'From Third World To Worst'

More to the Point

'From Third World To Worst'

By DR. FLORANGEL ROSARIO BRAID

MANILA, Philippines — This is the title of the memoirs of former Prime Minister Lee Kwan Yew, architect and founding father of Singapore, now an economic and technological leader in the Asian region. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who wrote the Foreword, explains how this vision had become a reality by showing how superior intelligence, discipline, and ingenuity would substitute for the lack of resources.

I am reminded of the journey of this remarkable man who dared to take a path that is different from many post-colonial countries. This is perhaps a good time to examine the ingredients needed for success as several developing countries are now poised to take their place in the modern world – Myanmar, Middle-Eastern and African states, among others.

Lee Kwan Yew’s fame preceded him. I first heard about him in the early 70’s – during the early days of his building a new and independent Singapore. This was from Asian journalists who participated in media meetings in Honolulu.

Whenever the subject of leadership would come up, they, together with counterparts from the English press, would invariably point to Lee’s unique leadership attributes. I would hear stories of their personal encounters with him – that he was different from the other “strong men” of Asia – traditional politicos like President Sukarno and his successor Suharto of Indonesia or Marcos of the Philippines who were known to live ostentatious lifestyles. In contrast, PM Lee, who would then regularly invite journalists to his home, would prepare breakfast for guests and drive himself to work which could be a security nightmare especially during the early years when there were frequent threats from enemies. Apparently, they were able to overlook his “dictatorial ways” as he himself would describe how his critics, many of them from the Singapore-based Western media who came out with slanted stories about local politics. These included the Strait Times, the Herald, Time Magazine, the Asian Wall Street Journal, and the regional weeklies, Asiaweek, Far Eastern Econmic Review, and the Economist.

Most of the criticisms were directed at what is perceived as an anti-Western and anti-monopoly bias of the government (laws prohibiting any person or his nominee from holding more than 3 percent of the ordinary shares of the newspaper were passed) as well as other nationalistic economic and political issues. He would react to the criticisms by writing letters which are either edited or denied publication. The response to the latter is restricting the circulation – sometimes from 10,000 to 1,000, then to 500 until the editors eventually give up and provide space to the letters.

Lee Kwan Yew’s concept of freedom of the press or the news media does not follow the traditional western model as he believes that the media “must be subordinated to the overriding needs of Singapore, and to the primary purpose of an elected government.” This is why New York-based Freedom House had consistently ranked Singapore “Not free” in accordance with the Western indicators of media freedom.

According to Lee, he needs the media “to reinforce, not to undermine, the cultural values and social attitudes being inculcated in the schools. The mass media can create a mood in which the people become keen to acquire the knowledge, skills, and disciplines of advanced countries, as without these, we can never hope to raise the standard of living of our people.”

In fact, Lee Kwan Yew cites the Philippine press which is patterned after the US model as an example of a system that has enjoyed all the freedoms but that it had failed the Filipino people. The partisan press, he notes, “helped Filipino politicians to flood the marketplace of ideas with junk, and confused and befuddled the people so that they could not see what their vital interests were in a developing country.”

I may not agree with Lee Kwan Yew’s concept of media management, but I would admit that we can work a little harder in raising our own bar of media responsibility. His governance philosophy has worked well as he had succeeded in making this leap to become a first world. It is as Kofi Anan says, a good model for many developing countries.

But our definition of development, is multidimensional, It is not only measured by Gross National Product but by other social, cultural criteria as well. While grappling with the daunting challenges of economic development, we are now focusing on human development considerations – individual’s freedom and right to make choices, happiness, and democratic participation which are equally important in a liberal democracy. My e-mail is florangel.braid@gmail.com