Event Summary: IPS-RSIS Forum on Race and Racism in Singapore

Jointly organised by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) and the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), the IPS-RSIS Forum on Race and Racism in Singapore aimed to facilitate a constructive discussion on racial fault lines in Singapore. The dialogue comes amid a rise in episodes of racial intolerance that has spurred a national debate on race and the state of Singapore’s racial harmony. Streamed online with some 1,600 viewers tuning in, the event featured a keynote address by Minister for Finance Lawrence Wong and a panel discussion featuring academics and practitioners seasoned in the public discourse on race and racism in Singapore.  

Opening Address 

In his speech, Minister Lawrence Wong addressed his concerns over the recent spate of highly publicised racist incidents, reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to building a racial equal society and outlined ways that Singapore can keep working at multiracialism to reduce its imperfections. 

He appealed for the Chinese majority to do its part by being sensitive to as well as conscious of the needs of minorities, pointing to the difficulties of being a minority in a multiracial society like Singapore. Minister Wong highlighted challenges faced by racial minorities in Singapore such as dealing with insensitive comments or stereotypes about their race, job discrimination and landlords specifying preferences of tenants along racial lines.  

“So I ask that we do more and take the extra step to make our minority friends, neighbours, co-workers feel comfortable. Treat others in the way you would like to be treated; and by your actions, teach your children to do the same. Remind those among your family members or friends who may slip up from time to time,” Minister Wong said. 

At the same time, he stressed that it is important to realise that the Chinese community is not monolithic and should not be painted with a broad brush. Drawing reference to the concept of “Chinese privilege” in discussions of race relations in Singapore, Minister Wong acknowledged the biases and blind spots that the Chinese community ought to become aware of and rectify. However, there remains an entire generation of Chinese Singaporeans who are more comfortable in using Chinese than English and consider themselves at a disadvantage in an English-speaking world, he added. Minister Wong explained that many would naturally object to being characterised as privileged, since these individuals feel that they have given up much to bring about a multiracial society — Chinese language schools, Mandarin dialects, Nanyang University, etc.

Nonetheless, he clarified that this does not mean minority Singaporeans should refrain from voicing out the racial prejudices they experience. In fact, Minister Wong encouraged individuals to be upfront and honest about their racialised experiences to initiate uncomfortable but necessary, civilised discussions. He called on groups advocating for change to be conscious of how they approach the issue, warning against insisting on “maximum entitlements and rights” for their respective groups, “constru[ing] every compromise as an injustice that needs to be condemned” or putting “the worst interpretation on every perceived slight or insensitivity”. 

In his view, this would trigger pushbacks from other groups, emboldening each side to up the ante and end up fuelling the tribalism and hostility experienced by many societies around the world.

Minister Wong also said that Singapore’s policies — be it the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) electoral system that ensures minority representation in Parliament or Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools — “are not cast in stone” and can always be changed and improved, adding that the government will continue to engage widely and update their policies on race, along with policies to strengthen racial harmony in Singapore. Citing the example of the ongoing review of Muslim nurses wearing the tudung with their uniform, he said that this fine-tuning process “entails detailed study and extensive dialogue between the government and our various communities. It cannot be rushed, nor should things be changed simply based on who shouts the loudest.”

Dialogue with Minister 

Following his speech, Minister Wong tackled questions from the online audience in a dialogue moderated by Dr Shashi Jayakumar, Senior Fellow and Head of Centre of Excellence for National Security of RSIS. He addressed the relevance of race-based policies such as the Chinese, Malay, Indian and Others (CMIO) model and the Housing and Development Board’s Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) that sets racial quotas in public housing estates. Critics allege these policies reinforce racial consciousness and detracts from Singapore’s goal of multiracialism. 

