monks, they would eventually "hit back" and that lives would be lost.
"I would expect some severe reprisals and crackdowns and more brutality from the regime. I think this is inevitable and I think the people of Burma know this and I hope they will not be deterred by it."
So far there has been little response from regional governments except the Philippines, which said Monday it wants to see democracy flourish in Myanmar.
ASEAN secretary general Ong Keng Yong has merely said he hoped the protests will remain "peaceful and calm", and his predecessor Rodolfo Severino indicated that little else would be forthcoming.
"Very little -- they could deliver a statement," Severino told AFP when asked what options the 10-bloc grouping had.
"What else can they do? Send in troops? I don't think ASEAN's in a position to do that. I think this is something that has to be worked out by the government and people of Myanmar."
Stirred into action by the United States and European governments which were highly critical of its performance, ASEAN has come out with some unusually bold statements against Myanmar's military government in recent years.
But despite mutterings about introducing a mechanism to suspend or expel the military-run state from the 10-nation bloc, there has been no action to match the rhetoric.
Jawahar Hassan, director of Malaysia's Institute of Strategic and International Studies, said that with the stakes now so high, nations in the region are even less likely to intervene.
"If nothing is happening in Myanmar they can issue some strong statements because it would not be seen as supporting opposition to Myanmar," he said.
"But when all this is happening to have to be careful... ASEAN governments cannot be seen to be supporting any movement against the government which may turn out to be violent."
After years of saying that change in Myanmar must come from within, Southeast Asia is being warned that now that just such a scenario has presented itself, the region cannot stand idle.
"Certainly ASEAN will not look good," said Katsumata.
"Human rights and democracy are becoming important parts of global norms, so the slower the ASEAN approach is, the worse ASEAN will appear in the eyes of the international audience." - AFP/ir
Some of us have heard of the Prague Spring.
It was in 1958 when the then Czechoslovakia, had a unique opportunity to liberalise politically even though it was still part of the communist Warsaw Pact.
Alexander Dubcek briefly wrested power from pro-Soviet politicians and from January till August of that fateful year, Czechoslovakians had illusions of democracy and political freedom.
This short-lived “spring” tragically ended with invasion by the Warsaw Pact forces. The rest of the world just stood and watched.
There are similar names of places and countries where thousands and even millions perished whilst the world just stood and watched.
Srebrenica, Rwanda, Cambodia, Sabra and Shatila, Soweto and now Myanmar?
ASEAN has used the excuse of the "principle of non-interference" to wash its hands off the affairs of the Myanmar people.
Are we going to just sit on our hands and wait for the makings of another “Killing fields” before guilt forces all of us to act?
Is it not exceedingly obvious that the vast majority of Myanmar people want to be freed from the yoke of oppression, represented by the military junta? They have been denied freedom and democracy for far too long.
Bloggers, your silence is deafening!
Are we content to just concern ourselves with narrow issues affecting our personal lives while barely 3 hours away, our South-east Asian brethren are fighting for their lives even while I speak?
For sure, any posts about gay rights (pro or against) or about CPF and longevity would get all of us hot under the collars, but not articles about poor and far-off Myanmar.
Sad but that’s life. Uniquely Singapore?
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
ASEAN under pressure to act as Myanmar protests mountPosted: 25 September 2007 1425 hrs (AFP/Channelnewsasia)
KUALA LUMPUR : Southeast Asian nations have long been reluctant to confront their reviled neighbour Myanmar, but as protests mount in Yangon, observers say they risk losing credibility if they fail to act.
In the 10 years since it joined the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Myanmar has proved a major headache for the budding democracies of the region, who have been admonished by the west for failing to press for reforms.
"By any normal global international standards, ASEAN hasn't done much. I suspect many of the policymakers in Kuala Lumpur or Singapore or Jakarta or Manila will admit to that," said Hiro Katsumata from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
"But this is not surprising because ASEAN needs Myanmar more than Myanmar needs ASEAN," he said, adding that the region feared the resource-rich nation could turn its back on the grouping in favour of closer ties with China.
In the face of the bravery of more than 100,000 people who stood alongside Buddhist monks in the streets of Myanmar's biggest city on Monday, regional governments are now facing loud calls to show their support.
"ASEAN can obviously do a lot more -- it's just a question of whether they want to. And with this internal protest and defiance of the people, it would be shameful if they kept quiet," said Malaysian lawmaker Zaid Ibrahim.
"They should use all their diplomacy and power and influence to pressure the regime," said Zaid, president of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Caucus, which was formed in 2004 to push for democratic reform in Myanmar.
Zaid said he was sure that although the ruling generals had not yet done anything to halt a week of street protests led by the revered monks, they would eventually "hit back" and that lives would be lost.
"I would expect some severe reprisals and crackdowns and more brutality from the regime. I think this is inevitable and I think the people of Burma know this and I hope they will not be deterred by it."
So far there has been little response from regional governments except the Philippines, which said Monday it wants to see democracy flourish in Myanmar.
ASEAN secretary general Ong Keng Yong has merely said he hoped the protests will remain "peaceful and calm", and his predecessor Rodolfo Severino indicated that little else would be forthcoming.
"Very little -- they could deliver a statement," Severino told AFP when asked what options the 10-bloc grouping had.
"What else can they do? Send in troops? I don't think ASEAN's in a position to do that. I think this is something that has to be worked out by the government and people of Myanmar."
Stirred into action by the United States and European governments which were highly critical of its performance, ASEAN has come out with some unusually bold statements against Myanmar's military government in recent years.
But despite mutterings about introducing a mechanism to suspend or expel the military-run state from the 10-nation bloc, there has been no action to match the rhetoric.
Jawahar Hassan, director of Malaysia's Institute of Strategic and International Studies, said that with the stakes now so high, nations in the region are even less likely to intervene.
"If nothing is happening in Myanmar they can issue some strong statements because it would not be seen as supporting opposition to Myanmar," he said.
"But when all this is happening to have to be careful... ASEAN governments cannot be seen to be supporting any movement against the government which may turn out to be violent."
After years of saying that change in Myanmar must come from within, Southeast Asia is being warned that now that just such a scenario has presented itself, the region cannot stand idle.
"Certainly ASEAN will not look good," said Katsumata.
