DOCSLIB.ORG

Lee Kuan Yew's Thinking on 38, Oxley Road

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lee Kuan Yew's Thinking on 38, Oxley Road 2011 PM Lee and his wife Ho Ching proposed to renovate the house without demolishing it. They suggested: Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking demolishing private living spaces to preserve the family’s privacy; keeping the historically signicant basement dining room; strengthening the decaying on 38, Oxley Road structure; creating a new living area. December 2011 Mr Lee accepted PM Lee’s proposal. He told the PM Lee: family it was best to redevelop the house straight away after he died, and do what PM Lee proposed. In December 2011, he In his ministerial statement, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) key discussions on the family home when his father was alive, and what Dec 27, 2011 Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet that if 38, Oxley Road told the family that it happened after Mr Lee died. was to be preserved, it needed to have its was “best to redevelop foundations reinforced and the whole building 38, Oxley Road refurbished. straight away”, after he PM Lee and Ms Ho proceeded along those lines, and kept the family fully informed. died, and do what we No one raised any objections to the plan. proposed. By redevelopment, he March 28, 2012 Oct 27, 2010 May 2011 means remove the Mr Lee signed the authorisation to submit Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet to set on record his Mr Lee stepped down from the Cabinet a week the development application to the Urban private spaces, wish for his house to be demolished after his death. after the General Election on May 7. Redevelopment Authority (URA). renovate the house This was after his wife, Madam Kwa Geok Choo, died. without knocking it July 20, 2011 April 17, 2012 The URA approved the renovation plans. down. At around the Mr Lee wrote to the Cabinet again to reiterate that same time, on Dec 27, he wanted the house knocked down. March 23, 2015 2011, he wrote to Mr Lee died. Cabinet a third time. July 21, 2011 PM Lee: PM Lee invited Mr Lee to make his case to the “Cabinet members Cabinet in person. Ministers unanimously said they PM Lee on the issue: Why is there still were unanimous that opposed demolition. an argument? One “As far as I knew, that was how the family had settled the matter – rationally, amicably 38, Oxley Road PM Lee did not express a view, as he was both a possible factor may son and prime minister, and hence conicted. while Mr Lee was still alive, which was what he had hoped to achieve and strived very should not be be a dierence in Before and after this, Mr Lee continued to discuss hard to achieve. I heard nothing to the contrary until after my father died.” demolished as I the matter with his family. views between me and my siblings and wanted. I have During discussions, Mr Lee Hsien Yang at one point reflected on this and suggested that his father gift the property to the dierence is over decided that if 38, Singapore, on the condition that the house be this question: What demolished and a small public park be built in its did my father think Oxley Road is to be place. January 2011 about the house, preserved, it needs to PM Lee said he thought this was worth considering have its foundations Mr Lee’s book, Hard Truths To Keep Singapore apart from Going was published. In it, he said he told Cabinet: but also gave another option: demolishing the demolition? Was his reinforced and the house, redeveloping the site, and selling off the “When I’m dead, demolish it.” This drew a strong view black and whole building property and donating the proceeds to charity. public pushback and calls from Singaporeans for white, all or nothing refurbished. It must the house to be preserved. Mr Lee said he preferred PM Lee’s option. – demolish the house then be let out for March 2011 August 2011 no matter what? Or people to live in. An was he prepared to empty building will Mr Lee asked some newspaper editors for their Mr Lee decided to will 38, Oxley Road to PM Lee as views on the house. All wanted it to be kept. part of his share of the estate, and told the family so. consider alternatives soon decline and should demolition decay.” not be possible? My siblings’ view is that Ho Ching and I my father absolutely therefore proceeded wanted to demolish along these lines. We DEVELOPMENTS AFTER MR LEE KUAN YEW DIED knocked down. the house, with no kept the family fully He said that as a son, he wanted to see his father’s compromise... My informed of our April 12, 2015 wishes carried out. view is that while my considerations and our Mr Lee’s will was formally read to PM Lee and his father wanted the siblings, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, April 15, 2015 intentions. We who objected to the renovation plans for the rst house to be e-mailed everyone, At the Cabinet meeting, PM Lee recused himself