Distinguished delegates at the Sherpa Meeting of the Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD), let me personally give you all a warm welcome and a good morning.

It's interesting you call yourself Sherpas, and as you know Sherpas do help their climbers climb summits (and) carry heavy workloads. I think that's what IISS intended for this meeting, for you to play key roles to guide each SLD to its fruitful conclusion. But if the SLD is to scale summits, then I think we do well to focus on identifying the challenges and threats, and collective measures to mitigate, if not resolve tensions. So I hope that during the discussions at this Fullerton Forum, you will have the resolve to do the heavy lifting, to tackle key issues and explore possible avenues to improve the security of our region.  

The 2014 Shangri-La Dialogue

For security matters, 2014 was an eventful year. Possible seeds of disruption were sowed, namely the annexation of Crimea and related to it, the tragic shooting down of MH17 over Ukranian airspace. I say disruptive because these two events significantly altered the mood -the mood felt at the 50th Munich Security Conference (MSC). Some of you may have attended that. It was the beginning of last year. The discussions at the 50th, the Golden Jubilee of the MSC, focused on the roles of NATO and the Trans-Atlantic Partnership in an era when Russia's foreign and economic policy seemed increasingly aligned with that of Europe - I'm referring to the MSC at the beginning of last year. Nuclear disarmament was still an issue to be resolved, but set against a more benign context that the Cold War had precipitated. I remember that questions were even being asked about what the focus of NATO should be, as its traditional threats had diminished and there were justifiably congratulations that in the last 50 years, wars have been avoided.

Indeed, the concern over Europe, at least from the perspective of Asia, was that a Europe that was "reaping its peace dividends" would be detached from the security and political affairs in this part of the world. This is why platforms like the ASEAN Regional Forum, the ASEAN-EU Dialogue Partnership and the Asia-Europe Meeting are important, as platforms for Europe's continued engagement in this region. Indeed, I remember because this was Secretary Gates, the US former Secretary of Defense. (He) had gone to Europe after coming to Singapore and giving us a foretaste of what he was going to say in Europe and expressed quite strongly his dissatisfaction with the US allies in Europe over their military commitment. In his farewell address in Brussels, I quote:   

"The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress, and in the American body politic writ large, to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense."

And everybody knew who the other partners were.

But just barely a year after the 50th MSC, Europe's security milieu has changed drastically. Against the backdrop of Russia's actions and posture over Ukraine, which have fundamental security implications, and the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), terror attacks and threats on the home soil of European states, some EU states have already increased or pledged to increase defence spending. The harvest of "peace dividends" this year, previously enjoyed, is now bare.

I start with rapid changes in Europe's security environment, not to suggest that the next SLD should focus on Europe. It should not, as the SLD should still be centred on Asia, our part of the world. I do so to point out that good Sherpas ought to tell their climbers that weather conditions are capricious as they attempt to scale summits. Weather conditions can change and you as experienced guides ought to tell your climbers, whoever you are climbing with, that we really ought to be focusing on something else besides what the current conditions are.

The known trans-national threats are obvious to all, such as tensions in the South and East China Seas due to maritime and territorial disputes; the risks of terrorist attacks whether from "lone-wolves" or better trained militants in Asia; biologic pandemics from Ebola or other organisms; humanitarian disasters, whether from typhoons, earthquakes or missing aircraft.  

But whatever we think the challenges are, the SLD must address these known challenges directly as we did last year. In last year's SLD, the conversations were frank - perhaps pointed and tense on several occasions as points of disagreement surfaced. But no one could have accused SLD for glossing over key issues and I think the overall discussions were constructive, with intense exchanges of views that enabled better understanding of each other's perspectives. Quite a few long-time attendees of the SLD said it was the best one yet.

During the discussions, participants boldly tackled issues like the US' rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific, the role of other major powers in the region and the changing regional order, territorial and maritime disputes in the East and South China Seas, military modernisation and new military capabilities, climate change and many others. We heard from speakers from many countries - the US, China, Japan, Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the UK, France, Vietnam, among others - although it was a pity that we did not have the opportunity to hear from India.

This tone of the SLD should be kept if it is to remain as the foremost defence and security forum in the Asia-Pacific region.

Moving into 2015

Moving onto this year's SLD, let me highlight some key themes that I think deserve our attention for the upcoming SLD. This is in addition to the known knowns. First, the threat of religious extremism is particularly relevant in Asia, where some of the most populous Muslim nations reside. ISIS ought to be seen in the continuum precipitated by the Sept 11 attacks in 2001. In that context, more weighty and even sensitive issues would have to be addressed apart from the immediate issue of neutralising ISIS. Because when the threat of ISIS has been stemmed, and I am confident that it will as more countries join the coalition, another rogue extremist religious group is likely to emerge to replace it - just as ISIS did over Al-Qaeda.

In the last few months, we have also witnessed an increase in "lone-wolf" attacks inspired by extremist ideology, whether (it's) in Australia, the Sydney café siege, in France, Canada,(or) the US, which also saw a number of attacks by individuals purportedly inspired by, but with no direct links to, the ISIS. Most recently, the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris.

As tragic and heinous that these events are, they are symptoms of a larger disturbance. The central issue is the evolution of political Islam and its impact on regional and global stability. Concurrently, within countries, the integration of their multiracial and multi-religious communities can be further stressed when their indigenous communities are subjected to external forces. It is reported that more than 1000 foreign fighters join ISIS very month. The returning waves of these foreign fighters, exposed to the immediacy of the struggle in Iraq and Syria, their ideology and armed training, is obviously keeping security agencies awake all over the world and I think rightly so.  