"Human rights and democracy are becoming important parts of global norms, so the slower the ASEAN approach is, the worse ASEAN will appear in the eyes of the international audience." - AFP/ir
Monday, September 24, 2007
Myanmar's brave Buddhist clergy and personal thoughts on peaceful protest
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke
Hi Friends,
I am sure that few of the Buddhist monks participating in the protests against Myanmar’s military junta know who Burke is, much less heard of his famous “triumph of evil” quote.
It is fair to say that it probably matters little to them as they have already taken upon themselves the duty to save Myanmar by literally putting their own lives on the line. To them, enough is enough and the oil price hike was but the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.
I had written previously about Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi here.
Peaceful protest justifiable?
For the detractors of peaceful protest -and Singapore has many, where do they stand?
Shall they still say that it is futile and counter-productive to protest? That the military junta should just be allowed to rule ad infinitum or until they see the folly of authoritarianism and give power voluntarily back to the people? "Wait Long" I hear some amongst us utter in Hokkien!I suppose in a clearcut case like Myanmar, where the ruling elite do not have any intentions of having democratic institutions such as universal suffrage from free and fair elections, almost all of you (including so-called detractors) would say without any hesitation- "Go ahead and protest. We support your marches."
What about back home in sunny Singapore, where some of us seemingly live in a sort of blissful Utopia, oblivious to problems and issues facing other human beings within or without our national boundary? That it is unwise to allow peaceful protests?or That it is justifiable for any 5 people walking together for any cause to be hauled before our courts and be charged for being part of an “illegal assembly”? Just because most of us have 3 square meals daily, have we forfeited the right of free expressions?
So to protest in Myanmar is good, but to protest in Singapore plain silly?
Think about it! And while doing so do have a thought or say a prayer for the brave souls up north!
My Myanmar friends, live long and prosper! I support your just cause!
With sincerest wishes for a peaceful resolution in your troubled land,
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Addendum: The SIIA (Singapore Institute of International Affairs) has a niece piece untitled "The Last Stretch for Myanmar?" here .
30,000 rally as Myanmar monks' protest gathers steam (AFP 24 Sept 2007)
Thousands of Buddhist monks marched in Yangon on Monday, piling the pressure on Myanmar's ruling military junta after a weekend that saw the biggest show of dissent in nearly two decades.
At least 30,000 people led by about 15,000 monks clad in orange and rust-red robes marched from the holy Shwedagon Pagoda and past the offices of Aung San Suu Kyi's opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) party.
As the monks walked by chanting prayers for peace, NLD officials came to the sidewalk, clasped their hands and bowed in respect to the clergy, and then joined the marchers.
Many of the marchers fixed onto their shirts small strips of rust-red cloth, taken from the robes of the Buddhist monks.
Shwedagon Pagoda has been the focal point of protests by the clergy that began nearly a week ago, which have swelled to include thousands of civilians.
"We are marching for the people," one monk said to the crowd, and urged supporters to remain peaceful and avoid chanting political slogans as they snaked through the nation's commercial hub.
On Sunday, about 20,000 people, half of them monks, thronged the rainswept Yangon streets chanting prayers and shouting slogans, while other rallies took place across the country.
Some 150 nuns joined the rallies for the first time.
They were the largest protests in Myanmar since a 1988 democracy uprising led by students, which was brutally put down by the military, killing hundreds, possibly thousands, of protesters.
Two of Myanmar's most famous actors, comedian Zaganar and heart-throb movie star Kyaw Thu, came to Shwedagon early Monday to bring food and water to the monks, witnesses said.
Both men had spoken on short-wave radio urging the public to support the protests.
Myanmar's junta have so far kept their distance. Any violence against the revered monks in this devoutly Buddhist nation would spark an outcry, analysts say, and the generals are likely keen to defuse the crisis peacefully.
"If the military kills a monk or a layman, then the demonstrations will quickly spread," said Aung Naing Oo, a Myanmar expert based in Thailand.
David Mathieson, Myanmar consultant with New York-based Human Rights Watch, told AFP that civilians joining the monks in the numbers seen Sunday marked a significant escalation in the protest movement.
"I'm heartened by the fact that there hasn't been a violent crackdown by the authorities, (but) this is still an incredibly tense time to see how they react," he said.
In a surprise move on Saturday, armed police allowed about 2,000 monks and civilians to pray outside the home of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The women known here simply as "The Lady" stepped outside the lakeside home where she has been under house arrest for more than a decade and greeted the monks and supporters.
"Walking down University Avenue and going to see Aung San Suu Kyi is something that people have been secretly dreaming of. And they did it, and the army let them, and that is what is really remarkable," Mathieson said.
But on Sunday, riot police blocked the road leading to the Nobel Peace Prize winner's house, and a smaller group of monks were forced to turn back.
Extra forces were again deployed around the home on Monday, witnesses said.
Anti-government protests began after a surprise rise in the price of fuel on August 15.
Initially, prominent democracy activists led the rallies, but the generals cracked down, arresting up to 150 people, human rights groups say, and now it is the monks who are spearheading the marches.
Smaller rallies have also been taking place in cities in central Myanmar, in a bold show of dissent in a nation that has been tightly controlled by the military for 45 years.
The United States and European nations are also preparing to round on Myanmar at the annual United Nations General Assembly this week, with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice branding the military leadership "brutal."
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Singapore's other political parties- still alive and kicking!
Hi Friends
This article (below) in the weekend’s Today caught my eye just when I thought that the most interesting event in the past week was the subdued “black shirt” protest against the Annuitygate!
Things have changed (albeit at snail’s pace).
In the old days ( or like my kids will say ... when policemen wore pants), such articles would never have seen the light of day. Although Loh Chee Kong did not exactly say that he welcomed multi-party politics but at least he appeared rather neutral and even mentioned about the Privy Council’s judgement that ruled in JBJ's favour. ( Younger readers should read up on the Privy Council's deliberation- rather intriguing).
If my memory serves me right, it was coincidental that shortly after this saga regarding JBJ (and was it involving Wong Hong Toy too?) that Singapore’s judiciary system decided to cut its umbilical cords from its British origins and the Privy Council no longer served as our court of last appeal. If anyone has the facts or references please do post them for the benefit of our younger ones who missed the more colourful goings-on of the old days.
(Dr.Huang (18.9.07) someone has provided me with references to the above event here and here )
I whole-heartedly believe that a vibrant WP is good for the nation.
Nothing can really beat having good-ole competition in the marketplace!
