Security Challenges for a New Generation

Thank you again Ms Müller, Professor Paulsen, Mr Wehmeier, for inviting me back here. I don't intend to speak for very long because I would rather hear from you and have an interchange. As the organisers have said, I am a committed, faithful devotee to this Munich Young Leaders Programme. I think it's a wonderful idea to invite outstanding young leaders who at your age, are extremely accomplished. Many of you are already in government parliaments, think tanks, media. And to involve you substantially in the main programmes - I've listened to some of the questions that you've asked world leaders which were very thoughtful and well presented, well-articulated. The second reason why I believe in the Munich Young Leaders Programme is that I don't think we will solve our problems in our lifetime so we had better get you involved earlier, so that you can solve them when you truly are world leaders. And I expect that some of you will come back and speak at the podiums of the Munich Security Conference as world leaders. I've seen your resumes, they are incredibly impressive, so that's the reason why I fully support this programme. I am delighted to be back again. Two years ago, I addressed this same group, and I identified five factors which I thought could potentially sow the seeds of discord in regions and globally. I don't intend to revisit or elaborate on those factors, but what I would like to do is just briefly recite these five factors and update with examples.

First, trade patterns. China is now the leading trade partner for ASEAN and Australasia. By 2020, China's exports to Europe (at over US$1 trillion) will be almost twice as large as the US. Just think about it. Europe's trade with China will be twice as large as that of the US. 

Second factor I identified was unsustainable legacy systems. Many states in Europe are struggling to cope with post-war "cradle-to-grave" social welfare systems for its citizens. And austerity is too bitter a pill and is impacting social and political systems, whether it's Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, so on and so forth.

Third, I mentioned greater polarisation. Even prior to the Charlie Hebdo incident, the problems of integration existed, as all of us know. But recent elections in Europe have seen a shift to the right with growing anti-immigrant sentiments, and this pull to the political right - anti-immigrant, anti-globalisation – is a global phenomenon. 

Fourth, I talked about transnational threats. Terrorist threats from ISIS, Ebola Crisis, the alleged North Korean cyber-attacks on Sony and the ISIS hacking of the US' Military's Central Command Twitter are recent examples. 

Finally, I talked about demography. Europe and Japan are ageing as we speak. By 2030, China's elderly dependent population is likely to outnumber its younger, working age population. 

The interplay of some or all of these factors is set against three current and contentious backdrops - An Altered Europe, Rising Nationalism and Political Islam. The combinations can be explosive. Let me elaborate. 

Altered Europe

This whole conference is about an altered Europe. The difference between this year's Munich Security Conference compared to last year's couldn't be starker. Last year, from all of us who attended this, we were celebrating the 50th anniversary of the MSC, 70 years of peace, 50 years of transatlantic strong relationships, so on and so forth, and then the annexation of Crimea occurred, the downing of MH17, Russia's subsequent rhetoric and its position on Ukraine, an unstable Ukraine. All these have radically altered the European security landscape. I muted my words because I didn't know how I would put it, but I didn't have to, listening to the talks. They have gone so far as to even declare that Europe's peace is broken. As many panelists on this conference have said, the defence spending of Europe is likely to rise. 

Across Europe, we are witnessing a rise of the right wing movement. Some examples: the European Parliament elections last year saw 24 seats gained by the Front National in France, three seats for the violent and anti-Semitic Greek Golden Dawn Party, three to the Anti-Semitic Hungarian Jobbik Party and the first neo-Nazi Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Germany. In addition to opposing immigration, many of these movements also campaign against the European Union (EU) and the single currency union. 

Rising Nationalism 

Second, rising nationalism. The leaders of many big powers, whether it's China, Japan, India or Russia have all taken strong nationalist positions as their political platforms. 

Let me recite you some. Shortly after taking office, President Xi in his first speech as Head of State said:

"Our responsibility is to unite and lead people around the country in realising the great revival of the Chinese nation, in order to let the Chinese nation stand more firmly and powerfully among all nations around the world and make a greater contribution to mankind."

Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe set forth early on when he assumed premiership,  in his speech to the diet in Jan 2013: 

"There is no one else who will create a 'strong Japan'. It is none other than we ourselves who will do it."

India's new Prime Minister Modi added to the chorus of rising nationalism in Asia during his first world exclusive interview by stating:

"[India] once upon a time was called 'the golden bird'. We have fallen from where we were before. But now we have the chance to rise again."

In Europe, President Putin stated in his speech to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation - this was following the annexation of Crimea - said:

"Unfortunately, what seemed impossible became a reality. The USSR fell apart. It was only when Crimea ended up as part of a different country that Russia realized that it was not simply robbed, it was plundered.