For political Islam, the dynamic of Arab nations, internally and with each other will impact us globally, as it does today. I will just choose to cite two quotes to make my point. First, from Former Pakistan ambassador to the UN Munir Akram wrote recently,

"The fundamental origins of Islamist extremism and militancy lie in the failure of Muslim states, and other states with Muslim populations, to deliver jobs, justice and dignity to a growing army of young people. The economic, social and demographic indicators in Muslim countries are some of the worst in the world. Their societies are imbued with inequality and injustice."

How moderate Muslims nations respond to these perceived injustices is therefore a key component in this evolution of political Islam. Here, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's speech to top religious leaders on the occasion of the Birth of Prophet Mohamed is particularly worthy of note, and I like to quote him. It's a long quote, but because of its importance, I think (it's) worth listening to:

"We should closely examine the situation in which we are in. (These are of course transcripts of translations.) It does not make sense that the thought we sanctify pushes this entire nation to become a source of apprehension, danger, murder and destruction in the entire world.

I am not saying the religion [itself]. I am saying this thought that has been sanctified; texts and thoughts that have been sanctified for hundreds of years. And disagreeing with [these texts and thoughts] has become very difficult. To the extent that [this thought] makes an enemy of the whole world.

Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world's inhabitants - that is 7 billion - so that they themselves may live? Impossible! I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema - Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I'm talking about now.

All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.

I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move... because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost - and it is being lost by our own hands."

I think this is one theme that bears focus on for the SLD.

Second, the dynamics between the large powers of US, China and now Japan bear watching closely. On the positive list are measures by the US and China to expand cooperation, including bilateral deals announced on the side-lines of the 2014 APEC Summit and the involvement of China for the first time in the US-hosted RIMPAC exercise.

Between China and Japan, the completion of the Four-Point agreement between the two countries last November and the first meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting were important first steps taken.

Nonetheless, military modernisation and defence spending in Asia continues on an unprecedented scale. It has increased by 70% over the last decade, according to the IISS, and has surpassed Europe's defence spending in recent years. Against the backdrop of ongoing territorial and maritime disputes in the region, the need for dialogue, de-escalatory mechanisms within a stable security architecture is clearly needed quickly. Here, I hope that this Fullerton Forum can flesh out important details and measures to establish an acceptable modus vivendi.

Third, political stability for individual countries in Asia and the impact on security. Some examples are Thailand, which has had to navigate the rapid change of governments, and Myanmar, which will hold watershed elections in the last quarter of this year.

Fourth, trans-national challenges arising from disasters and cybersecurity. The damaging effects of Typhoon Hagupit were mitigated and the search for missing AirAsia flight QZ8501 found quick resolution, in part due to the rapid response from collective efforts. As Typhoon Hagupit ploughed its way to the Philippines, a number of countries offered their assistance to the Philippine government. Singapore also put our Changi Regional HADR Coordination Centre on standby, and offered its assistance. Fortunately, external assistance was not needed. In the search for QZ8501, several countries, including Singapore, mobilised assets and resources and worked together under Indonesia's leadership to eventually locate the missing aircraft.

Way Forward

There are many more challenges that you will put on the plate but I just cited four for your consideration. I have three suggestions which I would like the Fullerton Forum to focus on to address our challenges.

First, there is scope to improve multilateralism to enhance regional security. We know platforms already exist, but how can we optimise them and to what end? Platforms include the ARF, EAS, ADMM and ADMM-Plus as well as the SLD and this Sherpa Meeting, where substantive engagement and cooperation on defence and security measures can take place. In particular, the ADMM-Plus has made good progress on practical cooperation through professional exchanges and joint exercises. One example that I would cite is the Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief and Military Medicine Exercise in Brunei which was conducted in 2013, where over 3,000 personnel from all 18 ADMM-Plus countries exercised together. Among others, a Maritime Counter-Terrorism exercise will be held in 2016. These practical cooperations build confidence and mutual understanding and helps prevent incidents on the ground from spiralling out of control because of misunderstandings or miscalculations. But in order for these platforms to stay relevant, it is important for such practical cooperation to be translated to the next level, such as actual outcomes and even operations.

And this is the next point - that we need to focus on practical measures to tackle the hard security challenges and to deliver concrete outcomes. And I think it is encouraging for some examples to be cited. In our regional security architecture, one examplesis Brunei's proposal for a Direct Communication Link among the ADMM members and partners, and Vietnam’s proposal for a no first use of force agreement. I hope that more countries will offer bold proposals that can deliver positive outcomes for the region.

Thirdly and finally, we need to enhance collective efforts to build real capacity to respond to challenges quickly and effectively. This is one reason why Singapore established in September last year the Changi Regional HADR Coordination Centre or RHCC, which seeks to facilitate military-to-military coordination in disaster response. Our hope is that the RHCC can contribute to more effective multinational military responses to disasters, by enhancing operational coordination among military responders. I am glad that China and France have already accredited International Liaison Officers to the RHCC, and that several other countries have indicated an interest in doing so. We have also set up the Republic of Singapore Navy's Information Fusion Centre (IFC) in 2009, which has played a useful role in enhancing regional maritime security through information sharing. Currently, 15 International Liaison Officers from various countries are working together at the IFC to fuse, analyse and disseminate maritime information to enable more effective responses to maritime security threats.

Conclusion

Let me conclude, ladies and gentlemen. In today's interdependent world, it is crucial for us to recognise that regional peace and stability depend on the collective will, and indeed the collective efforts, of nations to address the security challenges facing our region. I therefore look forward to your ideas on how we can make this a reality. Have a productive meeting and a good year ahead.