TREACHERY OF MASTER CHEE

Dr Chee Soon Juan’s foreign liaisons: an act of patriotism or treachery?

November 21, 2009 by admin
Filed under Opinion

Leave a comment

Written by our (fake) Correspondent

Singapore opposition politician Dr Chee Soon Juan is not new to controversy and this time round he managed to get himself in the spotlight both at home and abroad again for a series of damning interviews he gave to U.S. radio stations castigating the Singapore government for its “political repression” on the eve of the APEC Summit held in Singapore.

Robert Amsterdam, a Canadian lawyer representing Dr Chee pro bono in his court cases, published an equally damaging White Paper calling on U.S. President Barack Obama to voice out his concerns about Singapore’s “human rights record” during his visit here which was widely publicized in the international media.’

The state media predictably published an article with a glaring headline “Canadian with links to Chee attacks Singapore’s political system” to portray Dr Chee as a “foreign stooge”, a label which he had found hard to shake off.

This is not the first time that Dr Chee had made used of the western media to attack the Singapore government.

In 1995, he staged a protest in Williams’ College where then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong was to receive a Master’s degree from his alma mater.

Dr Chee’s “antics” was frowned about by Singaporeans who disapproved of him using “outsiders” to criticize their country’s leaders, which was reflected in subsequent elections in the declining share of votes received by his Singapore Democratic Party.

By and large, Dr Chee’s criticisms of Singapore in the west will hardly dent public confidence in the ruling party which maintains a tight grip on the Singapore media.

Neither will it have any impact on Singapore’s relationships with the United States and other countries. President Obama reaffirmed the excellent bilateral relations between Singapore and the United States during the APEC Summit. He did not meet Dr Chee or bring up Singapore’s “repressiveness” to its hosts.

Though Singapore is a tiny country, it has always been a key strategic ally of the United States in the region. Furthermore, its “repressiveness” pales in comparison to what is happening elsewhere in the region such as China, Vietnam and North Korea.

It will be foolhardy to expect the United States to strain diplomatic ties with Singapore by meddling in its domestic affairs.

Dr Chee may be able to generate bring attention to his cause, but its impact is likely to be minimal at least in the near future.

Not that his words doesn’t hurt the ruling party a bit. Singapore’s international image and standing have definitely taken a beating from the wave of negative publicity about its harsh and repressive laws to curtail the civil liberties of its citizens.

Branding is especially important for a small city-state like Singapore. What is the first impression that comes to one mind when Singapore is mentioned? Probably a nanny authoritarian state in contrast to Hong Kong which is widely viewed as a modern, cosmopolitan and liberal city though it is under communist rule.

One seldom hears the criticisms leveled at Singapore elsewhere – in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan or South Korea. Singapore can do without such persistent, if not irritating negative portrayal of its political system.

As for Dr Chee, the Singapore government can well afford to ignore him given that he is a spent force who posed little or no threat to them.

Being a bankrupt, Dr Chee is barred from contesting in future elections. His colleagues are unlikely to get elected either on a SDP ticket.

So is Dr Chee is a patriot or traitor?

Most Singaporeans certainly don’t regard him as a “patriot” trying to speak up for them.

To be fair to him, the mainstream media has been most biased towards him and is relatively successful in concocting an image of him of seeking out a personal vendetta against government leaders for bankrupting him.

To the ever faithful followers of the state media and the ruling party, Dr Chee is a traitor who will scoop to any means to defame the Singapore government.

But again, a traitor would have left Singapore a long time ago to fire pot shots at the ruling party from a safe distance afar rather than risk his livelihood and the future of his children by staying put in Singapore.

Dr Chee’s use of the foreign media to attack the Singapore government smacks more of desperation than a well-thought move. It is political suicide for any aspiring opposition politician who wishes to win a seat in parliament.

Besides Dr Chee, no other opposition leaders or MPs have criticized the Singapore government in the international press.

The ruling party has cleverly quoted them as examples that opposition politicians do exist in Singapore as long they don’t defame government leaders like Dr Chee in its defence.

Dr Chee is fighting a losing battle on his own without support even from his fellow opposition leaders or Singaporeans.

While he deserved some credit for his fighting spirit, doubts must be raised about his political acumen.

As history have shown us, the ruling party will not flinch from taking drastic actions to preserve its own interests despite international pressure, e.g. the arrests of 20 or so social workers and activists under “Operation Spectrum” in 1988.

Dr Chee and the SDP will be far better off building up their support at the grassroots level so that they will have a better chance of winning a coveted seat in the next general elections.

The Americans who heard Dr Chee’s interviews would probably have forgotten about Singapore and Dr Chee by now.

chee's biggest supporters are FOREIGNERS and not local peasants which really is very confusing. chee is sgporean, his supporters foreigners. why is chee exploiting foreigners to bash his own country? who would perish if one day chee succeeds? the foreigners or the locals? doesn't that make chee a very devious national traitor of the highest level?