(no subject)
Also posted on
sg_ljers
750,000 people protests on the streets of Taipei against a corrupt President. (Source: Chinatimes.tw)
An 8m by 8m area where activists are allowed to protest during the IMF/World bank meeting in Singapore. (Source: BBC)
Singapore welcome raises doubts (BBC Thursday, 14 September 2006)
Singapore shift on IMF activists (BBC Friday, 15 September 2006)
Singapore 'breaks protest deal' (BBC Thursday, 14 September 2006)
Singapore rapped over protest ban (BBC Friday, 8 September 2006)
Singapore IMF activist ban slammed (CNN September 15, 2006)
For me, it is a bittersweet feeling. I certainly do not wish to have a corrupt President so as to demonstrate that we have a vibrant democracy and full civil liberties, but neither is the other extreme pleasant. To read the ridicules in the international media about the way our government treat protestors is insulting, regardless whether I agree with them or not. I'm sure it's even heart-wrenching for those involved. Afterall, their effort for so many months has turned out to be a PR and branding disaster by no fault of theirs.
When our authorities' heavy-handedness created such a negative impression in our visitors' minds, all those expensive gift packs are treated like "bribery", our smiles on ST "fake", and our watertight security "excessive".
Somehow when we are promoting the Singapore brand of "efficiency", we forget that many of the delegates are politicians who have electorates to answer to in their own countries, and the last thing they want is to appear supportive of the restriction on civil liberties... even when they so enjoy it.
Paul Wolfowitz, by the way, can have many reasons to call our country "authoritarian". But during his tenure in the Bush Administration did he advice Bush to not screen participants of town hall meetings? Isn't he one of those neo-conservative advocate for unitary executive power? Wasn't Guantanamo Bay and secret prisons for suspected terrorists projects of the US Defense Department when he was Undersecretary? For him to critiercize Singapore now over free speech is quite ironic, if not hypocritical.
Hence, as much as I love democracy and freedom of expression, I prefer that Wolfowitz have nothing to do with it, because the last time he tried to spread democracy in another country, the U.S. invaded Iraq. You are welcomed, but you will not be greeted as liberator here, Mr. Wolfowitz.