風蕭蕭_Frank
以文會友
新加坡總理稱「沒多少國家願意加入沒有中國的聯盟」，意味著什麽？
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023
日，新加坡總理李顯龍通過視頻形式接受了彭博社總編輯米思偉（John Micklethwait）的專訪，這一專訪是為彭博創新經濟論壇（Bloomberg New Economy Forum）所製作的，於11月17日播出。
雖然美國總統大選結果仍未塵埃落定，但外界普遍認為拜登將入主白宮。基於這一背景，兩人對拜登就任美國總統後的世界局勢進行了探討。李顯龍表示，他希望拜登上台執政後能專注於製定一個“有利框架”，與中國建立建設性的關係。
訪問人米思偉則提到，人們所談論拜登將要做的事情之一就是建立所謂的“民主國家聯盟”，其中包括新加坡、印度尼西亞、日本和韓國。他向李顯龍問道：“這是你所說的‘建立框架’的其中一個可能性嗎？”
對此，李顯龍先是禮貌性地表示希望與美國合作，隨後他又補充稱，新加坡也希望與其他蓬勃發展的經濟體合作，共同促進區域合作。
“我想沒有多少國家願意加入一個會排除其他國家的聯盟，尤其是一個沒有中國的聯盟。我想這不僅是新加坡和亞洲國家（這麽想），即使在歐洲，也有一些國家希望與中國做生意。例如，歐盟正嚐試與中國簽訂投資協議。”
李顯龍還特別作出了解釋：“這是可以理解的，而且我覺得這樣更好。你希望大家參與對話，致力於作出調整，適應世界秩序的需要。在這個過程中，各國會結成聯盟，實現合作共贏。但如果是冷戰式的聯盟，我認為各國並不打算這麽做。”
麵對訪問人米思偉提出美國可能采取“拉幫結派”這一做法時，李顯龍雖沒有直白地拒絕，但卻用另一種委婉的表達方式作出了回應。
彭博社總編輯米思偉視頻專訪李顯龍 視頻截圖
李顯龍總理出席 2023 年彭博新經濟論壇
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023?
李顯龍總理 | 2023 年 11 月 8 日
李顯龍總理於 2023 年 11 月 8 日在彭博新經濟論壇晚宴上與彭博社總編輯 John Micklethwait 進行了主持對話。
John Micklethwait（主持人）：李總理，感謝您的接待。我們會嚐試在嚴肅中加點幽默。通常，如您所知，我們從中美之間的冷戰開始這些對話。但這次我們有兩場熱戰——哈馬斯與以色列，俄羅斯與烏克蘭。我們先從哈馬斯和以色列開始吧——10 月 7 日，您大聲譴責哈馬斯當時的所作所為。自那時起，隨著對加沙的轟炸持續不斷，您呼籲停火。您還補充了一些內容，比如也許有必要調查可能的戰爭罪行。您談到了需要更新兩國解決方案。這與美國的立場略有不同。我想知道您能否為我們解釋一下您為什麽會采取這種立場？
李顯龍總理：我們必須采取原則立場，考慮我們的國家利益，也考慮我們人民的感情和人性反應。原則是邊界不可侵犯，各國有自衛權，殺害無辜平民、婦女和兒童、老人或任何其他平民都違反國際人道主義法。
10 月 7 日發生的事情不僅違反了國際法，而且是一次規模巨大的可怕恐怖襲擊。所以我們完全理解以色列人對此的感受，以及他們為什麽做出這樣的反應。但此後，由於以色列的行動，加沙發生了一場巨大的人間悲劇。死亡人數每天都在增加，與 10 月 7 日的死亡人數一樣多。再次，受害者是婦女、兒童和許多無辜平民。破壞規模巨大。
