风萧萧_Frank
以文会友
新加坡总理称「没多少国家愿意加入没有中国的联盟」，意味着什么？
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023
日，新加坡总理李显龙通过视频形式接受了彭博社总编辑米思伟（John Micklethwait）的专访，这一专访是为彭博创新经济论坛（Bloomberg New Economy Forum）所制作的，于11月17日播出。
虽然美国总统大选结果仍未尘埃落定，但外界普遍认为拜登将入主白宫。基于这一背景，两人对拜登就任美国总统后的世界局势进行了探讨。李显龙表示，他希望拜登上台执政后能专注于制定一个“有利框架”，与中国建立建设性的关系。
访问人米思伟则提到，人们所谈论拜登将要做的事情之一就是建立所谓的“民主国家联盟”，其中包括新加坡、印度尼西亚、日本和韩国。他向李显龙问道：“这是你所说的‘建立框架’的其中一个可能性吗？”
对此，李显龙先是礼貌性地表示希望与美国合作，随后他又补充称，新加坡也希望与其他蓬勃发展的经济体合作，共同促进区域合作。
“我想没有多少国家愿意加入一个会排除其他国家的联盟，尤其是一个没有中国的联盟。我想这不仅是新加坡和亚洲国家（这么想），即使在欧洲，也有一些国家希望与中国做生意。例如，欧盟正尝试与中国签订投资协议。”
李显龙还特别作出了解释：“这是可以理解的，而且我觉得这样更好。你希望大家参与对话，致力于作出调整，适应世界秩序的需要。在这个过程中，各国会结成联盟，实现合作共赢。但如果是冷战式的联盟，我认为各国并不打算这么做。”
面对访问人米思伟提出美国可能采取“拉帮结派”这一做法时，李显龙虽没有直白地拒绝，但却用另一种委婉的表达方式作出了回应。
彭博社总编辑米思伟视频专访李显龙 视频截图
李显龙总理出席 2023 年彭博新经济论坛
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023?
李显龙总理 | 2023 年 11 月 8 日
李显龙总理于 2023 年 11 月 8 日在彭博新经济论坛晚宴上与彭博社总编辑 John Micklethwait 进行了主持对话。
John Micklethwait（主持人）：李总理，感谢您的接待。我们会尝试在严肃中加点幽默。通常，如您所知，我们从中美之间的冷战开始这些对话。但这次我们有两场热战——哈马斯与以色列，俄罗斯与乌克兰。我们先从哈马斯和以色列开始吧——10 月 7 日，您大声谴责哈马斯当时的所作所为。自那时起，随着对加沙的轰炸持续不断，您呼吁停火。您还补充了一些内容，比如也许有必要调查可能的战争罪行。您谈到了需要更新两国解决方案。这与美国的立场略有不同。我想知道您能否为我们解释一下您为什么会采取这种立场？
李显龙总理：我们必须采取原则立场，考虑我们的国家利益，也考虑我们人民的感情和人性反应。原则是边界不可侵犯，各国有自卫权，杀害无辜平民、妇女和儿童、老人或任何其他平民都违反国际人道主义法。
10 月 7 日发生的事情不仅违反了国际法，而且是一次规模巨大的可怕恐怖袭击。所以我们完全理解以色列人对此的感受，以及他们为什么做出这样的反应。但此后，由于以色列的行动，加沙发生了一场巨大的人间悲剧。死亡人数每天都在增加，与 10 月 7 日的死亡人数一样多。再次，受害者是妇女、儿童和许多无辜平民。破坏规模巨大。
全世界所有人都绝望地看着这一切，说这必须停止。无论对错，都必须关注人道主义考虑。我们试图在我们的声明中表达这一点。我认为重要的是，我们既要认识到 10 月 7 日第一次袭击时所做的邪恶之事，也要认识到现在加沙发生的非常悲惨的事情。我们必须劝告以色列人和其他人遵守国际规范，并考虑无辜平民。
米克尔思韦特先生：您认为有长期解决方案吗？您一直支持两国解决方案，这仍然可能吗？
李总理：没有其他选择。这非常困难，看起来遥不可及。但两国方案的替代方案是一国方案。这意味着一方或另一方必须被排挤。这是不可想象的。所以，如果你不能朝着两国方案努力，那么你将在未来几代人中陷入这种相互毁灭的循环。
米克尔思韦特先生：你担心这个地区的安全。我的意思是，在马来西亚，你隔壁有安瓦尔·易卜拉欣；他直言不讳地支持巴勒斯坦人。我认为有些人担心，我看到你已经采取了一些预防措施，防止这个地区出现更多的恐怖主义，因为以色列和哈马斯。
李总理：我认为外交立场是一回事。一些国家支持巴勒斯坦。一些国家支持以色列。新加坡与以色列有外交关系，我们也与巴勒斯坦权力机构有友好关系。所以外交支持不是困难，但恐怖主义是一种危险。
你在欧洲、法国和比利时看到了孤狼式的孤立袭击。在美国发生了一次袭击，一名无辜的巴勒斯坦男孩被杀。这种事情可能发生在世界的这个角落。我们在新加坡抓到过一些自我激进化的人，包括那些想要做坏事的青少年，他们买了防弹背心和刀具，进行练习。他们中的一些人想代表 ISIS 在中东作战。他们中的一些人想效仿基督城的恐怖分子，在新加坡的两座清真寺袭击穆斯林。
该地区仍有一些恐怖组织尚未消失。与基地组织有关联的伊斯兰祈祷团，我们在他们即将对新加坡发动七起卡车炸弹袭击之前就抓到了他们。（他们）仍然存在，而且正在观察。他们的一些追随者肯定会被激怒，他们可能会策划一些事情。所以我们必须非常认真地对待这件事。
米克尔思韦特先生：您赞成加沙停火。您认为我们什么时候会在乌克兰停火？您担心俄罗斯现在正在获胜吗？
李总理：我认为乌克兰问题将是一场持久战，而且将是一场
这场战斗非常艰难，因为俄罗斯不会宣布他们已经失败。此外，对于乌克兰来说，凭借其资源，甚至欧洲和美国的所有支持，能够继续战斗并坚持下去。你可以补充枪支、炮弹、飞机和坦克，但人员死亡、伤亡可以继续，但不能永远持续下去。
所以我认为俄罗斯已经未能实现战胜乌克兰的目标。这对世界来说是一个很大的好处，因为如果他们真的能够突然、压倒性地成功接管，然后出现新的边界，那么我认为世界将变得更加危险。但事实上他们失败了，他们付出了惨痛的代价，这是一个好处。但这会在哪里结束？乌克兰支持者能坚持多久？美国的情绪将如何变化？有了这个政府，我想你知道拜登总统的立场，但明年就要举行选举了。
米克尔思韦特先生：我们稍后再谈这个问题。但关于乌克兰，我只想问一个简单的问题。您认为这就是您所说的俄罗斯的可怕经历吗？您认为这改变了中国对可能进入台湾的想法吗？
李总理：我认为中国人从未轻视过进入台湾。他们肯定知道。他们有陆海军和飞行员会告诉他们，两栖攻击台湾不像硫磺岛战役，硫磺岛战役已经够血腥了。所以我相信他们一定有盘算，但我不认为他们好战。他们有一个问题——他们希望台湾成为中国的一部分，但如何从这里到达那里？
我相信，如果他们没有被激怒，如果事态没有失控——我不相信你有一天醒来发现他们已经决定发动诺曼底登陆。
米克尔思韦特先生：你现在更担心什么——我来到这个地区时感到震惊的是，是的，还有人在谈论台湾。但也有关于菲律宾的讨论。在南海问题上，马科斯总统对中国的态度相当强硬。中国是美国的条约盟友。这肯定会非常困难。