demolished, he was time. He wanted the house demolished from all discussions and decisions on the house, including my father, immediately. and placed Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean prepared to consider my sister, my brother PM Lee wanted to read their father’s Dec 27, 2011 in charge. alternatives should and his wife. No one letter to the Cabinet, as well as the full demolition Some time after the Parliament sitting, PM Lee the Government clause in his will, in Parliament the next day. raised any objections divested himself of the house. At rst, he offered to decide otherwise. Mr Lee Hsien Yang and his wife Suet Fern transfer it to his sister for $1 on the condition that to the plan. disagreed, but PM Lee said he would do so anyway. all proceeds or compensation would go to charity if His younger siblings issued a statement with the the house was sold or acquired. This fell through. full demolition clause that night. December 2015 April 13, 2015 PM Lee agreed to sell the house to his brother at PM Lee spoke in Parliament on how to honour Mr Lee. fair market value. They also agreed to each donate half the value of the house to charity. TEXT: CHARISSA YONG He told Parliament that it should not rush into PHOTOS: MALCOLM MCLEOD, making decisions on the matter, and also that his On top of that, PM Lee gave another donation equal STEPHANIE YEOW, GOV.SG SCREENGRAB, father had been unwavering in wanting the house to half the value of the house to charity. STRAITS TIMES FILE PHOTOS.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 170702Mindmap Copy
    Who said what Numerous allegations have been made in the ongoing feud between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings, from misuse of power to a conict Against Lee Hsien Loong of interest in preparing the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will. Insight charts the Against Teo Chee Hean • Allegation: PM Lee misused his claims and accusations in the dispute over the fate of 38, Oxley Road. • Allegation: Committee focused power to prevent the house from solely on challenging validity of being demolished demolition clause in Mr Lee’s will PM’s response: Denied the DPM Teo’s response: Not true that “baseless” allegations, will refute committee bent on preventing them in a ministerial statement in demolition of the house Parliament tomorrow • Allegation: Committee did not • Allegation: PM Lee made disclose options in prior exchanges, contradictory statements about only identied members and its their father’s wishes and the house terms of reference when “forced in public and private into the daylight” Ms Indranee Rajah’s DPM Teo’s response: Nothing response: Notes that secret about committee; it is like Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s numerous other committees last will specically Cabinet sets up to consider specic accepts and Against Ho Ching Against K. Shanmugam issues acknowledges that DPM Tharman Allegation: Has a pervasive Allegation: Conict of interest demolition may not take place. • • Shanmugaratnam’s inuence on government, well being on ministerial committee, response: Cabinet has beyond her job scope having advised the late Mr Lee and • Allegation: Did not challenge the numerous committees family about the house last will in court when probate was on whole range of granted • Allegation: Removed the late Mr Mr Shanmugam’s response: issues, to help think Lee’s items from house without PM’s response: Wanted to avoid a Calls the claim ridiculous; says through difcult choices approval; represented the Prime public ght that would tarnish the nothing he said precluded him from Minister’s Ofce despite not family name serving in committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Ministerial Committee on 38 Oxley Road
    REPORT OF THE MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE ON 38 OXLEY ROAD TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Background Chapter 2: Historical and heritage significance Chapter 3: Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s thinking and wishes on the property Chapter 4: Possible options for the property Chapter 5: Committee’s views 2 CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND 1. Founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s former home at 38 Oxley Road (henceforth referred to as the “Property”) is a single-storey bungalow surrounded by low-rise residential developments. 2. The issue of whether to preserve Mr Lee’s home after his passing, to demolish it, or some other option has become a matter of public interest. Shortly after Mr Lee’s passing on 23 March 2015, PM Lee Hsien Loong addressed this issue in Parliament on 13 April 2015, where he said that “there is no immediate issue of demolition of the house, and no need for the Government to make any decision now”, given that Dr Lee Wei Ling “intended to continue living in the Property”. He also stated that “if and when Dr Lee Wei Ling no longer lives in the House, Mr Lee has stated his wishes as to what then should be done…however, it will be up to the Government of the day to consider the matter”. 