Speech by Minister for Defence, Mr Chan Chun Sing, at the 6th Plenary Session on “Evolving Security Partnerships in a Fragmenting World” at the 23rd Shangri-La Dialogue on 31 May 2026

Distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, a very good morning to all of you. 

First, let me thank you all for participating in the 23rd edition of the Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD). For over two decades, the SLD has provided a valuable opportunity for leaders to speak frankly, listen carefully, and find practical ways to work together to overcome our challenges. It is also an opportunity for us to create new possibilities. This matters even more today, as we meet at a time of heightened instability. 

Having heard your views over the last few days, I would like to share Singapore’s perspective on how the nature of conflict is evolving, how we need to adapt, and what must remain constant. 

The Evolving Nature of Conflict 

Conflict has evolved in terms of three “beyonds” – beyond geography, beyond military firepower, and beyond the here-and-now. 

First, beyond geography. Conflict is no longer geographically isolated. Today, we are hyperconnected across borders, and across military, economic, information, and cyber domains. Conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, for example, have disrupted global supply and production chains far beyond those regions. 

Second, beyond military power. While conventional military conflicts were previously largely defined by military capabilities, today’s conflicts reflect the interplay of multiple dimensions of power – from weaponising economic leverage, to contesting narratives, to waging lawfare to shape global rules and norms. 

Third, beyond the here-and-now. Conflicts are no longer just about yesterday’s quarrels or today’s disputes; they are also about setting frameworks for tomorrow’s contests. These may involve access to our vital lifelines like our information systems, energy grids, and water systems.

At the same time, countries are grappling with how to harness new technologies while implementing effective guardrails. We have to deal with what we call the “Regulation Paradox” – regulate too early, and we risk stifling innovation; regulate too late, and norms become too entrenched and difficult to reverse. 

Where does that leave us? As conflict evolves, our responses must also adapt. Let me suggest three responses in our principles, partnerships, and politics. 

First, principles, institutions, and norms. We must both maintain and update the rules and norms that are critical to our security and progress. We must not think that we can do without principles, institutions, and norms. 

Second, partnerships. We need more and new networks of flexible, overlapping, issue-based partnerships to address the new challenges. We must not think that going alone can better address our insecurities. 

Third, domestic politics. Domestic confidence and cohesion are prerequisites for policy continuity, societal coherence, and capability development, and in turn for international cooperation. We cannot manage international issues without managing domestic issues well, nor can we manage domestic issues well by ignoring international ones. 

Principles, Institutions, and Norms 

Let me start with principles, institutions, and norms. Our current system is not perfect and needs to be refreshed and aligned with today’s realities. But let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater, nor let the perfect be the enemy of the good. 

The alternative – a world with weak institutions and norms, where every issue and every relationship is viewed through a transactional lens – would leave us all worse off. More beggar-thy-neighbour policies would make beggars of us all. Heightened uncertainties erode business confidence, deter investments, and ultimately slow growth. All these shrink the space for domestic politics and international collaboration, stifling growth further, and create a negative spiral. For our nations and economies to thrive, we need stability and predictability, undergirded by rules and norms. Foregoing all these for short-term political gain would undermine our long-term collective security.

The rules and norms are especially critical when they are grounded in international law. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is one example. It provides clear and firm rules for our maritime activities, including the right of transit passage through critical straits used for international navigation. Keeping our sea lanes open is not just a matter of law, but of enlightened self-interest for all nations. Our survival, trade, and prosperity depend on it. 

Recent developments in the Strait of Hormuz remind us why such maritime rights matter. Should the right of transit passage be eroded, all countries that depend on maritime connectivity would be worse off. For the sake of global commerce, we must avoid a race to the bottom where states try to price each other out of access to such critical straits. And today, these waterways carry not just trade, but our critical pipelines for energy and data as well. It is in our own enlightened self and collective interest to keep them accessible, open, and secure. 

This is why Singapore works with Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand on the Malacca Straits Patrol. We recognise that freedom of navigation along the Straits – for trade, for data, and for energy – cannot be secured by any single country alone. It requires practical cooperation from all stakeholders. 

Flexible and Issue-Based Partnerships 

This brings me to my second suggestion: the need for more and new overlapping networks of flexible and issue-based arrangements to complement multilateral cooperation. 