李总理：这是另一个可能的爆发点，因为四个东盟国家对南海的主权主张与中国重叠——菲律宾、文莱、马来西亚、越南。他们首先都想在他们之间达成某种协议，尤其是与中国达成协议，因为中国确实是最大的主权声索国，而且实力最强。但与此同时，他们与中国还有其他利害关系——我认为，中国是他们最大的贸易伙伴。因此，南海很重要，但并不是唯一的利害关系。我不认为他们中任何一个国家真的想把它推到边缘。
米克尔思韦特先生：但总的来说，没有人真的想这么做。
李总理：总体上没有人会这样做，但我想说，就东南亚国家而言，他们意识到了苏联人曾经称之为“力量对比”的东西。换句话说，谁站在你这边，谁站在我这边，谁的军队更大？我认为他们有着非常健康的现实主义意识，因此会有一些克制。菲律宾人也是如此。美国是他们的条约盟友，但你确定要卷入一场以你为战场的战争吗？
米克尔思韦特先生：在中国，你所说的中国似乎越来越现实。习近平正在更加认真地思考，他准备扮演一种更长期的角色。你是这么看的吗？
李总理：我认为中国想要发展。中国决心发展，我认为他们相信，迟早会以某种方式实现发展。你可以阻止他们几年。你可以拒绝他们提供技术。他们会发展自己的国家——可能没有那么好，但他们会有所成就，他们决心向人民和世界展示这是可以做到的。挑战在于，他们如何做到这一点并为自己感到自豪？同时，激发世界其他国家的信心和一定的平静。这非常困难，因为你可能认为你做的没有什么不合理的，这是你的权利，大国和小国都有权做同样的事情。但是当一个小国做某件事时，其他国家可以说，“好吧，那没关系。我的意思是，没有造成伤害”，但当一个大国做出同样的行动时，你可能会在不知不觉中引起各地的反响。我认为，中国人需要一段时间才能找到正确的感觉，才能成长得更高更强，同时又能让每个人都站在他们一边，保持良好的关系。
我认为他们正在努力，你看澳大利亚总理阿尔巴尼斯，他们和他有过一些困难的时刻
近年来，澳大利亚一直在中国，双方都希望向前迈进，希望建立关系。他们知道澳大利亚是美国的盟友——他们正在购买美国核潜艇——但他们仍然需要建立关系。
米克尔思韦特先生：有趣的是这个新成熟的中国，也许与你我刚开始时的情况略有不同。
李总理：我不确定我们是否应该判断他们是否成熟。他们处于不同的阶段。
米克尔思韦特先生：我是一名记者，我可以这样做。
李总理：你可以使用文字，但我必须使用我自己的文字。
米克尔思韦特先生：这个新成熟的中国，或者随便你怎么称呼它，现在是关于乔·拜登即将前往旧金山会见习近平。这就是这种关系的核心。
李总理：不，这是两国关系处于困难时刻的必要步骤。他们去年在巴厘岛会面。那是一次很好的会面。他们同意了一些相互尊重的原则；他们会合作，这将是双赢的。但此后，在 12 个月内，实际上不到 12 个月，事情发生了变化，事情偏离了轨道，他们正试图让事情重新回到正轨。我认为，为了使会议能够顺利进行并富有成效，需要进行很多反复。但我认为这是两国之间非常深刻的矛盾，你需要会议朝着正确的方向发展，但你不要指望会议能让一切再次变得甜蜜和轻松。这是不可能的。
米克尔思韦特先生：你们的外交部长在今天的会议上说得很好，天气可能会好转，但气候，想想你和我曾经进行过的所有对话，气候一直在变得越来越糟。
李总理：我认为气候非常困难。双方都有根深蒂固的观点。在美国，两党唯一一致的看法是中国是一个严重的威胁。而在中国，也有非常强烈的共识，认为美国会阻止他们，与美国共存很困难。你不应该尝试，你应该准备好保护自己免受美国的侵害。所以，当双方都有这样的观点时，甚至想延长谈判时间并谈论一个更具建设性的未来都很困难。
米克尔思韦特先生：请注意，这其中不可估量的是美国大选。我注意到，正如迈克所说，你宣布明年将把选票交给黄之锋，就在党成立70周年之前。
李总理：我没有说“就在之前”，而是说“到那时”。
米克尔思韦特先生：如你所知，那是11月，奇怪的是，这也是美国大选的日期。如果我们现在看看民意调查，一个叫唐纳德·特朗普的人领先。你有没有想过，“哦，天哪，又不是他，我会把他交给你”？
李总理：那不是我的主要考虑。
米克尔思韦特先生：但这是否是一种额外的激励？
李总理：不，世界是一个艰难的地方。我的意思是，无论我是明年还是五年后交出权力，都会有未解决的问题，地平线上也会有乌云密布。这恰好是最接近您、最突出的问题。
米克尔思韦特先生：但我认为，特朗普当选将给中国带来更大的压力，迫使中国在会场上成为那种成熟的人，我知道您希望中国成为这种人。
李总理：特朗普采取了拜登没有逆转的行动。例如，对中国产品征收关税，总体上使两国关系变得更加不可预测。拜登的做法更加可预测。但在中国问题上，他并没有逆转特朗普的做法。我认为他的态度也相当坚定，让人感觉你不想发生冲突，但他也不会在自己非常强烈关注的事情上让步。
如果你回顾特朗普先生，就像他上次那样，我想这会让你对他的外交政策有一些了解。但这是一场持久战，四年在政治上是很长的时间，但在两个大国关系史上并不长。所以，即使在美国，你专注于世界上最重要的双边关系以外的事情，在另一边和世界其他地方，这仍然应该是一个主要的关注点。希望他们能有远见和冷静，能够说：“我的伙伴正处于困难时刻，让我们看看我该如何处理”，既不泄露任何信息，也不做任何更糟糕的事情。
米克尔思韦特先生：听起来有点像房间里的成年人，但现在有第三个人物，那就是印度吗？
李总理：我认为印度正在迅速发展。去年，他们是世界上增长最快的国家之一。莫迪先生的经济改革和数字化推动正在取得进展；让印度更上一层楼。但这是一个距离，因为印度经济只有中国的五分之一，他们的国际
韩国的国际贸易额约为中国的五分之一。韩国人口更年轻，而且还在增长，而中国人口则老龄化，已经稳定，但开始下降。
但他们必须充分利用这一点，必须将影响力扩展到次大陆之外，以影响东亚、东南亚和更广阔的世界。我认为你可以看到他们开始通过四方安全对话来做到这一点。但我不认为他们在次大陆之外的更广阔领域投入了那么多资源。
米克尔思韦特先生：在这方面他们落后于中国，他们没有着眼于某种全球体系。
李总理：我认为他们的体系也不像中国体系那样适合；例如，如果他们决定实施“一带一路”计划。我不认为他们会说“好吧，我想投资基础设施”，然后突然发现港口、道路、机场、火车在整个地区如雨后春笋般涌现——这是好事，也可能是坏事。
米克尔思韦特先生：在您来这里期间，我们谈到了新加坡。您一直处于中美关系的中间。另一个国家，您是全球化的伟大象征，然而在我们进行的所有对话中，您会看到，世界每年都感觉更加区域化，而不是全球化。我提到了特朗普——特朗普现在表示，如果他上任，他将对所有商品征收 10% 的关税。这肯定会是全球化时代的终结，如果它还没有结束的话。
李总理：嗯，趋势并不乐观——即使没有特朗普——通胀削减法案，你们也在制定产业政策，你们决定做芯片，你们决定做更环保的技术。但基本上，你们决定我们需要为自己制定规则，而不是依赖多边谈判的规则。如果我们谈论的是基于规则的秩序，那么就很难理解规则究竟是如何制定的。如果每个人都采取这种方法，那么实际上就不会有任何规则，我们都会陷入困境。我认为欧洲人已经非常有力地阐述了这一点。