Russia did not annex Crimea by force. Russia created conditions for the free expression of will by people living in Crimea and Sevastopol.

Crimea was and will remain an indelible part of Russia in people's hearts and minds."

Nationalism as a political platform for leaders is nothing new. However, the conundrum for leaders and their nations is how inclusive they remain even as nationalistic sentiments are aroused. How would they contend with existing powers, such as the US, and as they rise, which they have said they want to, ensure their rings of influence and power do not intersect with one another? And, how can they do so while preserving the global commons of trade, finance and security? Can we forge consensus and win-win outcomes, and can these nationalistic aims be reconciled with the current international world order? I think these are important questions.

But what is certain, however, is that nationalistic fervour can get out of hand. You will remember that China deployed an oil rig in the SCS in disputed waters off the Paracel Islands last year. As a result of this, anti-China riots broke out in Vietnam. These were not small-scale rights, these were quite large riots. Factories were looted and damaged. Amusingly, they attacked the wrong factories because the factories belonged to Taiwan. But they couldn't differentiate it so…they look Chinese and anyway they looted. Similarly in 2012, Japan's purchase of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands led to violent anti-Japanese protests. 

Political Islam 

The third factor, Political Islam. Political Islam affects us all, evolution of Political Islam. The ability of countries to integrate their multiracial and multi-religious communities is affected by this evolution of Political Islam in Arab states and globally. Austere religiosity dictated by Wahabism, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Islamic militancy and Jihad are all products of this evolution.  

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. Here, I want you to hear what Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi said to top religious leaders on the occasion of the Birth of Prophet Mohamed in Al Azhar. Listen to these words carefully.



"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." 

Responding to the Evolving Security Landscape

How do we respond to these deep-seated forces that can threaten our peace and stability? And I think as I said, these challenges will not only occupy my but I suspect your generation in the decades ahead. They are not easy forces to content with. Let me offer some suggestions.

First, the search for common principles. The Principles of the Treaty of Westphalia which govern state to state relations can only be sustained when there is a rules-based approach to protect the global commons which serve us all. For trade and finance, countries are guided by agreements such as GATT and organisations such as the WTO, the UN. In the realm of security, there are established military alliances like NATO and agreements on nuclear disarmament. UNCLOS was seen as a significant advance which many countries ratified. These rules don't exist in vacua, they cannot exist in vacua but must be accompanied by compliance and enforcement otherwise they mean nothing. The US, as the de facto "hyperpower" for the last half-century, played this role of a global facilitator, if not an enforcer.  

So we have to think, as the global hierarchy re-arranges itself because of changing trade patterns, demography, the five factors I mentioned, do these rules change? And can the US, as the erstwhile only "hyperpower" continue its global role? The US has made clear that it intends to remain a "Pacific Power" and an Atlantic power.

But whatever the hierarchy, there is a need for multilateral engagement, to agree on principles and forge political consensus.  This is particularly true of Asia, which unlike Europe, does not have a long history of defence dialogue or cooperation. We have the ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting (ADMM), but that was only inaugurated in 2006. The Shangri-La Dialogue is less than 15 years. 

Second, we need confidence building measures that can enhance practical cooperation and build confidence. And one example I would cite is what we did in ADMM two years ago. We had 18 nations - the ADMM, the ASEAN and plus-8 countries - conduct a Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief and Military Medicine Exercise off Brunei in 2013. There were about 3,000 over personnel, 18 countries. So you had soldiers from Japan, China, India and the US coming together, landing on each others' decks on the ships and exchanging best practices and so on. In this regard, I think it is a valuable platform but we need to do more. 

And we will do more in terms of counter-terrorism, maritime security, and other exercises. Another example is the Combined Task Force against piracy in the Gulf of Aden.

The third point and finally, it is necessary to enhance collective efforts to build real capacity so that we can respond to challenges more quickly and effectively. What was mentioned at this conference, a quick reaction force, increasing it from a couple of thousand to thirty thousand is certainly one example, but there are other examples that I would cite, in Asia. Singapore started an Information Fusion Centre (IFC) and the Changi Regional HADR Coordination Centre (RHCC), and it plays a useful role because it allows a common picture to be shared by all for maritime security, And for humanitarian crisis, China and France have already accredited International Liaison Officers.

Conclusion

Let me conclude and I welcome listening to your questions after that. I think it is with every generation, potentially divisive forces exist that can threaten our collective peace and security. These challenges call for enlightened leadership, collective political action in the spirit of multilateral and international modes of cooperation so that we can safeguard global stability and progress. Thank you for your kind attention. I look forward to hearing your ideas on how we can make this a reality. Thank you very much.