全世界所有人都絕望地看著這一切，說這必須停止。無論對錯，都必須關注人道主義考慮。我們試圖在我們的聲明中表達這一點。我認為重要的是，我們既要認識到 10 月 7 日第一次襲擊時所做的邪惡之事，也要認識到現在加沙發生的非常悲慘的事情。我們必須勸告以色列人和其他人遵守國際規範，並考慮無辜平民。
米克爾思韋特先生：您認為有長期解決方案嗎？您一直支持兩國解決方案，這仍然可能嗎？
李總理：沒有其他選擇。這非常困難，看起來遙不可及。但兩國方案的替代方案是一國方案。這意味著一方或另一方必須被排擠。這是不可想象的。所以，如果你不能朝著兩國方案努力，那麽你將在未來幾代人中陷入這種相互毀滅的循環。
米克爾思韋特先生：你擔心這個地區的安全。我的意思是，在馬來西亞，你隔壁有安瓦爾·易卜拉欣；他直言不諱地支持巴勒斯坦人。我認為有些人擔心，我看到你已經采取了一些預防措施，防止這個地區出現更多的恐怖主義，因為以色列和哈馬斯。
李總理：我認為外交立場是一回事。一些國家支持巴勒斯坦。一些國家支持以色列。新加坡與以色列有外交關係，我們也與巴勒斯坦權力機構有友好關係。所以外交支持不是困難，但恐怖主義是一種危險。
你在歐洲、法國和比利時看到了孤狼式的孤立襲擊。在美國發生了一次襲擊，一名無辜的巴勒斯坦男孩被殺。這種事情可能發生在世界的這個角落。我們在新加坡抓到過一些自我激進化的人，包括那些想要做壞事的青少年，他們買了防彈背心和刀具，進行練習。他們中的一些人想代表 ISIS 在中東作戰。他們中的一些人想效仿基督城的恐怖分子，在新加坡的兩座清真寺襲擊穆斯林。
該地區仍有一些恐怖組織尚未消失。與基地組織有關聯的伊斯蘭祈禱團，我們在他們即將對新加坡發動七起卡車炸彈襲擊之前就抓到了他們。（他們）仍然存在，而且正在觀察。他們的一些追隨者肯定會被激怒，他們可能會策劃一些事情。所以我們必須非常認真地對待這件事。
米克爾思韋特先生：您讚成加沙停火。您認為我們什麽時候會在烏克蘭停火？您擔心俄羅斯現在正在獲勝嗎？
李總理：我認為烏克蘭問題將是一場持久戰，而且將是一場
這場戰鬥非常艱難，因為俄羅斯不會宣布他們已經失敗。此外，對於烏克蘭來說，憑借其資源，甚至歐洲和美國的所有支持，能夠繼續戰鬥並堅持下去。你可以補充槍支、炮彈、飛機和坦克，但人員死亡、傷亡可以繼續，但不能永遠持續下去。
所以我認為俄羅斯已經未能實現戰勝烏克蘭的目標。這對世界來說是一個很大的好處，因為如果他們真的能夠突然、壓倒性地成功接管，然後出現新的邊界，那麽我認為世界將變得更加危險。但事實上他們失敗了，他們付出了慘痛的代價，這是一個好處。但這會在哪裏結束？烏克蘭支持者能堅持多久？美國的情緒將如何變化？有了這個政府，我想你知道拜登總統的立場，但明年就要舉行選舉了。
米克爾思韋特先生：我們稍後再談這個問題。但關於烏克蘭，我隻想問一個簡單的問題。您認為這就是您所說的俄羅斯的可怕經曆嗎？您認為這改變了中國對可能進入台灣的想法嗎？
李總理：我認為中國人從未輕視過進入台灣。他們肯定知道。他們有陸海軍和飛行員會告訴他們，兩棲攻擊台灣不像硫磺島戰役，硫磺島戰役已經夠血腥了。所以我相信他們一定有盤算，但我不認為他們好戰。他們有一個問題——他們希望台灣成為中國的一部分，但如何從這裏到達那裏？
我相信，如果他們沒有被激怒，如果事態沒有失控——我不相信你有一天醒來發現他們已經決定發動諾曼底登陸。
米克爾思韋特先生：你現在更擔心什麽——我來到這個地區時感到震驚的是，是的，還有人在談論台灣。但也有關於菲律賓的討論。在南海問題上，馬科斯總統對中國的態度相當強硬。中國是美國的條約盟友。這肯定會非常困難。
