Alternative Viewpoints: the big bad world through daniel's glasses

Some political commentary today:


there was that andrew kuan hooha awhile ago, and i don't think anyone needs further details about that. with all honesty i am going to say that andrew kuan would not have made a good president, and i would not vote for him ever. there was a time when people with imperfect pasts became President - Devan Nair spent a few years in Changi Prison for his communist sympathies and for agitating against the colonial government - but even he was a man of substance and of passion, and inspired people because of that. since the President spends much of his time being a figurehead, what matters more really is not so much the guy's CV, but that he has the persona and a kind of aura. he must look Presidential. Mr. Nathan pulls that stunt off. not andrew kuan, no way!

my main gripe is actually that mysterious council that gives out the only free COE in the land. (although it is also the most difficult to get.) the three men of the PEC are all appointed by the PAP. now MM Lee says that the rationale for having the Elected Presidency is so that the guy can stand in the way of any "rogue government"(i like the way he says that, like a government can be a bunch of bandits or something) that wants to spend the hard-earned reserves. (which are no joke at around S$160-180 billion, or about one year's worth of GDP). and the strange thing is that the PEC that approves - i am tempted to use "selects" but i shall toe the official line - the candidate(s) for the Presidency is itself chosen by whatever government is in power.

so the fact is that the government still has quite a grip over who gets the "elected" Presidency. the "rogue" government can simply place cronies in the PEC - no one really knows who is on it anyway - and get another crony to run for President and have the crony PEC kick out everyone else. and they raid the nation's coffers with the President's consent.

that's the danger with the system as it is now. and it is made much worse by the vagueness and lack of transparency associated with how the PEC is selected, how they make the decision, and the fact that they are not required to explain their choice. with Andrew Kuan vs SR Nathan they merely released a statement saying that they felt Mr Kuan did not satisfy the criteria, even though to a large extent he did. because no one knows what's going on inside the PEC, and it doesn't have to entertain public scrutiny, it can do anything it wants - that includes pandering to a "rogue" government.

the President is supposed to be a check on the government. but how can he be one, if he has to be approved by the government in the first place? not very smart you see. i may be missing something though - and i hope i am.

conclusion: the PEC exists because the PAP doesn't trust us to make totally well-informed decisions. and no voter possibly can, therefore some means of screening Presidential candidates must be in place; the Presidency is after all the highest office in the land, and a very powerful one with regards to the economy. but the PEC's members, processes and decisions must be made transparent and accountable to the citizenry who earned the reserves the President guards. something like the US system of public hearings would be good, especially for controversial cases like Mr. Kuan. we cannot let them get away with giving the one-line explanation they gave the last time, for at this rate they may one day get away with putting an evil President in the chair.



On the international front:

israel just dragged its settlers out of the Gaza Strip. that was quite an achievement actually - they have always been very protective of their settlements. but the reaction was decidedly mixed. people worried about israel never ever pulling out of the West Bank, which is the main bone of contention between them and the palestinians. now most people seem to hate israelis and think they're evil. they have good reason - the israelis indeed have killed innocent palestinian women and children, and taken steps to hinder the palestinians from progress. but what makes them any worse than the palestinians, hamas, islamic jihad et al, who deliberately target israeli civilians; buses, nightclubs and weddings. (oh imagine someone bombing chinablack on friday night, that'll be so bad, think about it.) most israeli kills of innocents occur as collateral damage during terrorist hunts in the palestinian territories. it is not deliberate targeting at all.

and all the people whine about it, saying israelis are murderous, deprive the palestinians of freedom and prosperity, blah blah. that is true...


But we must all remember, that in the not too distant past, the arabs were the aggressors right from the start in 1948. the israelis may kill the occasional palestinian child, but from the day of israel's founding the arabs had sworn to annihilate the State of Israel and drive all the Jews into the mediterranean sea. it would have been the ultimate holocaust. and at that time the arabs had tremendous numerical and military superiority. but israel against all the odds redeemed its existence, through brilliant campaigns, sheer grit and some say divine providence; this will show through a study of the 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973 arab-israeli wars. when Singapore became independent LKY shed a few tears. but the israelis paid for their freedom with men, blood and lives against arabs hellbent on their destruction.

we wonder, then, how the israelis came to be in control of the West Bank and Gaza. well, the israelis won them in the aforementioned wars - ironically started by the arabs themselves! the occupied territories were also paid for with the loss of israeli blood and lives - the highest price that can be paid, and the return of the Gaza Strip has to be seen in that light. amidst all the modern-day talk of giving dispossessed people their rights to a nation and blabla, the fact is that the occupying power, having won the area in war, retains the right to do as it pleases in the land, and to actually give it away for nothing in return is laudable. when the brits first gave the State of Israel its territory, one of the reasons was that Jews had made an invaluable contribution to the Allied effort on World War II. what have the palestinians ever done for the israelis? other than kill them with bombs. just because you have a right to your own homeland doesn't mean you deserve it.

look at the administrative fiasco in the gaza strip now that the israelis are gone. the palestinians can't maintain the infrastructure and order the israelis established. i think that through all these years the real heroes are the israelis, for standing up for their own existence and having built a prosperous developed country in spite of living with neighbours keen on their destruction and launching the occasional war and suicide bomber.

i may seem one-sided, but the truth is that what we hear about the israeli-palestinian conflict is biased towards the latter. this is merely what it is: an alternative viewpoint.



then there's the iranian nuclear issue. iran has the second-biggest oil reserves in the world, but insists on developing expensive nuclear power technology. their rough explanation: "we want to develop peaceful nuclear technology, so as to preserve our oil and gas for export."

now THAT has got to be the biggest bullshit i ever heard! it is very very lame. what about all the resourceless countries like singapore? we have zero oil for our own use, so we have even better reason to build a nuclear power plant - but no, we spend good money to import the oil we need, as do most other countries. nuclear technology is a very dangerous thing and a very big responsibility, that's why most countries are unwilling to take it up. if advanced nations like singapore, malaysia and the aussies think they can't, what makes the poor backward iranians think they can? when they are the ones that need it the least.

and i'm not saying anything about suspecting they actually mean to build nuclear bombs, although i (and most informed observers with a brain) really think they do, and that they are well on the way to building one.



there'll be more later.