Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

Reflecting a diversity of views does not alter Singapore's national position on Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Minister for Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan said in Parliament on May 8.

He was answering a question on Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam's closing speech at ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institutes' closed workshop: "The Russia-Ukraine War and Southeast Asia One Year On: Implications and Outlook" on Mar. 8.

Shanmugam's closing speech attracted two questions raised in the Parliament session on May 8.

The first question: Indivisible security

The first question regarding Shanmugam's speech was raised by PAP Member of Parliament Vikram Nair, asking the Home and Law Minister to elaborate on the concept of "indivisible security".

In his closing speech at ISEAS - Yusof Ishak, Shanmugam said that indivisible security was an important principle of international law, and added that a state should not enhance its security at the expense of another’s, because one state’s security is inseparably linked to another’s.

Shanmugam's response

Replying to Vikram Nair's question, Shanmugam first asserted that self-determination, sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-recourse to the use of force are the fundamental principles of international law.

These principles were stated in the United Nations (UN) charter, to which 193 countries including Singapore adhere.

He specifically pointed to two specific articles in the UN charter:

Article 1.2: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.

Article 2.1: The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

Article 2.4: All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Article 2.7: Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.

Shanmugam said that the Russian invasion of Ukraine violates basic principles of international law, including self-determination, sovereignty, territorial integrity and the non-recourse to the use of force.

Russian invasion of Ukraine cannot be justified

Shanmugam reminded the House that he repeated four times that the Russian invasion cannot be justified in his closing speech at ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute.

Shanmugam pointed out that one of the reasons Russia gave for its invasion of Ukraine was indivisible security, which he said cannot give grounds for an invasion.

He said that indivisible security does not have the same status as self-determination, sovereignty or territorial integrity, and the non-recourse to use of force which made up the basic principles of international law.

Instead, it is best characterised as a concept that is invoked in international relations.

"I pointed out that the concept of indivisible security in some form has been invoked by both Russia and the United States. But that does not make it a principle of international law. And it's not set out in the UN Charter."

Shanmugam said he "shared diverse views on how the situation in Ukraine unfolded, and the roles of the West, NATO and the Russian Federation" in his ISEAS-Yusof Ishak speech.

"(The) result is that Ukraine is the unfortunate victim, and its people are paying a terrible price," Shanmugam said.

The second question: representing the government's views

The second question asked about Shanmugam's speech came from Workers' Party MP Sylvia Lim.

Lim posed her question to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, asking if Shanmugam's speech represented the views of the government and whether any revisions had been made to Singapore's position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Vivian Balakrishnan's response:

In response to Lim, Vivian asserted that Singapore's position on Russia's invasion of Ukraine remains unchanged.

Singapore must continue to take steps that are consistent with the principles of national interests, he added.

He reiterated Singapore's ministerial statement made on Feb. 28 2022:

"On the situation in Ukraine and its implications, Singapore strongly condemned Russia's attack on Ukraine. The invasion of a sovereign country is a gross violation of the principles of the UN Charter and of international law, the sovereignty, the political independence and the territorial integrity of all countries, big and small, must be respected."

Statements of each Minister reflect the views of the government: Vivian

Lim made three supplementary questions following Vivian's response.

Firstly, Lim asked if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was made aware of the speech Shanmugam would deliver on Mar. 8 and if they had known the content of the speech beforehand.

Secondly, she enquired about the government's view of indivisible security, which Shanmugam viewed as a concept in international relations.

Lastly, she asked if Vivian agreed that accepting a principle of indivisible security is "very risky" for small countries like Singapore.

Answering Lim's first question, Vivian stated categorically that Shanmugam's statements reflect the views of Singapore's government.

He added that the ministers know generally "when each minister is going to speak". However, no minister "personally check[s] every single line and sentence" in other ministers' speeches.

To Lim's other questions, Vivian said, "under the principle of collective responsibility, that you can take, as long as we are in charge, the statements of each minister reflect the views of the government".

He had nothing further to add on the topic of indivisible security as Shanmugam had already spoken about it.

Diversity of views does not alter Singapore's national position

Lim then questioned if the government's statements on the Russia-Ukraine war remained consistent and that there was no attempt to say that "the U.S. or NATO has been somewhat contributory to the current state of affairs", a view that Shanmugam had expressed.

I would like him to confirm that up to now the government has not taken this position and this is actually something new in the public domain," Lim said.

In response, Vivian said "there is nothing new", and the position has been and will continue to be clear and consistent. He added that the government's position, as well as that of the Opposition, remains that Russia's invasion of Ukraine was wrong.

"It was a breach of international law, and of the principles of the UN Charter for them to launch the invasion of Ukraine," Vivian said. Having said that, he added there are a "diversity of views" and it is not unreasonable to reflect them when explaining these matters in public.

"But reflecting the diversity of views does not alter our national position based on a defence of our national interests, and the principles which a small, tiny city-state like us must subscribe to," Vivian said.

Strategic look

Next, Lim referred to Shanmugam's specific view that NATO and the West were "not uninvolved bystanders who have no role to play in the current situation (i.e. the Russian invasion of Ukraine)" and asked if that was the government's view as well, since Vivian had said that the statements of each minister reflect the views of government.

In response, Vivian encouraged the house to take a "strategic look" at the whole situation. Singapore has taken a "categorical step" due to its vulnerabilities as a tiny city-state, which historically have encountered tough situations.

He repeated the stance that Singapore's position is clear that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is wrong, a breach of international law and a violation of the UN Charter principles.

Vivian also said that "In trying to avoid a parallel of that situation here (i.e. Southeast Asia), I think it is entirely legitimate for us to consider all views, diverse views, opposing views, even, on how the situation in Europe came about."

He added that Singapore cannot let itself be a vassal state, a stalking horse or catspaw for any other power.

Cleared with the highest levels of cabinet

Following this, Lim asked a final supplementary question:

"So based on the minister's last answer, he did not say whether the government agreed with the Law Minister's view that the West and NATO were not uninvolved bystanders who had no role to play in the current situation.

So do I take it from him that he'd rather not go into such historical matters?"

Shanmugam then said, "(For the) member's understanding, I cleared the speech with the highest levels of Cabinet."

Background

On Mar. 8, Shanmugam gave a closing speech at ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institutes' closed workshop: "The Russia-Ukraine War and Southeast Asia One Year On: Implications and Outlook".

In his speech, Shanmugam reiterated Singapore's position that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia was "totally unacceptable", which he continued to maintain throughout his speech.

He also offered two perspectives on the conflict in Ukraine.

He first explored how the West viewed the conflict, that Russia and President Putin are the "sole irresponsible actors".

He then explored how the Russians viewed the invasion, that historically, the country was given the basis to believe that NATO would not expand eastwards after the fall of the Soviet Union.

However, Eastern European countries like Poland, Bulgaria and Romania later chose to join NATO.

While acknowledging that nothing would justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine or the suffering it had brought, Shanmugam said that "the West and NATO, in my view, were not uninvolved bystanders who had no role to play in the current situation."

You might enjoy:

Read more:

Top image via MCI/YouTube.