3. Though there is no immediate need for a decision, given the significant public interest in the Property, the Cabinet 1 approved setting up a Ministerial Committee (“Committee”) on 1 June 2016 to consider the various options. The Committee was asked to prepare drawer plans of various options and their implications, with the benefit of views of those who had directly discussed the matter with Mr Lee, so that a future Government can refer to these plans and make a considered and informed decision when the time came to decide on the matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Transparency and Authoritarian Rule in Southeast Asia
    TRANSPARENCY AND AUTHORITARIAN RULE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA The 1997–98 Asian economic crisis raised serious questions for the remaining authoritarian regimes in Southeast Asia, not least the hitherto outstanding economic success stories of Singapore and Malaysia. Could leaders presiding over economies so heavily dependent on international capital investment ignore the new mantra among multilateral financial institutions about the virtues of ‘transparency’? Was it really a universal functional requirement for economic recovery and advancement? Wasn’t the free flow of ideas and information an anathema to authoritarian rule? In Transparency and Authoritarian Rule in Southeast Asia Garry Rodan rejects the notion that the economic crisis was further evidence that ulti- mately capitalism can only develop within liberal social and political insti- tutions, and that new technology necessarily undermines authoritarian control. Instead, he argues that in Singapore and Malaysia external pres- sures for transparency reform were, and are, in many respects, being met without serious compromise to authoritarian rule or the sanctioning of media freedom. This book analyses the different content, sources and significance of varying pressures for transparency reform, ranging from corporate dis- closures to media liberalisation. It will be of equal interest to media analysts and readers keen to understand the implications of good governance debates and reforms for democratisation. For Asianists this book offers sharp insights into the process of change – political, social and economic – since the Asian crisis. Garry Rodan is Director of the Asia Research Centre, Murdoch University, Australia. ROUTLEDGECURZON/CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIES Edited by Kevin Hewison and Vivienne Wee 1 LABOUR, POLITICS AND THE STATE IN INDUSTRIALIZING THAILAND Andrew Brown 2 ASIAN REGIONAL GOVERNANCE: CRISIS AND CHANGE Edited by Kanishka Jayasuriya 3 REORGANISING POWER IN INDONESIA The politics of oligarchy in an age of markets Richard Robison and Vedi R.
    [Show full text]
  • Names of Chinese People in Singapore
    101 Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 7.1 (2011): 101-133 DOI: 10.2478/v10016-011-0005-6 Lee Cher Leng Department of Chinese Studies, National University of Singapore ETHNOGRAPHY OF SINGAPORE CHINESE NAMES: RACE, RELIGION, AND REPRESENTATION Abstract Singapore Chinese is part of the Chinese Diaspora.This research shows how Singapore Chinese names reflect the Chinese naming tradition of surnames and generation names, as well as Straits Chinese influence. The names also reflect the beliefs and religion of Singapore Chinese. More significantly, a change of identity and representation is reflected in the names of earlier settlers and Singapore Chinese today. This paper aims to show the general naming traditions of Chinese in Singapore as well as a change in ideology and trends due to globalization. Keywords Singapore, Chinese, names, identity, beliefs, globalization. 1. Introduction When parents choose a name for a child, the name necessarily reflects their thoughts and aspirations with regards to the child. These thoughts and aspirations are shaped by the historical, social, cultural or spiritual setting of the time and place they are living in whether or not they are aware of them. Thus, the study of names is an important window through which one could view how these parents prefer their children to be perceived by society at large, according to the identities, roles, values, hierarchies or expectations constructed within a social space. Goodenough explains this culturally driven context of names and naming practices: Department of Chinese Studies, National University of Singapore The Shaw Foundation Building, Block AS7, Level 5 5 Arts Link, Singapore 117570 e-mail: [email protected] 102 Lee Cher Leng Ethnography of Singapore Chinese Names: Race, Religion, and Representation Different naming and address customs necessarily select different things about the self for communication and consequent emphasis.