米克尔思韦特先生：我能问您一个问题吗？人们确实希望制定规则的领域之一？人工智能。我查了一下——您是第一个，您怎么称呼的，高级管理员？您是第一个在剑桥大学获得最高数学成绩的人，迈克没有提到这一点。遗憾的是，我在牛津大学没有获得这个成绩。但您是第一个在新加坡获得这个成绩的人。所以您懂数学。我想对您来说，基本问题是：您认为人工智能比互联网带来的变化更大吗？
李总理：嗯，您必须知道的第一件事是，有很多事情您不知道。关于人工智能，我们大多数人都不知道它的发展方向。我认为甚至研究人员也不知道它的发展方向。我并不假装了解这项技术的工作原理。我对这些原理有一个模糊的概念，但我不明白它们是如何实现所有这些神奇结果的。我不知道目前的方法能走多远。从人工智能的概念出现，到人们开始发明 LISP 等计算机语言用于人工智能编程，再到 ChatGPT，这花了 50 到 70 年的时间。从 20 世纪 50 年代到现在，这是一个漫长而漫长的过程。在这条道路上，我们一直认为我们即将取得突破，而这一突破最终也确实实现了。现在你认为自己正在逃亡，但它是否会一路走到你可以进行对话的地步，要么聊天机器人可以采访我，要么我采访聊天机器人。
Micklethwait 先生：或者我可以采访聊天机器人。
李总理：或者两个聊天机器人之间的交流可能比我们更好。我们不知道——只要投入 10 倍以上的芯片和 10 倍以上的计算能力，它就可以达到这个水平。可能是你达到了极限，然后你需要在概念上取得另一个突破，将其提升到下一个水平，使其具有洞察力、理解力、判断力、推理能力和同理心。但我认为，原则上，没有理由不能制造一台可以思考、行动、说话，甚至可能看起来像人类一样有感觉的机器。一些哲学家认为这是不可能的，我不相信。我认为这是可能的，但我不知道需要多长时间。我知道，当它真的发生时，我们将有非常深刻的问题需要回答，而且很难回答，因为如果它和你一样聪明，你就无法预先编程让它愚蠢到可以被杀死。这是一个根本矛盾——我的意思是，你认为你可以在某个地方做一个特殊的按钮，按下它，它就会突然说是，服从你。但如果它真的那么聪明，你就不会想到所有的后果。
米克尔思韦特先生：但在这种技术力量平衡中，你是否觉得美国远远领先于中国？
李总理：我认为现在他们领先，一方面是因为他们制造的技术，芯片；也因为他们吸引了如此多的
很多人才，甚至亚洲、中国、印度的研究人员，都在美国取得突破。也因为他们的自由企业制度。我的意思是，硅谷，你可能对科技公司有自己的看法，但他们能够采纳一个想法，并用它来改变世界，无论是好是坏。现在，我们这里有一些正在发生的事情，已经对世界产生了影响，不是成为一个超级机器人，而是成为你的人工智能助手，帮助你起草一段话或写一篇短文。
我们需要积累操作经验，了解其中的陷阱，这样我们才能做出明智的决定，在发展过程中对其进行监管。现在，我可以肯定地说，在我的政府，我认为在大多数政府中，技术人员比政府人员更了解这一点。这是突破发生的方式所固有的。我们不是取得突破的人。做这件事的人在大学和公司，他们比我们了解得多。他们中有些人很担心，我认为我们有理由关注。
米克尔思韦特先生：我可以快速问你关于新加坡的问题吗？然后是你自己的问题，最后再谈谈新加坡。今年新加坡的情况比往常稍微艰难一些——一些中国商人卷入了洗钱事件，甚至有一两名政府官员没有被卷入其中，而是受到了调查等等。我知道，与某些南欧国家相比，这并不令人担心……
李总理：不，我们不会将自己与某些南欧国家相比。甚至不会与任何北欧国家相比。我们只是想保持高标准。当标准达不到要求时，我们必须处理。偶尔，你会发现你们中的一个人没有完全做到他应该做的事情，或者似乎做了一些不太正确的事情。好吧，我们必须做正确的事情，我们必须让人们看到我们做了正确的事情，而这正是目前正在进行的。我认为，中国洗钱案对我们来说绝不是丑闻。这是刑事案件。罪犯做坏事。我们发现了，进行了调查，做了该做的事，没收了钱、汽车、手提包和其他一切。我们在法庭上起诉他们，他们必须证明这些东西是他们合法拥有的，他们没有做错任何事。但就我的体制而言，这个体制是干净的。这个体制做了它应该做的事，它会保持干净。如果我的体制被破坏了……
米克尔思韦特先生：那你就有麻烦了。
李总理：那我就有麻烦了。
米克尔思韦特先生：那你就回到欧洲水平了。
李总理：我不知道欧洲人处于什么水平。
米克尔思韦特先生：我可以问你一下吗，正如你所指出的，迈克指出的，明年，在人民行动党成立70周年之前，你将把权柄移交给黄循财。所以，到那时你已经任职20年了。我想知道您认为这期间发生了什么变化？我的意思是，如果您看看您的父亲，他刚上任时是一位著名的社会主义者，最后却成了撒切尔主义者。我当时在新加坡四处游荡，发现新加坡有这么多大型项目，为退休人员提供更多资金，以对抗通货膨胀。您一直在向左转吗？
李总理：我们一直在小心翼翼地驶向更舒适的地方。当经济增长，所有船只都被潮水推高时，我们可以而且必须非常严格地帮助那些还没有赶上的人。您可以告诉他们跑得更快，工作更努力，这里有更多的激励，让他们取得进步。而且大多数情况下，这种方法效果很好。我们这样做了很长时间。但随着时间的推移，随着比赛的进行，随着参赛者人数的扩大，有些人走得更远，有些人走得不那么远，然后他们的孩子也走得不那么远，您必须考虑如何让这支队伍团结在一起？有时，一个人做得很好，但世界却发生了变化，第一名变成了最后一名。那么，你会怎么做？你会说，世界就是这样吗？或者我能做些什么来帮助他重新回到竞争中，再次做出贡献？我认为我们正处于一个阶段，我们必须一起做更多的事情，我们必须互相帮助，政府必须参与其中。我们必须竭尽全力避免政府成为解决所有问题的唯一解决方案。
米克尔思韦特先生：所以，政府不会大幅扩大，但会稍微大一点。
李总理：我们可能是发达国家中最小的政府，因为我们的政府预算占 GDP 的不到 20%。我的政府预算占 GDP 的比例与一些欧洲国家的国家养老金支出大致相同。我的意思是，你的
系统不同，但我们一直保持着非常精简的体系。我们需要保持非常精简的体系，但老龄化、医疗成本上升、社会需求上升的压力正在逐渐推高我们的预算。我们面临的挑战是，我们如何为此提供资金？我们如何在必要时允许这种情况发生，而不会失控？这意味着时不时地说出禁忌词——税收。我们现在正在这样做。我们有商品和服务税，就像增值税一样。它的比例是 7%。今年 1 月 1 日，我们将其提高到 8%，明年 1 月 1 日即将提高到 9%。我们会实现这一目标。但我们正在做的是向收入较低的三分之二人口提供相当慷慨的、几乎是现金的补贴，这样我就可以完成这个系统。就我的收入而言，我处于一个新的位置。但就对家庭的影响而言，这要推迟相当长一段时间。
米克尔思韦特先生：您希望人们怎样记住您？您说的是什么意思？您希望人们把您看作是让新加坡保持繁荣的人吗？
李总理：不，我想我会专注于做好我的工作。我不喜欢……
米克尔思韦特先生：悼词？
李总理：不，我不喜欢坐下来谈论我过去所做的事情。