More good years for all our political parties (including the SDP whom I believe also had not been lying down and just doing nothing ( read here)
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Something I wrote about David Marshall here
50 years on ... what keeps Workers' Party going
Loh Chee Kong (15th Sept 2007)
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg
HALF a century is a long time in politics. Very long if that is opposition politics. And an eternity if the politics happens to be in a country where the ruling party has been in power for 48 uninterrupted years, delivering an economic miracle and breathing life into nearly every corner of the physical, social, economic and political environment and fighting its rivals tooth and nail.
.
Then, how did the Workers' Party (WP) — put together by a pipe-smoking criminal lawyer called David Marshall on Nov 7, 1957, to promote workers' welfare — manage not just to survive but keep its parliamentary presence for a very long 26 years?
.
The answer may rest in the fact that in nearly every election, about a third of voters do not support the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), said Dr Terence Chong from the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (Iseas). "Opposition parties have survived on the votes of this 30 to 40 per cent of Singaporeans," he added.
.
The permanent anti-PAP bloc aside, the WP has also been kept alive by the presence of leaders who were able to provide the party and its supporters with what was needed at that time.
.
Mr Marshall was an idealist who thought there was room for another party amid a highly-charged political landscape. The next WP leader, Mr J B Jeyaretnam, threw in his lot with confrontational politics at a time when the political scene was bereft of opposition politicians who exhibited a sense of bravado to take on the PAP heavyweights.
.
And now there is Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is a major departure from his predecessors with his non-confrontational style. He prefers to let his grassroots walking do all the talking — a strategy that has gone down well with his constituents voting for him in four successive elections, the last one with an increased majority.
.
In the late 1950s, Mr Marshall, who had quit the Labour Front, discovered that there was a niche to be carved between the two extremes of the political spectrum — the left-wing PAP and the right-wing Labour Front government. And the quickest way to do that was through the communist-infested trade unions. Thus, the WP was born.
.
Despite a bright start that saw the party winning four of five seats it contested in the City Council Elections, the WP lost support dramatically once the communists threw their support behind the PAP. As political historian Hussin Mutalib notes in his book Parties and Politics, Mr Marshall's centrist stance failed to woo the populace, "at a time when the agitative political climate was looking for more radical leaders".
.
Mr Marshall was to go on to win the Anson seat in 1961 but, two years later, he was forced out of the WP after the party disagreed with his "all-or-nothing" position on the merger with Malaysia. Mr Marshall had wanted Singapore to either seek a complete merger with Malaysia or seek its own independence.
.
Divided and shorn of its most prominent face, the WP went into disarray and Mr Marshall was trounced at the 1963 elections in which he stood as an independent candidate.
.
The party remained rudderless until 1971, when a flamboyant former District Judge by the name of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam brought with him a group of English-educated professionals into WP's fold.
.
Armed with a 14-point manifesto that sought to "amend and repeal" some of the PAP's policies, the WP under JBJ — as he came to be known — was cheered from the fringes but failed to grab any parliamentary seats in an election just months after the leadership change.
.
The party tried to make an impression in the 1976 elections with its platform of "Towards a Caring Society". The campaign saw JBJ winning the highest percentage (40 per cent) of votes for an opposition politician but it was not enough to win him a ticket to Parliament.
.
JBJ was not to be denied five years later, when he won the Anson by-election, breaking the PAP's 15-year-old monopoly in the chamber.
.
He wrote a boisterous chapter in WP history during his term in Parliament when he made his presence felt, frequently engaging senior Cabinet Ministers, including Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in fiery debates.
.
But while his term in Parliament kept him in the limelight, his confrontational approach towards the Government led to his downfall.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam was forced to relinquish his Anson seat in 1986, when he was found guilty of false declarations of the WP's accounts — a conviction the Privy Council in Britain overturned but which was upheld here.
.
Still, he led a one-man crusade against the PAP. By roping in outspoken individuals who had an axe to grind, including former Solicitor-General Francis Seow, Mr Jufrie Mahmood and Mr Tang Liang Hong, the party established itself as the biggest — if not the loudest — opposition voice.
.
The exception was Mr Low Thia Khiang. Mr Jeyaretnam might rue the day he brought Mr Low into the party, since this set in motion a renewal process that indirectly led to his exit as WP leader.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam, who handed the reins to Mr Low in 2001, was bankrupted by defamation lawsuits while Mr Seow and Mr Tang fled Singapore.
.
Dr Hussin, in his book that was first published in 2003, argues the WP was often let down by the poor quality of its election candidates and its "spray-gun" approach against PAP policies. One exception was the WP's call for a "caring society" in the 1980s, which offered Singaporeans an alternative policy.
.
But even this platform was somewhat usurped by the PAP Government when then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong took the reins in 1990 and unveiled a vision for a "gracious society".
.
If Mr Jeyaretnam, with all his passion and fearless attitude, could not take the WP to greater heights, many doubted if the mild-mannered, Teochew-speaking Mr Low could take it anywhere at all.
.
After six years at the helm, Mr Low has proven his critics wrong. One need only look at last year's General Election to see how far Mr Low has helped to revive the WP's fortunes. Even the presence of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong during the Hougang hustings in support of the PAP candidate and the dangling of juicy carrots before voters could not swing the votes against Mr Low.
.
Mr Low's restrained ways have reshaped the WP brand — moving it away from firebrand politics and, consequently, unnecessary and costly legal battles. His stoic approach to the PAP's attacks also won him fans.
.
While observers, such as Iseas' Dr Chong, have no doubt the WP, under Mr Low, is the strongest opposition party today, the key questions many are asking as the party celebrates its 50th birthday in November are: Where can it go from here?
.
The PAP — like any other ruling political party — cannot be expected to make life easier for the WP. For some observers, the WP may find succour in something beyond PAP's control — the forces of globalisation.
.
Dr Chong said: "As Singapore becomes more open, will there be a gradual resistance to globalisation among Singaporeans? Will the WP be able to take advantage of the inequalities and side-effects it brings?"
.
Even in this area, the PAP is unlikely to concede space with the Government already taking the high ground by introducing measures such as Workfare to provide relief to lower-income Singaporeans.
.
While the odds are stacked against the WP's efforts to make a major impact on national policies, there are signs the party have started to adopt an approach that may seem modest at first glance but could pay big dividends eventually. And that is its strategy of "going local".
.
