Remarks by Singapore Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen at the Fourth Reagan National Defense Forum Panel "A View of US National Defense from Friends and Allies"

First, let me thank everyone for inviting us to this forum. It is my first time visiting the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. I know American vibrancy very well. The way you do things has always been exceptional and I agree with remarks made before this forum that this is a time for change and a time for reflection and I thought it would be useful for me to use the next few minutes to just confine my remarks to the Asia-Pacific region.

I think as one ponders policies going forward, it is quite useful to see how your past policies have affected the Asia-Pacific region. I thought I want to make three points. All of us know that in the last 70 years, after the World War II (WWII), there was American dominance in the Asia-Pacific region that was the force of stability. I wanted to choose a particular quote and this quote is from a former Indonesian Defence Minister, some of you may know him, Dr Juwono Sudarsono. He was the first civilian Defence Minister that Indonesia had. He said this, "It was America's "forward presence" that provided "vital strategic assurance, guaranteeing regional and financial growth" in the Asia-Pacific region." It was the USA's stabilising force that allowed emerging economies like Singapore, the four dragons, China (and) India to be able to rise. Indeed one should see the rise of China, India and ASEAN - of a combined population of three billion people –that allowed hundreds of millions to be lifted out of poverty, as a virtuous outcome of the US foreign and defence policies over the last 70 years. That is the first realisation. I think that very fact alone validates the effectiveness of the US foreign and defence policies in Asia over the last few decades. But I think this success brings along a suite of new challenges as we contemplate the US foreign policy going forward.

I would just like to make two points with regard to it. First, the US' role as a resident power in the Asia-Pacific region cannot be for the sole purpose of containing China, perceived or otherwise. It is neither possible nor strategically necessary to contain China's rise. There are good reasons for this. Secretary Fallon said that America benefits from its investments, and its security policies and defence policies around the world. China is now an integral leader of global systems of trade, finance and security. It is the second largest economy in the world, largest or second largest trading partner of nearly every country in the Asia-Pacific region. To cite some figures to reflect that, China is US' largest goods trading partner and the total goods traded between both countries amounted to $600 billion last year. In the first nine months of this year, Chinese companies have invested US$76 billion in buying US firms and this was compared to US$2 billion a decade ago. China also has strong economic initiatives. You have heard about the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) with 57 founding members to date. Militarily, China is the second largest defence spending behind the US and the PLA participates in many peacekeeping operations that are global in nature. It is clear that China needs the World as much as the World needs China, and I think this interdependence will grow, not diminish.

My second point is that the US' presence in the Asia-Pacific region based predominantly on security is unidimensional and structurally brittle. The US announced 60% of its naval and air power to be based in the Pacific by 2020. These security policies must be complemented by the US expansion of its trade and commerce links to ensure that it remains a dominant economic power as it has historically been. I will remind everyone that in the past 50 years, the US was instrumental in establishing the international monetary and financial order post WWII, whether it was the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the World Bank.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership would have been a concrete, tangible commitment and to continue to be a dominant force, the US needs a multifaceted relationship with countries in Asia. China is pursuing that multifaceted relationship with many countries, whether it is through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the One Belt One Road initiative and as I recently mentioned, the AIIB.

I want to just conclude by saying that I do not believe for a moment, even with any new administration, that the US would reduce its presence in the Asia-Pacific region. Singapore looks forward to working with the new administration to continue to allow the US to be a stabilising force in the Asia-Pacific region.

On the potential collaboration between the US' new administration and Taiwan

I want to be careful and wise and say that it is not Singapore's place to second-guess what President Elect's reason for the call is. But let me make the larger point. I started by saying that America's presence in the Asia-Pacific should not be perceived or otherwise be seen as containing China. And there is a larger strategic question: what is America's interest? Is it to accommodate China's rise in the Asia-Pacific region? Taiwan is a core interest of China. President Elect's administration team followed up after the phone call to say that they adhere to the One China policy, as does Singapore and we are very careful and in fact, constructive. If you remember, there were three instances whereby we advanced that One China policy. In 1993, in what was called the Wang-Koo talks, followed by the 1992 One Consensus meeting, and last year, when President Xi Jinping and Ma Ying-jeou met in Singapore. So I think we ought to have a larger strategic interest in mind. I think there are a lot of benefits of a strong China; being able to provide opportunities for both US and other countries in the world, and I think that there are many areas that you can focus on that are productive.

On the threats due to terrorist groups in Afghanistan

I thought it would be useful to share that the export of global terrorism effects in my region has great impact. As you know Indonesia, with 250 million people is the world's largest Muslim democracy. Malaysia has a significant number of Muslims. But more than that, as we emphasise to Secretary Carter when we met during our last meeting at the ASEAN-US Defence Minister' Informal Meeting is that paradoxically as the situation in Iraq and Syria improves, we are expecting the wave of returning fighters back in the Southeast Asia to exacerbate the region. The problem - Indonesia has reported more than 700 foreign fighters in Iraq and Syria; Malaysia has reported around 300 of which some numbers are from their military, and Southern Philippines and parts of Indonesia have, even now, geographically they are easy to house terror training camps. It is a clear and present danger and that is the reason why Singapore felt that we should be part of this fight against terror. That is why we went to Uruzgan together with the Australians, Americans as well as even to Kandahar, Kabul and now our tankers are helping to refuel some of the fighter jets in Iraq and Syria. We will continue to contribute.

I think there is a real opportunity for us to collaborate. We will collaborate on intelligence as well as other platforms, but it is a significant problem for Southeast Asia.

More Resources

China's Rise Cannot Be Contained - Singapore Defence Minister at Reagan National Defense Forum