Minister Wong replied that he appreciates these views but expressed reservations about Singaporeans ignoring ethnic identities and racial differences once the CMIO model is discarded. He recognised that the EIP has caused some minority homeowners difficulties in selling their apartments but explained that the policy has not only helped prevent the formation of ethnic enclaves and racial segregation as seen in many countries, but also engendered a sense of belonging and national identity over the years. Appeals would be handled on a case-by-case basis, including waiving EIP limits in exceptional circumstances, he added.  

Responding to a hot-button question on whether a non-Chinese can become Singapore’s Prime Minister (PM), Minister Wong pointed to IPS surveys indicating that a sizeable proportion of Singaporeans are more comfortable with a PM of their own race and added that a Singaporean of a minority ethnicity who wants to be PM should be aware of such sentiments on the ground. However, it does not mean these attitudes reflected in the surveys should be accepted and Singaporeans must work hard to change such views, he said.

Minister Wong also said that calling out racist behaviours and taking a strong stance against racism is crucial but urges Singaporeans to do so without assuming the worst in people, reiterating an earlier point he made in his speech. Adopting this aggressive position may lead to misunderstandings and worsen the situation as certain behaviours may well be accidental or ambiguous, he said. Minister Wong believes that responding with understanding, respect, and forgiveness instead of a confrontational attitude seeking to divide is key to approaching racial discourse.  

Other issues discussed include dealing with the racist behaviours of teachers, adopting education pedagogies on diversity in schools and Lianhe Zaobao’s editorial characterising the problem of racism in Singapore.  

Panel Discussion 

Professor Paulin Straughan, Dean of Students, and Professor of Sociology at Singapore Management University, moderated the discussion with four other panellists and explored steps to advance multiculturalism in Singapore.

They agreed that educating children on racism is imperative and teachers can play a central role in doing so through bias training and equipping of anti-racism resources. Associate Professor Daniel Goh from the Department of Sociology at the National University of Singapore (NUS) pressed for education on racism in schools, describing how children learn attitudes on race from a young age through socialisation until it becomes instinctual. While he conceded that this could place pressure on educators who are already juggling numerous responsibilities, he called racism an “existential issue” and proposed education on the issue as early as pre-school.  

Mr Goh Sin Teck, Editor of Lianhe Zaobao, emphasised the role of traditional media in promoting open conversations about race and maintained that newspapers like Lianhe Zaobao offer a platform for an exchange of differing views. Responding to a participant’s question on why his paper had published an editorial that “stoked racist sentiments” by pinning the surge in racist incidents on COVID-19, the polarisation on social media and the import of “foreign ideas” like Critical Race Theory, Mr Goh pointed out that it was inevitable to encounter different opinions and schools of thought on racial issues and acknowledged that not all would agree with the views expressed in his publication. He called for open communication and urged Singaporeans to refrain from using sweeping statements when conducting conversations on race.  

Associate Professor Elmie Nekmat from the Department of Communications and New Media at NUS underscored the inherent nature of social media to foster polarisation, given the existence of multiple pockets of online safe spaces created by netizens to discuss various issues. He suggested going beyond social media to hold inclusive safe space discussions on race in real-life settings, noting that the views and inputs of the elderly are lacking in the online sphere. 

On whether it is appropriate to import the term “Chinese privilege” from the concept of “White privilege” used in Western countries, Dr Laavanya Kathiravelu, Assistant Professor for the School of Social Sciences at Nanyang Technological University, contended that the practice is not new, arguing that Singapore has always borrowed language from other contexts and raised the country’s cherished principle of meritocracy as an example. The notion of “Chinese privilege” has resonated with younger people here as they are struggling for a language to talk about their social reality and these ideas are useful to express particular feelings, she elaborated. 

In contrast, Associate Professor Goh felt that context matters. He explained his objection to the term as he felt there was insufficient adaptation to Singapore’s local institutional context, adding that the use of ‘Chinese privilege’ as a blanket term puts everyone into a defensive posture and cuts off conversations. 

Opening Speech & Dialogue with Minister

Panel Discussion