That means working the ground — Mr Low reportedly attends as many funerals as he can in Hougang — and convincing the constituents that its members can do as good a job, if not better than, their PAP counterparts in running an estate and helping them solve their municipal problems through non-governmental means. But the biggest hurdle the WP faces is a ruling party that is likely to be tenacious in defending its ground vigorously. Still, as the hardline Old Guard exit the political stage, how the successive generations of leaders — brought up in an entirely different era — deal with the opposition will play a part in the latter's durability.
.
Like everything else in Singapore, it's results that matter. So, like JBJ's victory in 1981, securing the party's survival for another 50 years might hinge on the party winning a Group Representation Constituency.
This article (below) in the weekend’s Today caught my eye just when I thought that the most interesting event in the past week was the subdued “black shirt” protest against the Annuitygate!
Things have changed (albeit at snail’s pace).
In the old days ( or like my kids will say ... when policemen wore pants), such articles would never have seen the light of day. Although Loh Chee Kong did not exactly say that he welcomed multi-party politics but at least he appeared rather neutral and even mentioned about the Privy Council’s judgement that ruled in JBJ's favour. ( Younger readers should read up on the Privy Council's deliberation- rather intriguing).
If my memory serves me right, it was coincidental that shortly after this saga regarding JBJ (and was it involving Wong Hong Toy too?) that Singapore’s judiciary system decided to cut its umbilical cords from its British origins and the Privy Council no longer served as our court of last appeal. If anyone has the facts or references please do post them for the benefit of our younger ones who missed the more colourful goings-on of the old days.
(Dr.Huang (18.9.07) someone has provided me with references to the above event here and here )
I whole-heartedly believe that a vibrant WP is good for the nation.
Nothing can really beat having good-ole competition in the marketplace!
More good years for all our political parties (including the SDP whom I believe also had not been lying down and just doing nothing ( read here)
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
PS: Something I wrote about David Marshall here
50 years on ... what keeps Workers' Party going
Loh Chee Kong (15th Sept 2007)
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg
HALF a century is a long time in politics. Very long if that is opposition politics. And an eternity if the politics happens to be in a country where the ruling party has been in power for 48 uninterrupted years, delivering an economic miracle and breathing life into nearly every corner of the physical, social, economic and political environment and fighting its rivals tooth and nail.
.
Then, how did the Workers' Party (WP) — put together by a pipe-smoking criminal lawyer called David Marshall on Nov 7, 1957, to promote workers' welfare — manage not just to survive but keep its parliamentary presence for a very long 26 years?
.
The answer may rest in the fact that in nearly every election, about a third of voters do not support the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), said Dr Terence Chong from the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (Iseas). "Opposition parties have survived on the votes of this 30 to 40 per cent of Singaporeans," he added.
.
The permanent anti-PAP bloc aside, the WP has also been kept alive by the presence of leaders who were able to provide the party and its supporters with what was needed at that time.
.
Mr Marshall was an idealist who thought there was room for another party amid a highly-charged political landscape. The next WP leader, Mr J B Jeyaretnam, threw in his lot with confrontational politics at a time when the political scene was bereft of opposition politicians who exhibited a sense of bravado to take on the PAP heavyweights.
.
And now there is Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is a major departure from his predecessors with his non-confrontational style. He prefers to let his grassroots walking do all the talking — a strategy that has gone down well with his constituents voting for him in four successive elections, the last one with an increased majority.
.
In the late 1950s, Mr Marshall, who had quit the Labour Front, discovered that there was a niche to be carved between the two extremes of the political spectrum — the left-wing PAP and the right-wing Labour Front government. And the quickest way to do that was through the communist-infested trade unions. Thus, the WP was born.
.
Despite a bright start that saw the party winning four of five seats it contested in the City Council Elections, the WP lost support dramatically once the communists threw their support behind the PAP. As political historian Hussin Mutalib notes in his book Parties and Politics, Mr Marshall's centrist stance failed to woo the populace, "at a time when the agitative political climate was looking for more radical leaders".
.
Mr Marshall was to go on to win the Anson seat in 1961 but, two years later, he was forced out of the WP after the party disagreed with his "all-or-nothing" position on the merger with Malaysia. Mr Marshall had wanted Singapore to either seek a complete merger with Malaysia or seek its own independence.
.
Divided and shorn of its most prominent face, the WP went into disarray and Mr Marshall was trounced at the 1963 elections in which he stood as an independent candidate.
.
The party remained rudderless until 1971, when a flamboyant former District Judge by the name of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam brought with him a group of English-educated professionals into WP's fold.
.
Armed with a 14-point manifesto that sought to "amend and repeal" some of the PAP's policies, the WP under JBJ — as he came to be known — was cheered from the fringes but failed to grab any parliamentary seats in an election just months after the leadership change.
.
The party tried to make an impression in the 1976 elections with its platform of "Towards a Caring Society". The campaign saw JBJ winning the highest percentage (40 per cent) of votes for an opposition politician but it was not enough to win him a ticket to Parliament.
.
JBJ was not to be denied five years later, when he won the Anson by-election, breaking the PAP's 15-year-old monopoly in the chamber.
.
He wrote a boisterous chapter in WP history during his term in Parliament when he made his presence felt, frequently engaging senior Cabinet Ministers, including Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in fiery debates.
.
But while his term in Parliament kept him in the limelight, his confrontational approach towards the Government led to his downfall.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam was forced to relinquish his Anson seat in 1986, when he was found guilty of false declarations of the WP's accounts — a conviction the Privy Council in Britain overturned but which was upheld here.
.
Still, he led a one-man crusade against the PAP. By roping in outspoken individuals who had an axe to grind, including former Solicitor-General Francis Seow, Mr Jufrie Mahmood and Mr Tang Liang Hong, the party established itself as the biggest — if not the loudest — opposition voice.
.
The exception was Mr Low Thia Khiang. Mr Jeyaretnam might rue the day he brought Mr Low into the party, since this set in motion a renewal process that indirectly led to his exit as WP leader.
.
Mr Jeyaretnam, who handed the reins to Mr Low in 2001, was bankrupted by defamation lawsuits while Mr Seow and Mr Tang fled Singapore.
.
Dr Hussin, in his book that was first published in 2003, argues the WP was often let down by the poor quality of its election candidates and its "spray-gun" approach against PAP policies. One exception was the WP's call for a "caring society" in the 1980s, which offered Singaporeans an alternative policy.
