Social and religious harmony is not unraveling in Singapore

Social and religious harmony is not unraveling in Singapore

Asad Latif, The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore

The topic of the online discussion with Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim, which the Singapore International Foundation organized last week, was striking: "Social and racial harmony -- Is Singapore unraveling?"

Participant Ned Kelly asked: "Racial and religious tolerance begins with education. How will the 'unraveling' of Singapore relate to the unraveling of the tudung?"

Dr. Yaacob, the Acting Minister for Community Development and Sports and the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, was not ruffled by the question.

He explained that the tudung, the Islamic headscarf for women, was not banned in Singapore. Muslim women could wear it in their workplace, for example.

"But there are areas such as schools where we need to preserve the common ground. The vast majority of Muslims has accepted this. So I do not see this episode as the unraveling of Singapore," he replied.

The only other question which came close to the tone of that exchange was from Shorna, who asked whether the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore felt secure.

The minister thought that it did. Noting that many Malays worked in "large companies which we are proud of", he remarked: "They contribute to these companies knowing that their stake in our country depends on their performance in these companies."

If the two questions were laced with some acerbity (as their tone implied, at least to me), the overall tenor of the dialogue, which lasted more than an hour, was reflective.

The need to strengthen racial and social harmony was the theme of most of the 40-odd questions posed during the online forum.

Circumspection and not cynicism, disquiet but not despair characterized the questions and their premises.

Indeed, the discussion underscored the salience of racial harmony.

Participant Max Facto argued that the perception that diversity was unraveling should be changed, and Singaporeans should acknowledge diversity as a gift which they could leverage on.

Agreeing, the minister said he believed that the challenge was "for us to rise above the differences and appreciate them for what they are."

But when the same participant wondered whether the constant emphasis on racial harmony was not a reminder of racial differences, Dr. Yaacob was candid.

"I think we cannot run away from these differences," he said. "I would be lying if I say that I do not see differences every day in Singapore."

He understood the questioner's sentiments. "But groups do want to preserve their identities," the minister said. "Hence these differences will become transparent. The key is our attitude to such differences."

To me, a fruitful attitude recognizes that ethnicity is a fact of life in this country, and that it is not immune to international facts of life.

Domestically, there is what I shall call a balance of reality. The majority and the minorities realize that Singapore rests on mutual acceptance.

The Chinese do not seek to assimilate Malays, Indians and Eurasians but are more than happy to see the latter preserving their cultures and religions.

This enlightened approach allows the minorities to integrate with the majority on shared terms, not on terms handed down imperiously to them.

No matter what issues of cultural or religious practice might arise from time to time, citizens and the Government try to resolve them within the broader parameters of goodwill and trust that have been laid down and entrenched in the body politic over time.

To put matters bluntly, no matter how much dissatisfaction surfaces occasionally, I cannot imagine Malays believing that this is a Chinese country where they live on sufferance, or Chinese fearing that Indians and Eurasians will team up with Malays against them (or some other combination).

This is the balance of reality within Singapore.

The world outside is another matter.

The current global Islamic revival is the latest in a series of ascendancies to which Singapore has had to respond.

An ascendant West influenced its population once; the rise of China has not left Chinese Singaporeans unimpressed; today, the globalization of Islam is attracting the attention of Muslim Singaporeans.

The problem with global Islam (a term which I do not quite like but which I use as a shorthand) is not piety -- for there is no reason why a pious Muslim cannot be a good Singaporean -- but the terrible incursion of violence into the minds of some internationally-influential Muslims who would hijack a religion which is devoted to peace.

Repudiating that violence, as Muslim Singaporeans do by and large, is the way to ensure that the violent fringes of global Islam do not overpower the genuine character of the religion and pit non-Muslims against Muslims in a conflict of perceptions fed by misunderstanding, prejudice and fear.

Singaporeans cannot do anything about the ways of the world but everything to ensure that pernicious imports do not undermine the ways of this country.

Social and religious harmony is not unraveling in Singapore and it will not -- unless Singaporeans themselves let it happen.

And if they do, they will be responsible for the consequent catastrophe. The world will simply move on.