李總理：這是另一個可能的爆發點，因為四個東盟國家對南海的主權主張與中國重疊——菲律賓、文萊、馬來西亞、越南。他們首先都想在他們之間達成某種協議，尤其是與中國達成協議，因為中國確實是最大的主權聲索國，而且實力最強。但與此同時，他們與中國還有其他利害關係——我認為，中國是他們最大的貿易夥伴。因此，南海很重要，但並不是唯一的利害關係。我不認為他們中任何一個國家真的想把它推到邊緣。
米克爾思韋特先生：但總的來說，沒有人真的想這麽做。
李總理：總體上沒有人會這樣做，但我想說，就東南亞國家而言，他們意識到了蘇聯人曾經稱之為“力量對比”的東西。換句話說，誰站在你這邊，誰站在我這邊，誰的軍隊更大？我認為他們有著非常健康的現實主義意識，因此會有一些克製。菲律賓人也是如此。美國是他們的條約盟友，但你確定要卷入一場以你為戰場的戰爭嗎？
米克爾思韋特先生：在中國，你所說的中國似乎越來越現實。習近平正在更加認真地思考，他準備扮演一種更長期的角色。你是這麽看的嗎？
李總理：我認為中國想要發展。中國決心發展，我認為他們相信，遲早會以某種方式實現發展。你可以阻止他們幾年。你可以拒絕他們提供技術。他們會發展自己的國家——可能沒有那麽好，但他們會有所成就，他們決心向人民和世界展示這是可以做到的。挑戰在於，他們如何做到這一點並為自己感到自豪？同時，激發世界其他國家的信心和一定的平靜。這非常困難，因為你可能認為你做的沒有什麽不合理的，這是你的權利，大國和小國都有權做同樣的事情。但是當一個小國做某件事時，其他國家可以說，“好吧，那沒關係。我的意思是，沒有造成傷害”，但當一個大國做出同樣的行動時，你可能會在不知不覺中引起各地的反響。我認為，中國人需要一段時間才能找到正確的感覺，才能成長得更高更強，同時又能讓每個人都站在他們一邊，保持良好的關係。
我認為他們正在努力，你看澳大利亞總理阿爾巴尼斯，他們和他有過一些困難的時刻
近年來，澳大利亞一直在中國，雙方都希望向前邁進，希望建立關係。他們知道澳大利亞是美國的盟友——他們正在購買美國核潛艇——但他們仍然需要建立關係。
米克爾思韋特先生：有趣的是這個新成熟的中國，也許與你我剛開始時的情況略有不同。
李總理：我不確定我們是否應該判斷他們是否成熟。他們處於不同的階段。
米克爾思韋特先生：我是一名記者，我可以這樣做。
李總理：你可以使用文字，但我必須使用我自己的文字。
米克爾思韋特先生：這個新成熟的中國，或者隨便你怎麽稱呼它，現在是關於喬·拜登即將前往舊金山會見習近平。這就是這種關係的核心。
李總理：不，這是兩國關係處於困難時刻的必要步驟。他們去年在巴厘島會麵。那是一次很好的會麵。他們同意了一些相互尊重的原則；他們會合作，這將是雙贏的。但此後，在 12 個月內，實際上不到 12 個月，事情發生了變化，事情偏離了軌道，他們正試圖讓事情重新回到正軌。我認為，為了使會議能夠順利進行並富有成效，需要進行很多反複。但我認為這是兩國之間非常深刻的矛盾，你需要會議朝著正確的方向發展，但你不要指望會議能讓一切再次變得甜蜜和輕鬆。這是不可能的。
米克爾思韋特先生：你們的外交部長在今天的會議上說得很好，天氣可能會好轉，但氣候，想想你和我曾經進行過的所有對話，氣候一直在變得越來越糟。
李總理：我認為氣候非常困難。雙方都有根深蒂固的觀點。在美國，兩黨唯一一致的看法是中國是一個嚴重的威脅。而在中國，也有非常強烈的共識，認為美國會阻止他們，與美國共存很困難。你不應該嚐試，你應該準備好保護自己免受美國的侵害。所以，當雙方都有這樣的觀點時，甚至想延長談判時間並談論一個更具建設性的未來都很困難。