.
But even this platform was somewhat usurped by the PAP Government when then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong took the reins in 1990 and unveiled a vision for a "gracious society".
.
If Mr Jeyaretnam, with all his passion and fearless attitude, could not take the WP to greater heights, many doubted if the mild-mannered, Teochew-speaking Mr Low could take it anywhere at all.
.
After six years at the helm, Mr Low has proven his critics wrong. One need only look at last year's General Election to see how far Mr Low has helped to revive the WP's fortunes. Even the presence of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong during the Hougang hustings in support of the PAP candidate and the dangling of juicy carrots before voters could not swing the votes against Mr Low.
.
Mr Low's restrained ways have reshaped the WP brand — moving it away from firebrand politics and, consequently, unnecessary and costly legal battles. His stoic approach to the PAP's attacks also won him fans.
.
While observers, such as Iseas' Dr Chong, have no doubt the WP, under Mr Low, is the strongest opposition party today, the key questions many are asking as the party celebrates its 50th birthday in November are: Where can it go from here?
.
The PAP — like any other ruling political party — cannot be expected to make life easier for the WP. For some observers, the WP may find succour in something beyond PAP's control — the forces of globalisation.
.
Dr Chong said: "As Singapore becomes more open, will there be a gradual resistance to globalisation among Singaporeans? Will the WP be able to take advantage of the inequalities and side-effects it brings?"
.
Even in this area, the PAP is unlikely to concede space with the Government already taking the high ground by introducing measures such as Workfare to provide relief to lower-income Singaporeans.
.
While the odds are stacked against the WP's efforts to make a major impact on national policies, there are signs the party have started to adopt an approach that may seem modest at first glance but could pay big dividends eventually. And that is its strategy of "going local".
.
That means working the ground — Mr Low reportedly attends as many funerals as he can in Hougang — and convincing the constituents that its members can do as good a job, if not better than, their PAP counterparts in running an estate and helping them solve their municipal problems through non-governmental means. But the biggest hurdle the WP faces is a ruling party that is likely to be tenacious in defending its ground vigorously. Still, as the hardline Old Guard exit the political stage, how the successive generations of leaders — brought up in an entirely different era — deal with the opposition will play a part in the latter's durability.
.
Like everything else in Singapore, it's results that matter. So, like JBJ's victory in 1981, securing the party's survival for another 50 years might hinge on the party winning a Group Representation Constituency.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
No “Kiss & tell” for ex-Mrs. Reagan (Jane Wyman)
Hi Friends,
Not many of us know that President Reagan (40th US President 1981-89) was a divorcee and even less know that his first wife was an Academy Award winner named Jane Wyman.
Reagan was a strong American president and his attractive persona makes Bush (both father and son) appear like wall-paper. He was a natural orator who was especially famous for his “Evil empire” pronouncement of the Soviet Union and was justified in being credited with the break-up of the Communist bloc and the subsequent collapse of the Berlin Wall.
The main reason why Reagan’s first marriage remains private must be that his first wife Jane Wyman decided that “it's bad taste to talk about ex-husbands and ex-wives” and refused to cash-in by writing a “kiss and tell” book of her marriage to a President of the USA.
There are still people of principle in the world and money still cannot buy everything!
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Actress, ex-wife of Reagan
Won Academy Award for role in 'Johnny Belinda,' starred in TV's 'Falcon Crest'
September 11, 2007
BY BOB THOMAS
LOS ANGELES -- Jane Wyman won an Oscar for her role as a deaf rape victim in the film ''Johnny Belinda,'' and she'll probably be best remembered for her portrayal of a power-mad winery owner in TV's ''Falcon Crest.''
But her greatest distinction may have been refusing to kiss and tell about her love life, most especially her marriage to future President Ronald Reagan.
Ms. Wyman died Monday at her Palm Springs home, son Michael Reagan said. Ms. Wyman's age was listed as 93 in several reference books, however other sources, including the official family Web site, say she was 90.
''I have lost a loving mother, my children Cameron and Ashley have lost a loving grandmother, my wife Colleen has lost a loving friend she called Mom, and Hollywood has lost the classiest lady to ever grace the silver screen,'' Reagan said in a statement.
Ms. Wyman's film career started in the 1930s and stretched from the ''Gold Diggers of 1937'' to 1969's ''How to Commit Marriage,'' co-starring Bob Hope and Jackie Gleason. From 1981 to 1990 she played Angela Channing, a Napa Valley vintner who maintained her grip with a steely will on CBS' ''Falcon Crest.''
Her marriage in 1940 to fellow Warner Bros. contract player Ronald Reagan was celebrated in the fan magazines as one of Hollywood's ideal unions. While he was in uniform during World War II, her career ascended, signaled by her 1946 Oscar nomination for ''The Yearling.''
She and Reagan divorced in 1948, the year she won an Oscar for ''Johnny Belinda.'' Reagan reportedly cracked to a friend: ''Maybe I should name Johnny Belinda as co-respondent.''
'Not because I'm bitter'
After Reagan became governor of California and then president of the United States, Ms. Wyman kept a decorous silence about her ex-husband, who had married actress Nancy Davis.
In a 1968 newspaper interview, Ms. Wyman explained the reason:
''It's not because I'm bitter or because I don't agree with him politically. I've always been a registered Republican. But it's bad taste to talk about ex-husbands and ex-wives, that's all. Also, I don't know a damn thing about politics.''
A few days after Reagan died on June 5, 2004, Ms. Wyman broke her silence, saying: ''America has lost a great president and a great, kind and gentle man.''
Warner Bros. signed Ms. Wyman to a long-term contract in 1936. In 1937, Ms. Wyman married a wealthy manufacturer of children's clothes, Myron Futterman, in New Orleans. The marriage was reported as her second, but an earlier marriage was never confirmed. She divorced him in November 1938, declaring she wanted children and he didn't.
The actress became entranced by Reagan and romance ensued.
They were married on Jan. 26, 1940. The following year she gave birth to a daughter, Maureen. They later adopted a son, Michael. They also had a daughter who was born several months premature in June 1947 and died a day later.
In Reagan's autobiography An American Life, the index shows only one mention of Ms. Wyman, and it runs for only two sentences.
Their daughter Maureen died in August 2001 after a battle with cancer.
In 1952 Ms. Wyman married Fred Karger, a studio music director. They divorced, later remarried and divorced the second time in 1965.