米克尔思韦特先生：好吧，这引出了我的最后一个问题。有传言说您会成为高级部长。多年前我第一次见到您时，您刚刚接任总理。然后我去见您的父亲，据说他已经半退休了，担任高级部长。令我略感惊讶的是，他住在您的内阁办公室楼上，这让我感到……
李总理：不，他不是住在那里，而是在那里工作。
米克尔思韦特先生：所以，他在那里工作。如果我主持内阁会议，而他在那里……我的意思是，你会计划到那种程度吗？
李总理：没有发生过。我主持内阁会议，而他在内阁会议室。
米克尔思韦特先生：但他还是在那里。
李总理：效果很好。我的前任也在内阁会议室。所以，我的两位前任也参加了会议。我的一位总理同事对我说：“我无法想象你的内阁会议是什么样的。”
米克尔思韦特先生：这有效吗？
李总理：但他们有效。这有效。这是非常微妙的事情，既要监督，又不能专横跋扈，能够提供建议和有益的推动，以及恰到好处的明智之言，而不会妨碍继任者的作风。我听从继任者的安排。我已经说过，无论他想让我做什么，我都会尽力帮助他成功。所以，你必须问他，他会对我做什么。
米克尔思韦特先生：李总理，希望明年我们还能见到您。
李总理：不，我会坐在观众席上听您讲话。
米克尔思韦特先生：在上面听。谢谢。
李总理：非常感谢。
PM Lee Hsien Loong at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2023
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023?
SM Lee Hsien Loong | 8 November 2023
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had a moderated dialogue with John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, Bloomberg, at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum Gala Dinner on 8 November 2023.
John Micklethwait (Moderator): Prime Minister Lee, thank you for hosting us. We will try to add some humour amongst the seriousness. Normally, as you know, we begin these conversations with the cold war between China and America. But this time we have two hot wars going on – we have Hamas’ with Israel, and we have Russia’s with Ukraine. Can we begin first with Hamas and Israel — On 7th October, you spoke out loudly to condemn what Hamas did then. Since then, as the bombing of Gaza has continued, you have called for a truce or a ceasefire. You have added things about maybe there is a need to investigate possible war crimes. You have talked about the need to refresh the two-state solution. This is a slightly different position to America. I wonder if you could unpack for us how you ended up in that position?
PM Lee Hsien Loong: Well, we have to take a principled position, considering our national interests and considering also the sentiments and human reactions of our people. And the principle is that borders are inviolate, countries have the right of self-defence and killing of innocent civilians, women and children, old folks or any other civilians is against international humanitarian law.
What happened on 7th October was not just against international law, but a horrendous terrorist attack on an enormous scale. So we fully understand how the Israelis feel about it, and why they have reacted the way the way they have done. But what has happened since then in Gaza, as a consequence of Israeli operations, is an enormous human tragedy. The numbers keep on ticking up every day, as many times, as many as what happened on 7th October. Again, women, children and many innocent civilians. The destruction was and is on an enormous scale.
Everybody around the world looked at this in despair, and say surely this has to stop. Whatever the rights and wrongs, you must pay attention to the humanitarian considerations. And we have tried to express that in our statements. I think it is important that we recognise both the evil things which are done at the first attack on 7th October, and also the very tragic things which are happening in Gaza now. We have to exhort the Israelis and everybody else to abide by international norms, and to have a consideration for innocent civilians.