米克爾思韋特先生：請注意，這其中不可估量的是美國大選。我注意到，正如邁克所說，你宣布明年將把選票交給黃之鋒，就在黨成立70周年之前。
李總理：我沒有說“就在之前”，而是說“到那時”。
米克爾思韋特先生：如你所知，那是11月，奇怪的是，這也是美國大選的日期。如果我們現在看看民意調查，一個叫唐納德·特朗普的人領先。你有沒有想過，“哦，天哪，又不是他，我會把他交給你”？
李總理：那不是我的主要考慮。
米克爾思韋特先生：但這是否是一種額外的激勵？
李總理：不，世界是一個艱難的地方。我的意思是，無論我是明年還是五年後交出權力，都會有未解決的問題，地平線上也會有烏雲密布。這恰好是最接近您、最突出的問題。
米克爾思韋特先生：但我認為，特朗普當選將給中國帶來更大的壓力，迫使中國在會場上成為那種成熟的人，我知道您希望中國成為這種人。
李總理：特朗普采取了拜登沒有逆轉的行動。例如，對中國產品征收關稅，總體上使兩國關係變得更加不可預測。拜登的做法更加可預測。但在中國問題上，他並沒有逆轉特朗普的做法。我認為他的態度也相當堅定，讓人感覺你不想發生衝突，但他也不會在自己非常強烈關注的事情上讓步。
如果你回顧特朗普先生，就像他上次那樣，我想這會讓你對他的外交政策有一些了解。但這是一場持久戰，四年在政治上是很長的時間，但在兩個大國關係史上並不長。所以，即使在美國，你專注於世界上最重要的雙邊關係以外的事情，在另一邊和世界其他地方，這仍然應該是一個主要的關注點。希望他們能有遠見和冷靜，能夠說：“我的夥伴正處於困難時刻，讓我們看看我該如何處理”，既不泄露任何信息，也不做任何更糟糕的事情。
米克爾思韋特先生：聽起來有點像房間裏的成年人，但現在有第三個人物，那就是印度嗎？
李總理：我認為印度正在迅速發展。去年，他們是世界上增長最快的國家之一。莫迪先生的經濟改革和數字化推動正在取得進展；讓印度更上一層樓。但這是一個距離，因為印度經濟隻有中國的五分之一，他們的國際
韓國的國際貿易額約為中國的五分之一。韓國人口更年輕，而且還在增長，而中國人口則老齡化，已經穩定，但開始下降。
但他們必須充分利用這一點，必須將影響力擴展到次大陸之外，以影響東亞、東南亞和更廣闊的世界。我認為你可以看到他們開始通過四方安全對話來做到這一點。但我不認為他們在次大陸之外的更廣闊領域投入了那麽多資源。
米克爾思韋特先生：在這方麵他們落後於中國，他們沒有著眼於某種全球體係。
李總理：我認為他們的體係也不像中國體係那樣適合；例如，如果他們決定實施“一帶一路”計劃。我不認為他們會說“好吧，我想投資基礎設施”，然後突然發現港口、道路、機場、火車在整個地區如雨後春筍般湧現——這是好事，也可能是壞事。
米克爾思韋特先生：在您來這裏期間，我們談到了新加坡。您一直處於中美關係的中間。另一個國家，您是全球化的偉大象征，然而在我們進行的所有對話中，您會看到，世界每年都感覺更加區域化，而不是全球化。我提到了特朗普——特朗普現在表示，如果他上任，他將對所有商品征收 10% 的關稅。這肯定會是全球化時代的終結，如果它還沒有結束的話。
李總理：嗯，趨勢並不樂觀——即使沒有特朗普——通脹削減法案，你們也在製定產業政策，你們決定做芯片，你們決定做更環保的技術。但基本上，你們決定我們需要為自己製定規則，而不是依賴多邊談判的規則。如果我們談論的是基於規則的秩序，那麽就很難理解規則究竟是如何製定的。如果每個人都采取這種方法，那麽實際上就不會有任何規則，我們都會陷入困境。我認為歐洲人已經非常有力地闡述了這一點。
