Singapore Sets Values as Moral Anchor

The government has proclaimed five “shared values” for this tiny nation’s 2.7 million people, but seems to be giving up the idea of a distinctive Singaporean character.

When the government began its quest for a moral anchor in a rapidly changing world, it described the goal as a national ideology to prevent Singapore from becoming too Westernized. But the product of the search avoids religious or political controversy.

Parliament codified these five values in a “white paper” but did not enact them to be enforced as law:

* Nation before community and society above self.

* Family as the basic unit of society.

* Community support and respect for the individual.

* Consensus, not conflict.

* Racial and religious harmony.

Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who drafted the white paper, said it was hard to make the principles meaningful without being maudlin.

“Firstly, the subject is sensitive,” he said. “To succeed, the shared values cannot be controversial. They must enjoy wide consensus support. But secondly, neither can the shared values be mere platitudes. . . . They cannot be just a general list of virtues, with no practical meaning.”

Lee, 38, is the son of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, who stepped down in November after 31 years but is not gone from the picture. Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong acknowledges that the younger Lee is his logical successor.

Although the five values are not the only ones Singaporeans should hold in common, Lee said, they “provide a guide to help us avoid going astray. They offer a basis from which a Singaporean identity can in time emerge.”

The quest for a Singaporean identity has long engrossed the leaders of this prosperous city-state. About 76% of the people are of Chinese descent, 15% ethnic Malays and 9% ethnic Indians and others.

There was a search in the 1970s for distinctive formal clothing to set citizens of Singapore apart. It fizzled. National songs and community dances were promoted, with limited success.

“One people, one nation, one Singapore” was the theme of last year’s 25th independence anniversary, but it seemed to conflict with renewed debate of the country’s ethnic roots.

After years of waiting for a “Singaporean Singapore” to evolve, it became clear that the dream of a multiracial melting pot had largely been abandoned.

In its place is a new emphasis on strengthening and respecting ethnic and racial roots. Officials now speak of a mosaic of cultures, a successful blend of immigrant peoples who made an unlikely nation thrive through hard work, tough government and free enterprise.

Discussion of sensitive issues, taboo since bloody race riots in the 1960s, no longer is prohibited.

Special “cultural months” have extolled the separate heritages of the Chinese, Malays and Indians. The constitution was amended to make sure that ethnic minorities were represented in Parliament.

English has long been the closest thing to a common language, but last year, the majority Chinese were urged to speak Mandarin. The official campaign was so shrill that non-Chinese expressed concern.

Efforts are being made to improve the lot of Malays, most of whom are Muslim. As a group, Malays lag so far behind the super-achieving Chinese in education and economic progress that they sometimes seem like a permanent underclass.

Suppiah Dhanabalan, the minister in charge of national development, told his fellow Indians to stop blaming the “bogey of discrimination” for their shortcomings.

“Let us forget once and for all the idea that because we are a minority we are entitled to special concessions and privileges to help ourselves,” Dhanabalan said.

The government even agreed to a request from the 7,000 Eurasians to list them as such on official forms, not as “others.”

Not everyone agreed with the shift in direction. Former Foreign Minister Sinnathamby Rajaratnam, whose views are highly respected, said it was divisive and could lead to “a hodgepodge of wary ethnic strangers.”