Wen The Human Society.
Edited The Human Society.
«-[Introduction]-»
The night overwhelmed Washington, the lighting of the IMF headquarters hall on October 15th, the global economic giants gathered together, the air filled with coffee smell and tension.
Singaporean President Tharatnam Shanmugaratnam stepped onto the podium, and his voice was not urgent, but it was like throwing a stone into the Straits of Malacca, and the ripples went straight to Beijing and Washington.
He left a public warning in his speech, claiming that if he wanted peace, China has to give up one thing.
This netizen blown up the pot, someone called him "American messenger", someone said he stood up.
But is it really that simple? What did he say?
Washington’s Response: A Speech to Encourage Controversy
This time, Tharatnam Shanmugaratnam gave a lecture at the IMF's Per Jacobsson Foundation. The theme was quite high, called "The Age of Opportunity: Reshaping Economic Order and Sharing Goals."
He talked about Sino-US relations, the global economy, and also mentioned some AI, The Ambitious Vision of Climate Change.
But the most striking is his suggestion about China’s “self-sufficiency.”
He said that China and the United States are pinching too tightly now, like two huge ships squeezing in a narrow strait, and no one will let anyone else. For a small boat like Singapore, it is simply "a fight between gods and mortals".
He gave China advice: Don't focus on the complete self-sufficiency of "making everything yourself". Try "relying on each other" with the United States and Europe, integrating technology, and sharing benefits. Only in this way can competition be turned into cooperation and everyone get rich together.
To put it bluntly, he meant that if China wants peace, it must give up one thing: self-sufficiency.
However, he did not let the United States off, advising Washington not to think about confrontation. We must learn how to deal well with a strong China.
This sounds quite pertinent, but why is there a fuss online?
Some people think that Shandaman is to get China to "pick up the gun", listen carefully to America's words, give up its science and technology dish.
Although looking through the original speech, Shandaman did not say "surrender" at all, but advised both sides, emphasizing that "interdependence" must be managed well and not let the supply chain become a weapon.
He also mentioned that the WTO has to change, AI has to set rules, and the world has to deal with climate issues together.
This is more like a small country shouting in the seams, "You two don't argue."
But why is this remark still interpreted as "partial to the United States"?
We have to see what Singapore is going on.
The president in Singapore is a symbol, similar to the Queen of England, appearing and speaking, the real director is the Prime Minister Yuan Yuan and his cabinet.
This “Westminster” system determined that Shandamann’s words were more of “leaving a point of view” than of determining national policies.
But after all, he represents Singapore, and the logic behind it has to dig.
The Straits Keeper: The Survival of Singapore
This part of Singapore, the land of bullets, is one in nine smaller than Shanghai, there are no resources, food and drinking water must be imported.
The fresh water?
Previously, all depended on Malaysia, knocking your neck per minute.
So people early launched the "four water plan", engaged in seawater desalination and rainwater recycling, in 2023, the self-sufficiency rate has been 65%, the goal in 2045 is completely not dependent on foreigners.
Who can't give a thumbs up for this "rainy day"?
Interestingly, Shandaman urged China not to “self-sufficient”, but he worked with Chinese cold chain companies on food to stabilize his own supply chain.
How does this look like a bit of “self-fighting”?
The Strait of Malacca is the “garlic” of global trade.
80% of China’s oil imports come from here.
Previously, this waterway was Singapore, Malaysia, The three Indonesian brothers said that foreigners were not allowed to enter.
However, on September 7, this year, Yellow Rush went to India and invited the Indian Navy to join the Malacca patrol to break the old rules.
Someone pointed it out directly. Isn't this just adding congestion to China? After all, India and China are still confused on the border. At this time, the signal is obvious enough to pull it in.
It is understandable that a small country is sandwiched between a big country, and it is good to have both sides, but don't go too far.
China and the United States are both 30% of its trading partners, Politically in America., but I will never be a "hardcore little brother" like Japan and Australia.
Therefore, Shandamann's words can not be said to be "American speaker", but small countries find balance in the wave, afraid that China and the United States will strike too hard, and this trade hub will not go down.
Self-sufficiency: China’s shield or lock-in?
Why does Shandaman look at “self-sufficiency” when he speaks?
In 2018, our domestic chip was thrown by the U.S. card, ZTE almost failed to go past, the ASML light engraving machine one night stopped confessing, and China was forced to realize: the core technology must be in its own hands.