Mr Micklethwait: Do you think there is a long-term solution? You have always been a supporter of the two-state solution, is that still possible?
PM Lee: There is no alternative to that. It is very difficult. It looks way over the horizon. But the alternative to a two-state solution is a one-state solution. That means one side or the other has to be squeezed out. That is unimaginable. So if you cannot work towards a two-state solution, you are going to be in this cycle of mutual destruction for generations to come.
Mr Micklethwait: You worry about security in this region. I mean next-door in Malaysia you have Anwar Ibrahim; he has come up quite vocally in support of the Palestinians. I think some people worry, I see you have taken some precautions about more terrorism in this region, because of Israel and Hamas.
PM Lee: I think diplomatic positions is one thing. Some countries support Palestine. Some countries support Israel. Singapore has diplomatic relations with Israel, and we also have friendly relations with the Palestinian Authority. So diplomatic support is not the difficulty, but terrorism is a danger.
You have seen lone wolf, isolated attacks in Europe, in France, and in Belgium. There was an attack and an innocent Palestinian boy got killed in America. It can happen in this part of the world. We have had self-radicalised individuals in Singapore we have picked up – including teenagers who wanted to do terrible things, and had gone and bought bulletproof vests and knives and practised. Some of them wanted to fight in the Middle East on behalf of ISIS. Some of them wanted to emulate the Christchurch terrorists and attack Muslims in Singapore in two mosques.
And there are still terrorist groups within the region who have not disappeared. The Jemaah Islamiah who are affiliated with Al Qaeda, and whom we picked up in Singapore before they were about to do seven truck bomb attacks in Singapore. (They) still exists and they are watching. Some of their followers will surely be riled up and they may plan something. So we have to take it very seriously.
Mr Micklethwait: You are in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza. When do you think we will get one in Ukraine? Do you worry at the moment Russia is winning?
PM Lee: I think Ukraine is going to be a long fight and it is going to be a very difficult fight, because Russia is not going to declare that they have lost. Also, for Ukraine, with its resources and even all the support from Europe and from the US, to be able to keep on fighting and keep it up. You can replenish your guns, your shells, your aeroplanes and tanks, but the human deaths, the casualties, it can go on, but it cannot go on forever.