    [Show full text]
  • Tools of Survival: Sovereign Wealth Funds in Singapore and China
    Geopolitics, 14:328–344, 2009 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1465-0045 print / 1557-3028 online DOI: 10.1080/14650040902827799 FGEO1465-00451557-3028Geopolitics,Geopolitics Vol. 14, No. 2, Mar 2009: pp. 0–0 Tools of Survival: Sovereign Wealth Funds in Singapore and China SovereignVictor Shih Wealth Funds in Singapore and China VICTOR SHIH Department of Political Science, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA The rise of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) as major investors in the global economy has raised worries that they serve the geopolitical ends of owner countries. However, given the paramount impor- tance of surviving domestic political competitions, SWFs are likely also tools of domestic political survival. In examining the corpo- rate governance and underlying political environment in which SWFs in Singapore and in China operate, this paper further exam- ines the role of political unity in directing SWF behaviour in authoritarian regimes. The main finding is that a highly unified autocracy is more likely to direct SWFs to maximise long-term profit, while a fragmented one like China is more likely to treat its SWF as an arena for domestic political and bureaucratic infight- ing. SWFs operating in a fragmented regime are unlikely to make long-term profit and foreign policy objectives top priorities, and their behaviour can be highly unpredictable. The existing discussion on sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) focuses on their potential to become geopolitical tools of owner countries. How- ever, state leaders in a wide variety of political systems confront the problem of domestic political survival on a daily basis. Thus, to the extent that political considerations drive the behaviour of SWFs, domes- tic political concerns may be a stronger political driver than foreign pol- icy concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Case As A
    CSJ‐ 08 ‐ 0006.0 Settle or fight? Far Eastern Economic Review and Singapore In the summer of 2006, Hugo Restall—editor-in-chief of the monthly Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER)--published an article about a marginalized member of the political opposition in Singapore. The piece asserted that the Singapore government had a remarkable record of winning libel suits, which suggested a deliberate effort to neutralize opponents and subdue the press. Restall hypothesized that instances of corruption were going unreported because the incentive to investigate them was outweighed by the threat of an unwinnable libel suit. Singapore’s ruling family reacted swiftly. Lawyers for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore, asserted that the article amounted to an accusation against their clients of personal incompetence and corruption. In a series of letters, the Lees’ counsel demanded a printed apology, removal of the offending article from FEER’s website, and compensation for damages. The magazine maintained that Restall’s piece was not libelous; nonetheless, it offered to take mitigating action short of the three demands. But the Lees remained adamant. Then, in a move whose timing defied coincidence, the government Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts informed FEER that henceforth it would be subject to new, and onerous, regulations. These actions were not without precedent. Singapore was an authoritarian, if prosperous, country. The Lee family--which claimed that the country’s ruling precepts were rooted in Confucianism, a philosophy that vested power in an enlightened ruler—tolerated no criticism. The Lees had been in charge for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Sektor Pelancongan Anggar Rugi RM105 Juta, Sektor Perniagaan
    Ex-PM: Hsien Loong’s siblings trying to bring him down Free Malaysia Today July 5, 2017 The former Singapore prime minister vouches for the integrity of Lee Hsien Loong in parliamentary debate over abuse of power accusations made against the prime minister. SINGAPORE: Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong says Lee Hsien Yang’s goal is to bring his elder brother, Lee Hsien Loong, down as prime minister. Channel NewsAsia quoted the former prime minister of Singapore as saying the family feud between Hsien Loong and his two siblings had tarnished Singapore’s reputation. He asked if the two siblings were whistle-blowing in an effort to save Singapore or waging a personal vendetta against Hsien Loong. “It is now no longer a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a private family affair. “But if in the process of their self-destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.” Goh was speaking on the second day of a parliamentary discussion over a public dispute between the children of Lee Kuan Yew, following allegations by Hsien Yang and his sister Lee Wei Ling that Hsien Loong was abusing his powers to block the demolition of their 38 Oxley Road family home. Channel NewsAsia quoted Goh as saying Singaporeans were getting sick and tired of all this. “There must be a clear conclusion at the end of this debate. Either we clear the PM over the allegation on his abuse of power, or we censure him,” he said.