Since then, photovoltaic silicon wafers have accounted for 83% of the world's total, and the "nine chapters" of quantum computing have killed supercomputing. Grain output will exceed 1.4 trillion catties in 2024, with an average of 500 kilograms per capita, throwing the international warning line.
100% rice and wheat. Maize 98%, more than 80% of the energy depends on itself.
What is this "closed door car"? clearly the bottom line of "other people do not sell, I can live."
But how did this confidence become a "threat" in Tharatnam Shanmugaratnam's mouth?
What he wants to express is actually that he is afraid that China will completely "decouple" and rely entirely on internal circulation, and the world economy will be torn apart.
His ideal way is for China to "tie together" with the United States and Europe, share technology and share interests.
Someone hit the nail on the head. Isn't this just letting China be the downstream of the industrial chain? High technology in the United States?
Not to mention, the price of soybeans in Brazil rose, and China immediately switched to 1.3 million tons from Argentina. The market reacted as quickly as a snap of fingers.
China has not refused to cooperate, but will not hand the door of fate over to others.
Look at Singapore itself.
65% of fresh water is self-sufficient, and 90% of grain is imported. Isn't it the same as keeping warm with Chinese cold chain companies?
Why do small countries do so by calling it "strategic vision" and big countries do so by calling it "disrupting balance"?
These two targets are even more shaking than the waves of the Strait.
Global Chess: Who is redrawing the map?
Look at the distance, this is not just Singapore’s “small calculator”.
American relations are at a crossroads.
In the past, the United States was the world leader, with free trade and immigration flags high.
But now, the shadow of protectionism left by the Trump era is still, Yellen just worried about China's "property black hole" at the IMF's annual meeting, but forgot that the U.S. government debt is more than high.
The Chinese economy is following the United States. Technology frequently shows its cards in photovoltaics, quantum, and AI.
In 2025, the IMF predicted that China would grow by 4.8%, upgraded the U.S. and British Brazil's data, and it can be seen who is the "capstone" of the global economy.
Since the 1990s, China has "learned from beauty" and learned from the United States how to develop agriculture, adjust urban-rural contradictions, and combat technical unemployment.
But the United States let go of the market, and China relies on the government's guidance, and has taken a lot of turns.
For example, food, stable your own dish, the global market is 30% less demand pressure, and the poor in developing countries are less hungry.
Where is this a "threat to peace"? Obviously supporting the world.
But the United States is also turning in the Cold War mindset, rare-earth sanctions, chip bans a wave after another, forcing China to have bright muscles in the Western Pacific, aircraft carrier crew cruise, a clear signal: the Pacific is large enough to accommodate two great powers.
Shandamman looked in his eyes and was afraid of what he was afraid of? afraid that China and the United States would completely disconnect, the world would split into two, and Singapore's "Strait Guardman" would be unemployed.
He pushed "interdependence", in fact, to let China not go too far, the United States do not shake too hard, everyone sits down and talks about the WTO reform and AI rules.
What is reality so simple?
China did not say no cooperation, high-tech foreign investment increased by 28.3% in 2022. Tesla and BASF steal money.
But the cooperation can be fair. The United States always thinks about "stuck its neck". Can China not wear a "seat belt"?
The Lighthouse of the Strait: Who Decides the Future?
The wave of the Strait gradually calmed, the Chinese "peace friendship" exercise ended, Shandaman's voice was still floating, and the answers had emerged.
On October 23, Huang Xuncai said in public: In the post-American era, order is a bit chaotic, but there are also many opportunities.
This is like patching Tharatnam Shanmugaratnam: Singapore doesn't want to take sides, it just wants to find a way to survive in the chaos.
China's path has been set long ago: independence + openness.
Self-government is a shield, protecting the "card neck", and opening up is a bridge to connect with the global market.
The Arctic route is open, and Singapore fears that the "transit fee" is less, but China is not often invited to do it together.
China is not to close the door, it is to open a bigger door, but there must be a lock.
Looking around the globe, Shandaman's "advice" is dispersed like the wind of the strait.
But it reminds something: the world is changing, unilateral hegemony can't be played, and multipolarization is the trend.
The road to the future is not to let anyone "give up" something, but to the big powers and small countries together to find a fair play.
The boat of Malacca arrives and does not stop.
China’s giant ship, with its own warehouse and technology, steadily headed forward.
As for where is the next ship headed?
Perhaps the answer lies in the lighthouse in the strait, bright and waiting for people.
Reference: Lianhe Zaobao