So I think Russia has already failed in its objective of overcoming Ukraine. And that is a great plus for the world, because if they had actually been able to launch a sudden, overwhelming and successful takeover and then there is a new border, then I think the world would have been much the more dangerous place. But the fact that they have failed, that they are paying a terrible cost, that is a plus. But where will it end? And for how long can Ukraine supporters keep it up? And how will the moods change in America? With this administration, I think you know where President Biden stands, but elections are due next year.
Mr Micklethwait: We will come back to that. But just one quick question on Ukraine. Do you think that is what you described as this horrific experience for Russia – do you think that has changed the thinking in China about potentially going into Taiwan?
PM Lee: I do not think the Chinese would ever have thought lightly about going into Taiwan. They must surely know. And they have soldiers and sailors and airmen who will advise them that an amphibious attack, attacking Taiwan is not like doing Iwo Jima, and Iwo Jima was bloody enough. So I am sure they must make the calculations but I do not believe that they are trigger happy. They have a problem – they would like Taiwan to be part of One China, but how to get from here to there?
And I believe if they are not provoked, if events do not spin out of control – I do not believe that you are going to wake up one day and find that they have decided to launch D-Day.
Mr Micklethwait: Are you more worried at the moment – I was struck coming to this region is that yes, there is still talk about Taiwan. But there is also talk about the Philippines a bit. In the South China Sea, you have President Marcos being quite aggressive with China. They are a treaty ally of the United States. And surely that would be very difficult.
PM Lee: That is another possible flashpoint because four ASEAN countries have claims in the South China Sea, which overlap with Chinese claims – Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam. All of them want to work some arrangement out between themselves in the first place and with China, mostest, because China is really the biggest claimant, and most muscular. But at the same time, all of them have got other stakes with China – China is their biggest trading partner, I think, for all of them. Therefore, the South China Sea is important, but it is not the only thing at stake. And I do not believe that any of them really truly want to push it over the brink.
Mr Micklethwait: But nobody ever does on the whole.
PM Lee: Nobody ever does on the whole, but I would say that in the case of the Southeast Asian countries, their awareness of what the Soviets used to call the “correlation of forces”. In other words, who is on your side and who is on my side, and whose battalions are bigger? I think there is a very healthy sense of realism, and therefore some restraints will be there. And even the Filipinos. The Americans are their treaty ally, but are you sure you want to get into a fight where you will be the battleground?
Mr Micklethwait: Within China, the China you are talking about seems to be one that is getting more realistic. Xi Jinping is thinking harder, that he is prepared to play a kind of more long-term role. Is that the way you look at it?
PM Lee: I think China wants to grow. China is determined to develop, and they believe I think rightly, that they will get there one way or the other, sooner or later. You can hold them back a few years. You can deny them technology. They will develop their own – it may not be as good, but they will have something, and they are determined to show their people and show the world that it can be done. Challenge is, how do they do this and feel pride in themselves? At the same time, inspiring confidence, and a certain tranquillity amongst the rest of the world. And that is very hard, because you may think you are doing nothing very unreasonable, and these are your rights and countries big and small are entitled to do the same things. But when a small country does a certain thing, others can say, “Well, that is alright. I mean, no harm done” but when a big country makes the same kind of action, you can cause reverberations everywhere without quite realising it. I think that it will take a while to get the right feel, for the Chinese to be able to grow taller and stronger and yet, keep everybody onside and on good terms.
I think they are trying, you see the Australian Prime Minister Albanese with whom they have had some difficult moments in recent years, has been in China, and that both sides want to move forward and want to have a relationship. They know that Australia is a US ally – they are buying American nuclear submarines – but they still need a relationship.
Mr Micklethwait: The interesting thing is this new mature China, which perhaps is slightly more different to how you and I began.
PM Lee: I am not sure that it is for us to judge whether they are mature or not. They are in a different phase.
Mr Micklethwait: I am a journalist, I am allowed to.
PM Lee: You are allowed to use words, but I have to use my own.
Mr Micklethwait: This new mature China, or whatever you want to call it, is now about Joe Biden is about to go and meet Xi Jinping in San Francisco. And that is the core of this relationship.
PM Lee: No, that is a necessary step in this difficult moment in the relationship. They met last year in Bali. It was a good meeting. They agreed on some principles that they would respect each other; they would cooperate, it would be win-win. But after that, in 12 months, in fact, less than that, events happened, and things went off-track, and they are trying to put it back on track again. And I think there is a lot of to-ing and fro-ing to tee it up so that the meeting can take place and be productive. But I think that this is a very deep contradiction between the two countries, and you need the meeting to head in the right direction, but you do not expect a meeting to make everything sweetness and light again. It is not possible.
Mr Micklethwait: Your foreign minister put it very well in our conference today, the weather may get better, but the climate, you think of all the conversations you and I ever had, the climate has continued to get worse and worse.
PM Lee: I think that climate is very difficult. On both sides, very entrenched views have taken root. In America, the only thing that the two parties agree on is that China is a grave threat. And in China, there is also a very strong consensus that America is out to block them, and it is difficult to coexist with America. And that you should not try, you should prepare to protect yourself against America. So, when you have these such views on both sides, even to want to think about stretching out and talking about a more constructive future is difficult.
Mr Micklethwait: Note the imponderable in that is the American election. I noticed that, as Mike said, you announced that next year you would give over to Lawrence Wong, just before the party’s 70th anniversary.
PM Lee: I did not say “just before”, I said “by the time of”.
Mr Micklethwait: As you know, that is in November, which is also curiously the date of the American election. And if we look at the polls now, a man called Donald Trump is ahead. Did you look and think, “Oh god, not him again, I will hand him over to you”?