If international cooperation is a lattice, multilateral institutions are its pillars. They provide legitimacy and inclusiveness. But as new domains evolve rapidly, we cannot be held hostage by the lowest common denominator. We should instead develop flexible partnerships with like-minded countries, forming coalitions of the able and willing. These serve as the connecting beams of our cooperative lattice: to bridge gaps, test ideas, and path-find in new and uncharted territories. As our second speaker mentioned, some of these new networks must include not just countries but other stakeholders. 

With these networks, we can work towards building trust in domains such as cyber and Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI offers tremendous opportunities to strengthen national security, but no government wants an uncontrollable AI-enabled weapons system. This is why Singapore has worked with partners like the Netherlands and the Republic of Korea to convene global discussions on military AI governance. In the cyber domain, Singapore launched the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM) Cybersecurity and Information Centre of Excellence (ACICE) in 2023. Singapore saw value in building a regional network that translates UN-level norms into practical regional cooperation. ACICE is leading an effort to implement the 11 UN norms on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace for ASEAN Member States. 

Beyond cyber and AI, Singapore sees an urgent need to establish guardrails to protect our Critical Underwater Infrastructure (CUI). As Australia Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles noted yesterday, subsea cables and pipelines are critical infrastructure underpinning our global connectivity, and their vulnerability is a growing shared concern. These systems span jurisdictions and cannot be secured by any single state alone. This is why Singapore spearheaded the development of the Guiding Principles for Underwater Infrastructure Defence Exchanges, or GUIDE, with like-minded partners. We launched this yesterday and welcome more partners to join us.

While we worked with Brunei and Thailand to co-sponsor the 2025 ADMM Concept Paper on CUI Security, from a Defence Perspective we saw a need to bring together like-minded partners from across different regions to tackle the global and transboundary challenge of CUI security. We are pleased that GUIDE was launched yesterday with 17 countries from the Europe, Southeast Asia, Oceania regions and the Middle East. GUIDE is a non-legally binding, multilateral initiative that outlines shared principles for CUI security and highlights potential areas of cooperation for us to translate into real capabilities.

The value of GUIDE is not only in the principles themselves, but in the network it builds. Through GUIDE, we hope to bring countries together around a shared vulnerability and develop common practices before they are tested by crisis. 

Domestic Politics

Let me turn to my final suggestion on politics. Trust abroad requires confidence at home. Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong once described Singapore as a small speedboat in an open sea. This image still holds. We cannot control the sea, but we can certainly keep our boat seaworthy. 

A captain cannot steer the boat effectively if the crew is divided. If our society is anxious or distrustful, our leaders will have less room to negotiate abroad. Conversely, domestic confidence and cohesion create space for governments to engage meaningfully and constructively, and to strike the compromises and collaborations necessary for peace. Domestic stability and external collaboration form a double helix that can and must reinforce each other. 

In these rough seas, steering the boat is not an easy task. It may be tempting to enact simple, populist solutions to earn short-term domestic support. However, over time, such solutions erode trust, deepen divisions, and leave societies less resilient. True leadership demands the courage to speak difficult truths, the discipline to take a long-term view, and the conviction to act in the broader interests of our people. 

There is no short-cut for solving problems at home. Blaming others will not fix what is broken. Durable solutions require countries to address their own challenges directly, using their economic, military, and information levers. The stronger our trust at home and the more cohesive we are, the better placed we are to work with others abroad. The stronger our capabilities, the more relevant we are, and the more credible and attractive a partner we can become. By pulling our own weight, we preserve the agency to pursue our own interests and avoid the false choice of having to pick sides, which ultimately makes us irrelevant. 

Conclusion 

Ladies and gentlemen, our challenges ahead are daunting, but every generation will have its own challenges cut out for it. They also present opportunities for us to strengthen cooperation between states. Our challenges will not define us – our responses to them will. We can either be paralysed by the magnitude of our challenges and retreat into zero-sum competition, or we can choose a different path: by reaffirming the rules that matter, creating new norms for emerging domains, and sustaining practical cooperation. 

Amid these changes, our goal remains the same – to build a better future for the next generation. Singapore will continue to do our part to contribute to global stability, and it is in this spirit of encouraging honest dialogue and practical cooperation that we host the SLD every year. Let us leave this gathering not just with a better understanding of our challenges and each other’s challenges, but with a renewed commitment to work together in addressing them. 

Before I end, I would like to thank IISS, the staff of Shangri-La Hotel, our security forces, and our media friends for your hard work behind the scenes. I wish you a safe journey home, and we look forward to hosting you once again next year. Thank you very much.

More Resources

Mr Chan: The Need for Flexible, Issue-based Partnerships to address Evolving Conflicts