AP
Not many of us know that President Reagan (40th US President 1981-89) was a divorcee and even less know that his first wife was an Academy Award winner named Jane Wyman.
Reagan was a strong American president and his attractive persona makes Bush (both father and son) appear like wall-paper. He was a natural orator who was especially famous for his “Evil empire” pronouncement of the Soviet Union and was justified in being credited with the break-up of the Communist bloc and the subsequent collapse of the Berlin Wall.
The main reason why Reagan’s first marriage remains private must be that his first wife Jane Wyman decided that “it's bad taste to talk about ex-husbands and ex-wives” and refused to cash-in by writing a “kiss and tell” book of her marriage to a President of the USA.
There are still people of principle in the world and money still cannot buy everything!
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Actress, ex-wife of Reagan
Won Academy Award for role in 'Johnny Belinda,' starred in TV's 'Falcon Crest'
September 11, 2007
BY BOB THOMAS
LOS ANGELES -- Jane Wyman won an Oscar for her role as a deaf rape victim in the film ''Johnny Belinda,'' and she'll probably be best remembered for her portrayal of a power-mad winery owner in TV's ''Falcon Crest.''
But her greatest distinction may have been refusing to kiss and tell about her love life, most especially her marriage to future President Ronald Reagan.
Ms. Wyman died Monday at her Palm Springs home, son Michael Reagan said. Ms. Wyman's age was listed as 93 in several reference books, however other sources, including the official family Web site, say she was 90.
''I have lost a loving mother, my children Cameron and Ashley have lost a loving grandmother, my wife Colleen has lost a loving friend she called Mom, and Hollywood has lost the classiest lady to ever grace the silver screen,'' Reagan said in a statement.
Ms. Wyman's film career started in the 1930s and stretched from the ''Gold Diggers of 1937'' to 1969's ''How to Commit Marriage,'' co-starring Bob Hope and Jackie Gleason. From 1981 to 1990 she played Angela Channing, a Napa Valley vintner who maintained her grip with a steely will on CBS' ''Falcon Crest.''
Her marriage in 1940 to fellow Warner Bros. contract player Ronald Reagan was celebrated in the fan magazines as one of Hollywood's ideal unions. While he was in uniform during World War II, her career ascended, signaled by her 1946 Oscar nomination for ''The Yearling.''
She and Reagan divorced in 1948, the year she won an Oscar for ''Johnny Belinda.'' Reagan reportedly cracked to a friend: ''Maybe I should name Johnny Belinda as co-respondent.''
'Not because I'm bitter'
After Reagan became governor of California and then president of the United States, Ms. Wyman kept a decorous silence about her ex-husband, who had married actress Nancy Davis.
In a 1968 newspaper interview, Ms. Wyman explained the reason:
''It's not because I'm bitter or because I don't agree with him politically. I've always been a registered Republican. But it's bad taste to talk about ex-husbands and ex-wives, that's all. Also, I don't know a damn thing about politics.''
A few days after Reagan died on June 5, 2004, Ms. Wyman broke her silence, saying: ''America has lost a great president and a great, kind and gentle man.''
Warner Bros. signed Ms. Wyman to a long-term contract in 1936. In 1937, Ms. Wyman married a wealthy manufacturer of children's clothes, Myron Futterman, in New Orleans. The marriage was reported as her second, but an earlier marriage was never confirmed. She divorced him in November 1938, declaring she wanted children and he didn't.
The actress became entranced by Reagan and romance ensued.
They were married on Jan. 26, 1940. The following year she gave birth to a daughter, Maureen. They later adopted a son, Michael. They also had a daughter who was born several months premature in June 1947 and died a day later.
In Reagan's autobiography An American Life, the index shows only one mention of Ms. Wyman, and it runs for only two sentences.
Their daughter Maureen died in August 2001 after a battle with cancer.
In 1952 Ms. Wyman married Fred Karger, a studio music director. They divorced, later remarried and divorced the second time in 1965.
AP
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Ngiam Tong Dow and danger of Group Think
Hi Friends,
Ngiam Tong Dow is yet again trying to get the ruling class to listen to his opinions about where the system needs tweaking.
His mind is a treasure trove that the government would do well to take advantage of.
I have already written about this here ( yes, I know it was also a well-disguised shameless plug for my alma mater, ACS!).
The argument can be succinctly summarised in one sentence:
If all our future leaders , who are today’s smart kids, are schooled in only 1 or 2 schools, it is highly likely that they will see the world through the same set of lenses- and that is not ideal.
I agree with Ngiam that a diversity of opinions and solutions for Singapore’s complex problems is preferable to the situation now where scholars who will likely be senior civil servants or politicians pass through the same well-trodden path which their seniors had trodden upon. The risk-free path.
The talking is the easy part.
The gargantuan task is this (warning-Long sentence) –
Since Singapore’s educational system is purportedly meritocratic, and “risk-averse” parents being “risk-averse” Singaporeans would naturally take the path most well-trodden and prod their kids onto this self-same well trodden path, how do we tell these parents that for the sake of diversity of ideas and for the good of the nation, their kids should not go to the “R” schools even though they got A* for all subjects at the Primary School Leaving Exams and are already representing the state in Wushu/Youth Orchestra/Five Stones by virtue of attending enrichment classes since the time they popped out of the womb, but should attend secondary school and Junior College in the Best of the Rest instead?
Tough sell!
Only diehard ACSians ( and others from St Joseph/ Chinese High) will contemplate such folly!
For the records, I have nothing against the R schools. I even have many friends from these fine schools! (haha)
Cheers and have great weekend!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Addendum (9 Sept 07 8.55pm): I just remember that I wrote about Mr. Ngiam some time ago and here it was about "Singapore the Nation is Bigger than Singapore the Country" Enjoy
S'pore in need of a talent spread?
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg (Today 7th Sept 07)
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
http://nofearsingapore.blogspot.com/2007/03/about-anglo-chinese-school-and-why.html
Ngiam Tong Dow is yet again trying to get the ruling class to listen to his opinions about where the system needs tweaking.
His mind is a treasure trove that the government would do well to take advantage of.
I have already written about this here ( yes, I know it was also a well-disguised shameless plug for my alma mater, ACS!).
The argument can be succinctly summarised in one sentence:
If all our future leaders , who are today’s smart kids, are schooled in only 1 or 2 schools, it is highly likely that they will see the world through the same set of lenses- and that is not ideal.
