PAP leadership renewal - the next chapter

Football aficionados and students of Singapore politics will have noticed that the analogies used on the occasion of anointing Lawrence Wong as Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's successor were different from 1984, when Goh Chok Tong became then-PM Lee Kuan Yew's successor-in-waiting.

In 1984, both Mr Goh and Mr Lee Kuan Yew were clear that the latter would be "goalkeeper" to the former's striker. Mr Wong's role has been cast quite differently, with PM Lee Hsien Loong observing that the next prime minister and his ministers would "score goals collectively" for Singapore.

Together, PM Lee, former minister Khaw Boon Wan and Mr Wong used the word "team" 58 times during a media conference at the Istana on April 16 where all three elaborated on the announcement two days earlier of the People's Action Party's (PAP) choice of its next leader.

Good sides have many qualities. Teamwork is one of them. But the best teams also have influential, decisive captains.

As prime minister, and in the lead-up to him taking the reins, it would in my view be a mistake to see Mr Wong as a senior director perched just above other directors - he might be primus inter pares but he will be the leader.

He will need to show his authority - indeed stamp it, in his own way.

After the disappointing 1991 general election for the PAP, which saw the Opposition winning four seats, the founding prime minister, Mr Lee, told his successor, Mr Goh, that there was little fear of the Government in certain quarters, and that the problem had arisen as to who would carry the "big stick" for Mr Goh. The implication was that the leader could not afford to be seen as too soft. Mr Goh replied that he would carry the big stick himself, but he would do so "quietly, like Suharto", referring to the Indonesian strongman.

The question arises as to what sort of stick Mr Wong - the newly minted 4G leader - will choose to wield, and on what occasions.

The Opposition will use every opportunity in Parliament to test the PM-in-waiting, and to attempt to exert some sort of psychological dominance from an early stage (indeed, it is the nature of politics that the Opposition does not even need to outperform the PM-in-waiting in every single skirmish to claim political victory). This will be an interesting challenge.

Mr Lee took the view that the PM had to go beyond technocratic expertise and communicating policy. After his successor was chosen, Mr Lee wrote that Mr Goh could hold his own against opposition leaders Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam, but that if for some reason he could not, then Mr Goh should not govern Singapore, and other ministers and members of parliament (MP) should know it.

When it comes to his own successor, PM Lee has observed: "He will have to pull his weight and... show that he deserves to be what his peers and his colleagues in Cabinet think that he can do... this is necessary. If you're unable to win elections, you cannot be the leader. You can be a great thinker, you can be a great planner, but you have to be in politics."

Mr Wong has already shown on several occasions that he can debate and take on the Opposition effectively in his own way, particularly when it comes to matters of policy. But, inevitably, there will be occasions down the line where taking on the Opposition, either in or out of Parliament (say, "street-fighting" on the campaign trail), will require different skill sets and a different aspect of charisma.

Mr Wong, as prime minister, and his team could perhaps seek to depersonalise some of the sparring while still channelling conviction and passion in debate, which the younger generation seem to relate to more.

The late Mr Lee could be ruthless when the situation demanded.

"Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac", he once said.

Domestically, Mr Wong, supported by the 4G team, will not need a hatchet and may not even need to openly carry a big stick, given how times have changed.

But he may need some hatchet capability, combining a tough and uncompromising approach with the nuance and subtlety that the founding prime minister employed when needed. These attributes will increasingly be needed in the international arena.

Singapore's principled stand on Russia's illegal and unwarranted invasion of Ukraine is a case in point. It would have been the easiest thing for the leadership to sit back and adopt a wait-and-see approach, or take a position that fudges the issue without condemning Russia's naked aggression.

With Ukraine, the right call was made. But as has become clear, segments of the population disagree or have doubts about the wisdom of Singapore making a stand in this way. Some on the ground (and here I take the ground to mean individuals and informal groups from coffee shops to golf courses) appear to have taken the view that it would have been sufficient to make the right noises against war, to express regret at civilian loss of life, and to state the hope that a peaceful resolution could quickly be reached.

Here, I think of former head of Civil Service Peter Ho's account of how Mr Lee once said to him, "Reasonable men adapt. Unreasonable men change the world."

Future security challenges will, from time to time, arise that will force Mr Wong and the rest of the 4G leadership to be "unreasonable" - in other words, to avoid seemingly safe compromises and risk-free approaches.