PM Lee: That was not my principal consideration.
Mr Micklethwait: But is it an additional incentive?
PM Lee: No, the world is a difficult place. I mean, whether I hand over next year or in five years’ time, there will be things outstanding and there will be clouds on the horizon. This just happens to be the most, the one which is closest to you and most prominent.
Mr Micklethwait: But a Trump election would, in this way, it would put I think, more pressure on China to be the kind of grown-up in the room which I know you want it to be.
PM Lee: Well, Trump took actions which Biden did not reverse. For example, impose tariffs on Chinese products, and generally made the relationship much less predictable. Biden's approach is much more predictable. But on China, he has not reversed what Trump did. And I think his attitudes are also quite firm, a feeling that you do not want to clash but neither is he going to give way on things which he feels very strongly about.
And if you go back to Mr Trump, as he was the previous time, I suppose that gives you some idea of his approach to foreign policy. But it is a long game and four years is a long time in politics, but not a long time in the history of the relations between two great powers. So even if, in America, you are preoccupied with things other than the most important bilateral relationship in the world, on the other side and in the rest of the world, this should still be a major preoccupation. And hopefully there will be the perspective and equanimity and the reach to say, “My partner, is in a difficult moment, let us see how I can manage this” without giving anything away, but neither doing anything worse.
Mr Micklethwait: Sounds a bit like being the grown-up in the room, but is there now a third figure which is India?
PM Lee: I think India is growing rapidly. Last year, they were one of the fastest growing countries in the world. And Mr Modi with his economic reforms and his drive towards digitalisation is making progress; getting India to move up another level. But it is a distance because the Indian economy is one-fifth of the Chinese, their international trade is about one-fifth of the Chinese. Their population is younger, and still growing, unlike the Chinese one which is older and already stable and beginning to come down.
But they have to make the most of it and they have to extend that reach beyond the subcontinent to influence East Asia, Southeast Asia and the wider world. And I think that you can see they are starting to do that with the Quad . But I do not think that they have put quite as much resources into the wider game beyond the subcontinent.
Mr Micklethwait: They are behind China in that respect, they are not looking at a kind of global system.
PM Lee: I think also their system is not as amenable to the Chinese system; if they decide to do a Belt and Road for example. I do not think they would be able to say “Ok, I want to invest in infrastructure” and then suddenly you find ports, roads, airports, trains sprouting up all over the region — which is for the good and maybe for the bad.
Mr Micklethwait: We have talked about Singapore through your time here. You have been in the middle of the America-China one. The other one, you are the great symbol of globalisation and yet you see during all these conversations we have had – every year the world has felt more regional, and less global. I mentioned Trump — Trump has now said that if he comes in, he is going to put 10% tariffs on everything. Surely that will be the end of the global age, if it has not ended already.
PM Lee: Well, it is trending not in a favourable direction – and even without Trump – the Inflation Reduction Act, you are making industrial policy, you are deciding to do CHIPS, you are deciding to do greener technology. But basically, you are deciding that we need to make rules for ourselves and not depend on rules which are negotiated multilaterally. And if we are talking about a rules-based order, it becomes difficult to understand exactly how the rules are being made. And if everybody takes that approach, then in effect, there will not be any rules and we will all be in difficulty. I think the Europeans have made that point quite forcefully.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you about something which is one of those areas where people do want rules? AI. And I looked it up — you were the first, what do you call, a Senior Wrangler? You were the first person to get top math marks at Cambridge University which Mike did not mention. I did not sadly get that at Oxford. But you were the first person to get that from Singapore. So you understand math. And I suppose the basic question to you is: Do you think AI is a bigger change than the internet?
PM Lee: Well, the first thing you must know is that there are a lot of things you do not know. And on AI, most of us do not know where it is going. I do not think even the researchers know where it is going. And I do not pretend to understand how the technology works. I have a vague idea of the principles, but I do not understand how they have made all these magical consequences happen. And I do not know how far the present approach can go. It took 50, 70 years from the time the idea of AI came about, and people started inventing computer languages like LISP to be used for AI programming, to ChatGPT. 1950s until now, it is an enormous, long duration. And all along that path, the thought was we are about to make a breakthrough, which eventually did come. Now you think you are on the run, but will it go all the way to the point where you can have a conversation and either the chatbot can interview me or I may interview the chatbot.
Mr Micklethwait: Or I could interview the chatbot.
PM Lee: Or two chatbots may be talking to each other better than us. We do not know — it could go there just by putting in 10 times more chips and 10 times more computing. It could be you reach a limit, and then you need another breakthrough conceptually to take it to the next level where it has got insight, understanding, judgment, reasoning and empathy. But I think in principle, there is no reason why you cannot build a machine which can think, act, speak, maybe possibly look like it is feeling like a human being. Some philosophers think it is not possible; I do not believe that. I think it is possible, but I do not know how long it will take. I do know that when it does happen, we will have very profound questions to answer, and it will be very difficult to answer, because if it is as smart as you, you will not be able to pre-program it to be stupid enough to be killed. That is a fundamental contradiction — I mean, you think that you can make a special push button somewhere and press it and it will suddenly say yes and obey you. But if it is really that smart, you will have not thought of all of the consequences.
Mr Micklethwait: But in that sort of technological balance of power, do you sense that America is a long way ahead of China?
PM Lee: I think right now they are ahead, both, because of the tech they make, the chips; also because they attract so much of human talent, and even Asian, Chinese, Indian researchers, they are in America making breakthroughs. And also because of their free enterprise system. I mean, Silicon Valley, you may have your views about the tech companies, but they are able to take an idea and use it to transform the world, for better or for worse. And now, here we have something which is happening, already making an impact on the world, not to become a super cyborg, but just to be your AI assistant to help you draft a paragraph or to write a short note.
