2001 Speeches
Speech delivered at the Singapore's Institute of Policy Studies
Franklin L. Lavin - U.S. Ambassador to Singapore
October 10, 2001
Thank you, Ambassador Koh and IPS for sponsoring this seminar. Let me first give a brief overview. Then I will touch on international, domestic, and economic considerations. Finally I will offer some thoughts on implications for Singapore.
Overview
We know what this struggle is about. As Tony Blair noted in his speech last week to the labour Party Conference, "Can anyone doubt that the terrorists would have killed 70,000 people rather than 7,000 people if they had the chance?" This is not about targeting Muslims, or Arabs, or Afghans. Indeed, the U.S. military has gone to the aid of Muslims repeatedly over the past decades in Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Somalia. This is not about targeting a people. There is not even an Afghan government to speak of. This is about targeting a criminal gang.
We are witnessing a multi-faceted approach. Politically, the United States is helping shape and lead a global coalition more inclusive than any other in history. Virtually every country in the world - with only a few sad, predictable exceptions - is publicly backing the efforts of the Coalition. Some forty Coalition members are offering use of bases, logistics, or direct combat support. And the United Nations has unanimously passed Security Council resolutions endorsing the Coalition efforts.
Beyond the political initiatives, the world’s financial centers are reviewing and improving their financial controls and anti-money laundering regulations.
There is also a criminal justice dimension. Police and security services from around the world are increasing their coordination and information sharing.
Finally, there is a deterrence aspect. Home ministries and homeland defense offices around the world are reviewing their procedures and policies to ensure this type of tragedy cannot be repeated.
We are seeing a military campaign that is not just unprecedented because of the scope of its political support, but also because of the extraordinary effort of the Coalition to avoid civilian casualties. This is the first military campaign ever in which humanitarian relief is taking place even as the conflict unfolds. In World War II, the Allies waited until the formal surrender of Japan and Germany before they could start their humanitarian work. In this day and age, with laser-guided weapons and precision munitions, we have the capabilities of disrupting a terrorist command center in one valley, and in the next valley simultaneously providing food and medicine to civilians.
Although the military activity by its very nature will capture the most media attention, probably more important over the long run will be the quiet policy decisions made by government leaders and regulators in Washington, London, Singapore and elsewhere.
International aspects
Tragedies occasionally have some unexpected consequences. One foreign policy result of this tragedy is that it allows the Coalition countries to reshape relations and put historical animosities behind them. Most noteworthy in this regard is the improvement in U.S.-Russia relations. Also of note is a more modest, but nonetheless welcome uptick in U.S.-China relations. The gravity of the challenge reminds all of us to keep focused on the overriding objectives of putting terrorists out of business and not to get side-tracked by day-to-day issues.
Thus Coalition management moves front and center as a foreign policy requirement and we can be heartened by the U.S. approach to date. What we see in formation is no rigid architecture, nor a series of mandatory obligations, but a voluntary gathering of disparate nations. Thus a successful coalition respects the participating nations’ varying preferences and skills, and allows each country wide latitude in its participation. This requires extra management effort, but this a la carte coalition will over the long run prove more enduring as it respects national differences.
Domestic politics
Although the terrorists murdered thousands and devastated thousands more, their true target is public opinion. They seek to use these monstrous deeds to spread their hatred and to divide the world, nation against nation, culture against culture, religion against religion. Countries that have sizable Islamic populations will have to work hard to maintain social cohesion and domestic political support for their Coalition participation. One only has to read the Senior Minister’s memoirs and his description of the powerful hold Mao’s China held on the imagination of Singaporean Chinese in the 1950s to remind us of how ties of sentiment and blood, combined with real or perceived grievances, can concoct a dangerous brew of passion.
Some countries will indeed pay a domestic political price for supporting the Coalition. But political leadership is not without its costs. Leaders who want to serve their nation will occasionally have to deal with disaffected constituencies. Some of these groups will be noisy, or numerous, or possibly even dangerous. Part of the potency of terrorists is that they mask their evil activity in political slogans and populist rhetoric. And one can always appeal to anti-Americanism and even simple envy.
In the Cold War, the Communists would frequently exploit or incite grievances in an attempt to improve their position. Responsible governments had to deal head-on with this threat, even when there was a domestic political cost. It requires political will, the ability to engage in the battle for hearts and minds, and the ability to sustain this effort through criticism and friction. Political leaders who seek another route, who believe they can side-step this issue by not publicly defending their Coalition support, risk emboldening their critics and undercutting the moderate majority.
The ability of democratic societies to sustain long-term campaigns against an elusive foe should not be underestimated. When our very way of life is threatened, we will take up the mantle of the "Long twilight struggle," to use John F. Kennedy’s phrase.
Economic implications
Some brief words on the economic implications: These attacks have been quite punishing. Billions of dollars have been knocked off the stock markets. Billions of dollars in capital expenditures have been cancelled. The travel and tourism industry have been particularly hard hit. One U.S. airline, United, has already grounded more airplanes than Singapore Airlines has in its entire fleet. But the U.S. and the world economy are highly resilient. And remember, the U.S. has seen nine separate central bank rate cuts along with a substantial tax cut already this year. We were primed for upward movement when the disaster hit. This tragedy will push the U.S. economy down by 1% or so for the last quarter of this year and the first quarter of next year.
And so we do not think the talk about the economy is just about numbers and spreadsheets, the World Bank has predicted that this economic softening will have fatal consequences for those who live on the margin, mainly those in poorer countries. The World Bank estimates that some 20-40,000 babies will die this year as a result of the economic softening.
Singapore’s role
Finally, a word about Singapore. Singapore has joined the front ranks of nations in stepping up to the Coalition. We are gratified by the vocal support of Singapore leadership, the support rendered in the U.N., and the outpouring of popular sentiment we have seen at the national memorial service and elsewhere.
But now there is more to do. Singapore is in the process – as is the U.S. - of re-examining its internal systems and policies. The U.S. is looking at everything from cockpit safety to immigration to money laundering, and we are consulting with Singapore authorities who are doing the same thing.
Key to stopping the terrorists will be to shut down their movement of people, goods, and money. This will be the focus of responsible governments around the world. Since Singapore has excellent transportation, shipping, and financial centers, there is no doubt that it can play a central role.
Singapore’s willingness to step up on these issues will be vital to the Coalition’s struggle. But as we will welcome these moves, we must also acknowledge that it would not be pure altruism that would propel Singapore down this path, for Singapore’s self-interest also lies in helping establish a world free from terrorism.
You cannot be a commercial hub, serving a seven-hour flight radius, when air flights are disrupted, or shipping service in encumbered, or financial flows are dislocated, or societies are pitted against each other. So efforts by the world community to cut off terroriss’ use of global transport and financial systems will be applauded by Singaporeans themselves.
This realization calls to mind a poem by Edna St. Vincent Millay, written in the Summer of 1940. It is fittingly titled, "There Are No Islands, Any More." Let me close with a few lines…
Dear Islander, I envy you:
For I’m very fond of islands, too;
And few the pleasures I have known
Which equaled being left alone.
Yet matters from without intrude
At times upon my solitude
A forest fire, a dog run mad,
A neighbor stripped of all he had
By swindlers, or the shrieking plea
For help, of stabbed Democracy.
Singapore, and the world, heard the shriek last month. We know there are military risks and Coalition management challenges for the U.S. There are domestic political costs for some Muslim countries. There is an economic cost for the world. And there are also challenges for us all to face as we rise to the challenge. And rise we must. For there are no islands any more.