    [Show full text]
  • Differences Surface
    Differences surface A family feud over the fate of founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s house at 38, Oxley Road spilt into the public sphere in June, two years after Mr Lee’s death. Two of his children, Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang, accused their brother, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, of misusing his power and not honouring their late father’s wish to demolish the family home. Timeline JUNE 14 JUNE 19 which he said “the Singapore Dr Lee and Mr Lee Hsien Yang post a PM Lee issues a statement and a video Government is very litigious and has a statement on Facebook saying they apologising to Singaporeans for the pliant court system”. have lost condence in PM Lee and harm caused by the protracted and that they fear the use of organs of publicly aired dispute with his siblings. AUG 4 state against them. They also accuse AGC says it led application to begin him and his wife Ho Ching of wanting to JULY 3 - 4 contempt of court proceedings against make use of the late Mr Lee’s legacy to Parliament debates the allegations Mr Li for his comments on the further their political ambitions for their over the abuse of power. Over two days, Singapore judiciary. son Li Hongyi. PM Lee denies their 36 ministers and MPs speak, with the accusations. People’s Action Party lifting its Whip. OCT 17 PM Lee says his siblings’ “allegations AGC serves court papers on Mr Li at JUNE 15 - 16 have been aired, have been answered Harvard University in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-Sghc-255-Pdf.Pdf
    IN THE COURT OF THREE JUDGES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGHC 255 Court of Three Judges/Originating Summons No 2 of 2020 In the matter of Sections 94(1) and 98(1) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) And In the matter of Lee Suet Fern (Lim Suet Fern), an Advocate and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Singapore Between Law Society of Singapore … Applicant And Lee Suet Fern (Lim Suet Fern) … Respondent JUDGMENT [Legal Profession] [Solicitor-client relationship] [Legal Profession] [Professional conduct] — [Breach] This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. Law Society of Singapore v Lee Suet Fern (alias Lim Suet Fern) [2020] SGHC 255 Court of Three Judges — Originating Summons No 2 of 2020 Sundaresh Menon CJ, Judith Prakash JA and Woo Bih Li J 13 August 2020 20 November 2020 Judgment reserved. Sundaresh Menon CJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction 1 This is an application by the Law Society of Singapore (“the Law Society”) for an order pursuant to s 98(1)(a) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) (“the LPA”) that the respondent, Mrs Lee Suet Fern (alias Lim Suet Fern) (“the Respondent”), be subject to the sanctions provided for under s 83(1) of that Act. At the time of the proceedings before the disciplinary tribunal (“the DT”), the Respondent was an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Singapore of 37 years’ standing and practised as a director of Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC, a law corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lee Kuan Yew Lee Kuan Yew Blazing the Freedom Trail Blazing the Freedom Trail Lee Kuanyew
    Anthony Oei Anthony For Review onlyLEE KUAN YEW LEE KUAN YEW BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL YEW LEE KUAN It was the 1950s, a tumultuous time for post-war Singapore. Disgruntled with the British ruling power, anti-colonial forces were calling for independence. The main contenders were the People’s Action Party led by nationalist Lee Kuan Yew and the Communist Party of Malaya headed by Chin Peng. Displaying their political acumen, Lee and his team overcame all adversities to win the people’s mandate. Lee, who became Singapore’s first Prime Minister in 1959, orchestrated the movement to build a prosperous FREEDOM TRAI Singapore. When he stepped down in 1990, he left behind B L an efficient government, world-class infrastructure and a AZING THE thriving economy. When he died in 2015, he left behind a shining Singapore as his legacy. This book is an updated and revised edition of Days of Thunder: How Lee Kuan Yew Blazed the Freedom Trail (2005). It explores Lee’s leadership during Singapore’s early years and the question: Could Singapore have L achieved as much without Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of modern Singapore? Marshall Cavendish Editions SINGAPORE/POLITICS ISBN 978-981-4677-77-6 Exploring the leadership of Singapore’s ,!7IJ8B4-ghhhhg! first Prime Minister from 1959 to 1990 Anthony Oei For Review only LEE KUAN YEW BLAZING THE FREEDOM TRAIL QUOTES BY LEE KUAN YEW For Review only The verdict of the people is a terrifying thing. To build a country, you need passion. You will trample over us, over our dead bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks by Esm Goh Chok Tong Parliamentary Debate on Pm’S Statement on Allegation of Abuse of Power – 4 July 2017
    REMARKS BY ESM GOH CHOK TONG PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ON PM’S STATEMENT ON ALLEGATION OF ABUSE OF POWER – 4 JULY 2017 Mdm Speaker, 1. This sad public squabble between the Lee siblings is blown out of proportion. But it has embroiled all of us. It has tarnished the reputation of Singapore and distracted the Government from far more important work. 2. Because the allegations against PM have been made by members of the Lee family, they are given weight. The public is confused and concerned, even as Singaporeans continue to trust the PM and the Government. There is thus urgency to explain, restore trust and get back on track. It is our duty and responsibility to do this, to account to our voters. 3. My main concern is neither the fate of 38 Oxley Road nor the family feud. They are far removed from the daily concerns of Singaporeans. It is the wilful attack on the integrity of our leaders and the insidious corrosion of public faith in our institutions that I want to address. The nub of the issue for us in Parliament is integrity and trust – in the Prime Minister and our system of government. Absent these, Singapore will descend to a Third World country. 4. Incorruptibility of our Government is what distinguishes Singapore. The Prime Minister is central in upholding that incorruptibility. He holds the key levers of state power, entrusted by the people. When trust in the Prime Minister disappears, his moral authority and political capital shrivel. 1 Therefore, the constant self-policing, restraint and care of the Prime Minister in wielding the immense power at his disposal, is paramount.
    [Show full text]
  • Administration of Barack Obama, 2016 Remarks at a State Dinner Honoring Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore August 2, 20
    Administration of Barack Obama, 2016 Remarks at a State Dinner Honoring Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore August 2, 2016 President Obama. Good evening, everybody. Nearly 50 years ago, President Lyndon Johnson welcomed to the White House the first Prime Minister of a newly independent Singapore, a man he hailed as "a patriot, a brilliant political leader, and a statesman of the New Asia," Singapore's founding father, Lee Kuan Yew. A half century later, Michelle and I are honored to welcome his son: a patriot, a brilliant political leader, and a statesman of a rising, thriving Asia-Pacific. Prime Minister Lee and Mrs. Lee, welcome. Now, we all know how seriously Singaporeans take their food. [Laughter] In Singapore, even the street vendors—the hawker stalls—earn Michelin stars—[laughter]—which creates some pressure this evening. We have a lot to live up to. We were tempted to offer each of you a "Singapore Sling" or some chili crab. However, for those of you who know its unmistakable scent, which never seems to go away, you'll understand why we are not serving a fruit known as durian here in the White House. [Laughter] With this visit we're celebrating 50 years of diplomatic relations between our two nations. Yet even as we mark this anniversary of our formal ties, we honor bonds that stretch back at least 180 years, when Singapore was still a colony and the United States was not far removed from being one ourselves. The first American representative to Singapore was a planter named Joseph Balestier, whose name lives on in one of Singapore's neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]