I agree with Ngiam that a diversity of opinions and solutions for Singapore’s complex problems is preferable to the situation now where scholars who will likely be senior civil servants or politicians pass through the same well-trodden path which their seniors had trodden upon. The risk-free path.
The talking is the easy part.
The gargantuan task is this (warning-Long sentence) –
Since Singapore’s educational system is purportedly meritocratic, and “risk-averse” parents being “risk-averse” Singaporeans would naturally take the path most well-trodden and prod their kids onto this self-same well trodden path, how do we tell these parents that for the sake of diversity of ideas and for the good of the nation, their kids should not go to the “R” schools even though they got A* for all subjects at the Primary School Leaving Exams and are already representing the state in Wushu/Youth Orchestra/Five Stones by virtue of attending enrichment classes since the time they popped out of the womb, but should attend secondary school and Junior College in the Best of the Rest instead?
Tough sell!
Only diehard ACSians ( and others from St Joseph/ Chinese High) will contemplate such folly!
For the records, I have nothing against the R schools. I even have many friends from these fine schools! (haha)
Cheers and have great weekend!
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
Addendum (9 Sept 07 8.55pm): I just remember that I wrote about Mr. Ngiam some time ago and here it was about "Singapore the Nation is Bigger than Singapore the Country" Enjoy
S'pore in need of a talent spread?
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg (Today 7th Sept 07)
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
Don't crowd bright students in a handful of top schools: Ngiam
Jasmine Yinjasmine@mediacorp.com.sg
EVEN after retirement, one of Singapore's most prominent former civil servants cannot resist bringing up a pet topic whenever he bumps into the political leadership.
.
The Republic's best and brightest should be "spread out" across the public and private sectors — and across schools — believes former Permanent Secretary Ngiam Tong Dow (picture), 70.
.
Trained by different mentors and with diverse sets of thinking and skills, they would then be in good stead to tackle the challenges of a highly-competitive world.
.
For instance, bright Primary 6 school-leavers should be sent to different schools, instead of congregating at a handful of top schools.
.
"It's very dangerous to hot-house them ... I think we should spread out our talents … to support a stronger country.
.
"I'm still trying whenever I meet the younger ministers. I try to tell them … but so far, I don't think I'm making much headway," he said, to laughter, in reply to a question at a lecture on Friday organised by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
.
He has a similar concern about government scholars.
.
Recalling a discussion with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew "long ago", Mr Ngiam said he had asked if it was necessary for everyone to serve their bond in the public sector, as opposed to allowing some scholarship holders to work in the private sector.
.
After all, they are still working in Singapore for the country, he had argued.
.
Mr Lee, in turn, questioned the availability of talent in the civil service to accommodate such an arrangement, among other points of dissent.
.
"Intellectually, MM Lee could not accept such an argument," said Mr Ngiam, who retired from the civil service in 1999 after a 40-year career.
.
Over time, though, the public sector has changed, and Mr Lee even said three years ago that the public sector is too talent-heavy, and suggested that half its scholars should be released into the private sector after six or seven years.
.
Currently, there are also selected private-sector attachment schemes for government scholars.
.
Mr Ngiam, the chairman of Surbana Corporation, the privatised arm of the Housing and Development Board, gave the thumbs-up to the Government's focus on education.
.
"As a tax-paying citizen, I do not begrudge for one moment the billions of dollars we are spending on our schools, polytechnics and universities," said the mandarin who became the youngest-ever Permanent Secretary in 1972, at age 35.
.
Equal opportunities for education are the "well-spring of Singapore's social and economic success" and form the "bedrock of the social compact between the Government and the people", he pointed out.
.
It is through competition in knowledge that the Republic got to where it is today, he noted.
http://nofearsingapore.blogspot.com/2007/03/about-anglo-chinese-school-and-why.html
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Singapore-City of im-Possibilities
Hi Friends,
I think I survived my Managerial Finance exams today. I am going to put my CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model); Harry Markowitz's Portfolio Theory; MM (Modigliani & Miller) Capital Structure Theory and the other interesting stuff behind me.
Instead, I am going to return to the other Harry and the other MM’s sphere of influence- ie Singapore.
From the letters to the forum page below, it seems that Professor Ho Peng Kee had been less than convincing in his assertion as to why Singaporean political activists cannot be trusted to organize a peaceful and routine recreational event.
It still puzzles me why in every other aspect of Singapore life, we can be so forward-thinking and be at the cutting edge- except in politics.
We can be first-world in education and healthcare; be the first mover in city-planning experiments like the ERP ( Electronic Road Pricing ) schemes etc.
But in politics, we are decidedly third-world. Third-world mentality when the only two opposition-led wards of Hougang and Potong Pasir are deprived of nation's financial resources to upgrade their estates. Third-world mentality when the government uses its enormous powers to curtail the growth of full and unfettered political freedoms.
Do not get me wrong! Even third-world countries with more draconian governments are liveable – I do not need to name them. You know which countries I am alluding to- the new Asian economic super-power; the nation that humiliated USA in IndoChina etc. So, even if Singapore remains as politically-conservative ; most Singaporeans will still vote for the party; and foreigners will still love and praise the Lee’s; and the economy will still chug along.
But… it would not be right. It would not be good in the long run.
So friends, do you think our leaders will ever shed their third-world small-mindedness anytime soon? Until then, Singapore remains a City of possibilities-Not!
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
1 Sept 07 Straits Times Forum page
1. Govt's call for greater civic role has clear limits
I REFER to the reports on the parliamentary sitting on Aug 27. The responses of both Minister of State for Education Lui Tuck Yew and Senior Minister of State (Law and Home Affairs) Ho Peng Kee suggest that the Government's calls for greater diversity and inclusiveness stop short of allowing genuine political debate and contestation.
Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui's reply to questions on why the Ministry of Education (MOE) rejected playwright Alfian Sa'at as a relief teacher was disappointing. While he may have been right to say that Parliament is not the right forum to discuss the personnel issues of any one individual, for him to suggest that Mr Alfian 'engage MOE directly' is inappropriate.
Anyone who has followed the online discussion on this knows that MOE has consistently refused to give Mr Alfian the real reason for its decision.
Unlike most developed democracies, Singapore does not have a Freedom to Information Act that requires a government to provide information to individuals who seek it unless doing so is against the public interest.
