Lee Hsien Yang made a very strange claim recently that has dangerous ramifications for Singaporeans.
He claimed that the Singapore government is intent on blocking his son, Li Shengwu, from one day becoming Prime Minister.
This is the first time Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Lee Suet Fern have floated the notion of Shengwu as a political scion, and it’s a troubling development.
If they fabricated this claim to obtain political asylum, they would be guilty of misleading UK authorities— a serious offense. If they genuinely believe their claim, however, it is a wake-up call for Singaporeans to guard against any unearned continuation of political dynasties.
Singapore’s ethos is built on meritocracy, not inheritance. SM Lee Hsien Loong has many times said his children have no desire to enter politics. SM Lee’s own son has publicly declared he has no political ambitions, dismissing any notions of family succession. If the goal is a Singapore free from dynastic influence, then Singaporeans ourselves must be vigilant in protecting this principle.
It’s hard to ignore the sense that Lee Hsien Yang’s claim is more an attempt to gain sympathy as a victim and to shame and paint Singapore as some crockpot third world dictatorship, rather than a stable, mature democracy with democractic, independent institutions.
The Singapore government has shown no indication of grooming specific successors, and these baseless accusations make little sense in a country known for its meticulously planned and transparent leadership transitions.
Beyond the questionable nature of their asylum claims, there’s an air of entitlement in Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Suet Fern’s political ambitions for their son. Li Shengwu is largely unknown to the general public, having lived abroad for years with no political involvement or interest.
To suggest that he could or should be Singapore’s future Prime Minister is presumptuous, at best. Merely being descended from Lee Kuan Yew does not entitle one to power; leadership in Singapore is earned, not inherited.
His brother, SM Lee had to gain the trust of the people through multiple elections, but just as importantly, the trust of his colleagues, in order to assume the position of Prime Minister. And he had to maintain the trust of people and colleagues through clear, effective leadership across 20 years.
The idea that Lee Hsien Yang or his son is in any way owed such a position undermines the meritocratic values upon which Singapore was built. And to make such claims, tells us a lot of his character.
Remember that Lee Hsien Yang teased everyone into thinking he would run for elections under Tan Cheng Bok’s Progress Singapore Party, and then didn’t in the end. Then a year later, he pulled the same stunt by pretending he was interested in the Presidential Elections. And then he didn’t run.
Perhaps he didn’t run, because he knew that he would be judged by Singaporeans, and we would judge him to be severely wanting. And now, by running away and pleading the UK to “protect” him, hiding under the skirts of our former colonial masters simply to embarrass his brother, he has embarrassed us Singaporeans.
This saga feels more like a soap opera than a genuine political issue, and it’s largely due to the persistent, very public comments from Lee Hsien Yang. His brother, SM Lee, has stayed largely silent, unwilling to stoke the flames of this public feud.
Lee Hsien Yang, however, seems determined to keep the drama alive, to the exasperation of many Singaporeans who are simply tired of the spectacle. It’s difficult to see this as anything other than a personal vendetta, one that does not serve the interests of Singapore or its people.
Views: 18