And we need to gain experience operating with it and understand what the pitfalls are so that we can make smart decisions to regulate it as we go along. Right now, I can safely say that in the government, in my government, and I think in most governments, the tech people know more about this than the government people. It is inherent in the way the breakthroughs are happening. We are not the ones making the breakthroughs. The people who are doing that are in the universities and the companies, and they know much more about it than us. Some of them are worried and I think there is reason for us to pay attention.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you quickly about Singapore, and then about yourself, and then end on Singapore. It has been a slightly tougher year than normal in Singapore — you had this money-laundering thing with some Chinese business people, you even had one or two officials in the government, not being pulled into that, but being probed and so on, which I know compared with certain Southern European countries would not really worry…
PM Lee: No, we do not compare ourselves with certain Southern European countries. Not even with any Northern European countries. We just want to maintain high standards. And when the standards fall short, we have to deal with it. And once in a while, you will find that one of your own did not quite live up to what he should have done or appears to have done something not quite right. And well, we have to do the right thing and we will have to be seen that the right thing is done, which is currently underway. I do not think the Chinese money-laundering cases is in any way a scandal for us. It is a criminal case. Criminals do bad things. We find out, we investigate it, we do what we need to do, we seize the money, the cars, the handbags, and everything else. And we charge them in court and they have to prove that these are things which they legitimately own, they did not do anything wrong. But as far as my system is concerned, the system is clean. The system did what it was supposed to do, and it will keep itself clean. If my system had been corrupted…
Mr Micklethwait: Then you will be in trouble.
PM Lee: Then I will be in trouble.
Mr Micklethwait: Then you would be back in the European levels.
PM Lee: I do not know what levels the Europeans are at.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you, as you pointed out, Mike pointed out, you are next year, sometime before the PAP 70th Anniversary, you are going to hand over to Lawrence Wong. So, you will have done 20 years by then. And I wonder how much you think, what has changed during that? I mean, if you look at your father, your father came in famously as a socialist and ended up as a Thatcherite. I had been wandering around Singapore at the moment, and there are all these big programmes to hand out more money to people in retirement, fight off inflation. Have you been drifting to the left?
PM Lee: We have been sailing carefully to a more comfortable place. When the economy is growing and all boats are lifted by the tide, we can afford to be and we need to be, very rigorous in how we help those who are not quite catching up. You can tell them run faster, work harder, here is a bit more incentive, get ahead. And mostly it works very well. And we did that for a very long time. But over time as the race goes on, and as the field spreads out, and some are further forward and some are not quite so far ahead, and then their kids are not so far ahead, you have to think how are you going to hold this team together? And when sometimes, somebody who is doing perfectly well, their world changes on him and suddenly the first shall be last. Well, what do you do? Do you say, that is just the way the world is? Or is there something I can do to help him get back into the race again and be contributing again? And I think that we are in a phase where we have to do more together, where we have to help each other, and the government has to be there. And we have to try very hard to avoid the government being this sole solution to all problems.
Mr Micklethwait: So, the government is not going to get massively bigger, but it will get a bit bigger.
PM Lee: We are probably the smallest government in the developed countries because we spend about less than 20% of the GDP that is the government budget. My government budget is about the same percentage of the GDP as some European countries spend on state pensions. I mean, your system is different, but we have kept ours very lean. And we need to keep it very lean, but the pressures of ageing, of higher healthcare costs, of higher social needs are pushing us up gradually. And our challenge is, how do we fund that? And how do we allow that to happen where necessary, without just blowing up out of control? And that means from time to time, uttering the forbidden word – taxes. And we are in the middle of doing that now. We have a Goods and Services Tax, like a VAT. It was 7%. We pushed it up to 8% on the first of January this year, and it is about to go up to 9% on the first of January next year. And we will make it happen. But what we are doing is to provide quite generous, practically cash subsidies to the lower two-thirds of the population, so that I can get the system through. I am in a new place in terms of my revenues. But as far as impact on the households, that is deferred for quite some time.
Mr Micklethwait: How would you like to be remembered? What is the bit out of that? Do you want to be seen as the person who kept Singapore…
PM Lee: No, I think I will just focus on doing my job. I am not into…
Mr Micklethwait: Eulogies?
PM Lee: No, I am not into the point where I sit down and talk about what I used to do.
Mr Micklethwait: Well, that brings me to my last question. There is talk of you becoming Senior Minister. When I first met you many years ago, you had just taken over as Prime Minister. And then I went to go and see your father, who supposedly had semi-retired, to be Senior Minister. And I discovered to my slight surprise, he was living above your Cabinet room, which struck me as being…
PM Lee: No, he was not living there, he was working there.
Mr Micklethwait: So, he was working there. If I was running a Cabinet meeting, and he was up there… I mean, are you going to be planning to that degree?
PM Lee: It did not happen. I was running the Cabinet meeting and he was in the Cabinet Room.
Mr Micklethwait: But he was still somewhat there.
PM Lee: It worked quite well. My predecessor was in the Cabinet Room too. So, I had two of my predecessors in the meeting. And one of my fellow Prime Ministers said to me, ‘I cannot imagine what your Cabinet meetings are like’.
Mr Micklethwait: Does this work?
PM Lee: But they worked. It worked. It is a very delicate thing to be overwatching but not overbearing, and to be able to give advice and a helpful nudge, and just the right, wise word, and not cramp the style of your successor. I am at the disposal of my successor. I have already said whatever he wants me to do, I will do to help him succeed. So, you have to ask him what he will be doing with me.
Mr Micklethwait: Well Prime Minister Lee, I hope we will see you next year as well.
PM Lee: No, I shall be in the audience listening to you.
Mr Micklethwait: Listening from up above. Thank you.
PM Lee: Thank you very much.