In the absence of such a legal requirement, our governance system is dependent on individuals and institutions making decisions that can stand up to public scrutiny.
Without external checks on the Government, the virtues of integrity, transparency and objectivity have to be imposed from within and practised by all public officers. If not, what assurance do we have that officials do not make arbitrary decisions, or decisions that serve only narrow party interests rather than the public good?
Associate Professor Ho's reply on why the Workers' Party was not given a permit to hold an outdoor event also stretched the incredulity of thinking Singaporeans.
Even if we gave Prof Ho the benefit of doubt and assumed the worst of Singaporeans - that open-door political events increase the risks of conflict - one must seriously question whether the strategy of avoiding conflict might not stunt society's maturation.
Both responses by the ministers show that the Government's call for greater civic engagement and participation has clear limits.
While the Government subscribes to economic openness and liberalism, its distrust of and discomfort with real political contest means that it will try to keep Singapore politically conservative.
Low Tzer Kai
30 August 2007 ST forum
2. Outdoor political events should be allowed
I REFER to the article, 'Outdoor events by political parties banned' (ST, Aug 28).
Political causes require visibility, and no place is more appropriate than the public square, which exists primarily for political purposes. In the years leading to Singapore's independence, outdoor rallies were de rigueur. Even today, we have accepted the need for political parties to hold election rallies in outdoor venues.
The answer that outdoor political events have a 'greater potential for breach of the peace, public disorder and unruly behaviour' needs to be justified. Outdoor activities organised along racial or religious affiliation are allowed, even though they have a more tumultuous past.
Assuming that Singaporeans are willing to risk prosecution or even their lives for political causes is an overestimation of Singaporeans' passion for political affairs.
The ban on outdoor political activities is a contributing cause of political apathy. With appropriate policing, there is no reason why political events should not take place outdoors.
The question then is how to balance political participation of the population against possible risks to the public peace.
Michael Tang Yong'An
I think I survived my Managerial Finance exams today. I am going to put my CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model); Harry Markowitz's Portfolio Theory; MM (Modigliani & Miller) Capital Structure Theory and the other interesting stuff behind me.
Instead, I am going to return to the other Harry and the other MM’s sphere of influence- ie Singapore.
From the letters to the forum page below, it seems that Professor Ho Peng Kee had been less than convincing in his assertion as to why Singaporean political activists cannot be trusted to organize a peaceful and routine recreational event.
It still puzzles me why in every other aspect of Singapore life, we can be so forward-thinking and be at the cutting edge- except in politics.
We can be first-world in education and healthcare; be the first mover in city-planning experiments like the ERP ( Electronic Road Pricing ) schemes etc.
But in politics, we are decidedly third-world. Third-world mentality when the only two opposition-led wards of Hougang and Potong Pasir are deprived of nation's financial resources to upgrade their estates. Third-world mentality when the government uses its enormous powers to curtail the growth of full and unfettered political freedoms.
Do not get me wrong! Even third-world countries with more draconian governments are liveable – I do not need to name them. You know which countries I am alluding to- the new Asian economic super-power; the nation that humiliated USA in IndoChina etc. So, even if Singapore remains as politically-conservative ; most Singaporeans will still vote for the party; and foreigners will still love and praise the Lee’s; and the economy will still chug along.
But… it would not be right. It would not be good in the long run.
So friends, do you think our leaders will ever shed their third-world small-mindedness anytime soon? Until then, Singapore remains a City of possibilities-Not!
Cheers
Dr.Huang Shoou Chyuan
1 Sept 07 Straits Times Forum page
1. Govt's call for greater civic role has clear limits
I REFER to the reports on the parliamentary sitting on Aug 27. The responses of both Minister of State for Education Lui Tuck Yew and Senior Minister of State (Law and Home Affairs) Ho Peng Kee suggest that the Government's calls for greater diversity and inclusiveness stop short of allowing genuine political debate and contestation.
Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui's reply to questions on why the Ministry of Education (MOE) rejected playwright Alfian Sa'at as a relief teacher was disappointing. While he may have been right to say that Parliament is not the right forum to discuss the personnel issues of any one individual, for him to suggest that Mr Alfian 'engage MOE directly' is inappropriate.
Anyone who has followed the online discussion on this knows that MOE has consistently refused to give Mr Alfian the real reason for its decision.
Unlike most developed democracies, Singapore does not have a Freedom to Information Act that requires a government to provide information to individuals who seek it unless doing so is against the public interest.
In the absence of such a legal requirement, our governance system is dependent on individuals and institutions making decisions that can stand up to public scrutiny.
Without external checks on the Government, the virtues of integrity, transparency and objectivity have to be imposed from within and practised by all public officers. If not, what assurance do we have that officials do not make arbitrary decisions, or decisions that serve only narrow party interests rather than the public good?
Associate Professor Ho's reply on why the Workers' Party was not given a permit to hold an outdoor event also stretched the incredulity of thinking Singaporeans.
Even if we gave Prof Ho the benefit of doubt and assumed the worst of Singaporeans - that open-door political events increase the risks of conflict - one must seriously question whether the strategy of avoiding conflict might not stunt society's maturation.
Both responses by the ministers show that the Government's call for greater civic engagement and participation has clear limits.
While the Government subscribes to economic openness and liberalism, its distrust of and discomfort with real political contest means that it will try to keep Singapore politically conservative.
Low Tzer Kai
30 August 2007 ST forum
2. Outdoor political events should be allowed
I REFER to the article, 'Outdoor events by political parties banned' (ST, Aug 28).
Political causes require visibility, and no place is more appropriate than the public square, which exists primarily for political purposes. In the years leading to Singapore's independence, outdoor rallies were de rigueur. Even today, we have accepted the need for political parties to hold election rallies in outdoor venues.
The answer that outdoor political events have a 'greater potential for breach of the peace, public disorder and unruly behaviour' needs to be justified. Outdoor activities organised along racial or religious affiliation are allowed, even though they have a more tumultuous past.
Assuming that Singaporeans are willing to risk prosecution or even their lives for political causes is an overestimation of Singaporeans' passion for political affairs.
The ban on outdoor political activities is a contributing cause of political apathy. With appropriate policing, there is no reason why political events should not take place outdoors.
The question then is how to balance political participation of the population against possible risks to the public peace.
Michael Tang Yong'An
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)