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.