Even as he and his team show this type of steel, when it comes to explaining various issues to the domestic constituency, skill and subtlety will be needed. Many issues have arisen in recent years that have the potential to polarise and open up fissures in Singapore society.

Race is one example. I had the privilege of moderating a talk by Mr Wong at the 25 June 2021 IPS-RSIS Forum on Race and Racism in Singapore, and observed him at a separate forum on tribalism and identity politics onNov 23, 2021. To me, he was thoughtful, accurate and nuanced on many issues.

He observed that the majority needs to be sensitive to the minority and acknowledged that there had been instances of thoughtlessness. He also stressed the need to avoid stereotyping groups of people and assuming that these are monolithic. Mr Wong also noted that some Chinese Singaporeans were in some ways disadvantaged and would not understand what Chinese privilege means. In my view, he was correct in making these observations. At one or two points, he seemed to suggest that Chinese privilege is nothing more than a stereotype (many might disagree).

Intelligent, rational people may very well be able to come up with seemingly sound arguments of their own to substantiate or contest the analysis and observations made by Mr Wong on the issues above. On this and other domestic issues with the potential to polarise society - if not already polarising society - Mr Wong will have to wade into very tricky waters when he gives his views, or when he maps out his vision for Singapore. As much as he might want to appeal to a broad swathe of society, the very expression of his perspectives may to some degree segmentalise opinion on him.

It is impossible to tell whether the first major challenge to the next PM will come from within or without. It may well be a combination of both. In facing challenges, what stands the 4G leadership in especially good stead is bench strength when it comes to experience, capabilities and intellect. It is buttressed by both senior ministers and ministers recruited during the 3G era. There are also younger office holders who are not yet full ministers, but who (including a few who sit in Cabinet meetings) may well be in future.

These younger office holders were not involved this time round in choosing Mr Wong. Not involved too this time round were PAP MPs, although they endorsed the choice when presented to them. Mr Wong will need time for younger office holders and MPs to get used to his style and approach. He shows great promise on this front.

At the April 16 media conference, the issue of inducting talent and further successions down the line came up, with PM Lee expressing the hope that Mr Wong would together with colleagues identify more promising leaders, and build up the 5G team.

These comments are not premature. The PAP has always treated talent renewal at all levels as an existential issue. The 2G leadership came into being as a result of a rigorous - some would suggest ruthless - winnowing that began in the 1970s.

It is a process that should start now with the 5G.

The future team - 4G in the post-Lee Hsien Loong era, 5G and beyond - will doubtless have talent and ability, but these qualities will need to be harnessed by the prime minister of the day.

As PM Lee said on April 16, "…you must maximise the abilities and the experiences and the instincts of people from a wide range of backgrounds and get them to work together so that you have an outstanding result which no single person can deliver."

Politics has changed - and so has football. It is not so much about just the striker anymore, and yes, passing the ball has become important. Some teams now pass in very intricate patterns (while making sure, of course, that the ball is still going upfield). The good teams have many qualities but what the best have in common, besides influential captains, are deep talent pools they can draw on.

Mr Wong has been chosen as the man - the one beyond all others in the frame - to unite the Cabinet and bring out the best in them when it comes to collective performance and results for Singapore.

The team members themselves may well have diverse strengths and other qualities, including belief in one's ability to do the job at all office-holding levels, for example. This would be expected and, as politics progresses, natural. It may in fact be why Mr Khaw, the former minister, was needed: his role was not a simple consultative role but a bridging one. Mr Khaw confirmed this at the media conference - his role was to obtain views from ministers but also to do so in a way that fostered a consensus and brought the team together.

If future transitions see either more than one individual being prepared for the job or being prepared to put his or her hand up, the PAP may have to accept this. While there is a difference between this and competition for the job, the difference in practice may not be large.

The issue is not necessarily the idea of competition in itself but in keeping intra-party contention healthy, while avoiding internal politics and "destructive dynamics" that is commonplace in other Cabinets, as PM Lee mentioned at the media conference in April.

As a Singaporean and observer of politics, I hope that future leaders, including those in the 5G who have not yet made their appearance, will retain that disinterested sense of service to nation evident in the incumbent prime minister, his chosen successor and his peers.