米克爾思韋特先生：我能問您一個問題嗎？人們確實希望製定規則的領域之一？人工智能。我查了一下——您是第一個，您怎麽稱呼的，高級管理員？您是第一個在劍橋大學獲得最高數學成績的人，邁克沒有提到這一點。遺憾的是，我在牛津大學沒有獲得這個成績。但您是第一個在新加坡獲得這個成績的人。所以您懂數學。我想對您來說，基本問題是：您認為人工智能比互聯網帶來的變化更大嗎？
李總理：嗯，您必須知道的第一件事是，有很多事情您不知道。關於人工智能，我們大多數人都不知道它的發展方向。我認為甚至研究人員也不知道它的發展方向。我並不假裝了解這項技術的工作原理。我對這些原理有一個模糊的概念，但我不明白它們是如何實現所有這些神奇結果的。我不知道目前的方法能走多遠。從人工智能的概念出現，到人們開始發明 LISP 等計算機語言用於人工智能編程，再到 ChatGPT，這花了 50 到 70 年的時間。從 20 世紀 50 年代到現在，這是一個漫長而漫長的過程。在這條道路上，我們一直認為我們即將取得突破，而這一突破最終也確實實現了。現在你認為自己正在逃亡，但它是否會一路走到你可以進行對話的地步，要麽聊天機器人可以采訪我，要麽我采訪聊天機器人。
Micklethwait 先生：或者我可以采訪聊天機器人。
李總理：或者兩個聊天機器人之間的交流可能比我們更好。我們不知道——隻要投入 10 倍以上的芯片和 10 倍以上的計算能力，它就可以達到這個水平。可能是你達到了極限，然後你需要在概念上取得另一個突破，將其提升到下一個水平，使其具有洞察力、理解力、判斷力、推理能力和同理心。但我認為，原則上，沒有理由不能製造一台可以思考、行動、說話，甚至可能看起來像人類一樣有感覺的機器。一些哲學家認為這是不可能的，我不相信。我認為這是可能的，但我不知道需要多長時間。我知道，當它真的發生時，我們將有非常深刻的問題需要回答，而且很難回答，因為如果它和你一樣聰明，你就無法預先編程讓它愚蠢到可以被殺死。這是一個根本矛盾——我的意思是，你認為你可以在某個地方做一個特殊的按鈕，按下它，它就會突然說是，服從你。但如果它真的那麽聰明，你就不會想到所有的後果。
米克爾思韋特先生：但在這種技術力量平衡中，你是否覺得美國遠遠領先於中國？
李總理：我認為現在他們領先，一方麵是因為他們製造的技術，芯片；也因為他們吸引了如此多的
很多人才，甚至亞洲、中國、印度的研究人員，都在美國取得突破。也因為他們的自由企業製度。我的意思是，矽穀，你可能對科技公司有自己的看法，但他們能夠采納一個想法，並用它來改變世界，無論是好是壞。現在，我們這裏有一些正在發生的事情，已經對世界產生了影響，不是成為一個超級機器人，而是成為你的人工智能助手，幫助你起草一段話或寫一篇短文。
我們需要積累操作經驗，了解其中的陷阱，這樣我們才能做出明智的決定，在發展過程中對其進行監管。現在，我可以肯定地說，在我的政府，我認為在大多數政府中，技術人員比政府人員更了解這一點。這是突破發生的方式所固有的。我們不是取得突破的人。做這件事的人在大學和公司，他們比我們了解得多。他們中有些人很擔心，我認為我們有理由關注。
米克爾思韋特先生：我可以快速問你關於新加坡的問題嗎？然後是你自己的問題，最後再談談新加坡。今年新加坡的情況比往常稍微艱難一些——一些中國商人卷入了洗錢事件，甚至有一兩名政府官員沒有被卷入其中，而是受到了調查等等。我知道，與某些南歐國家相比，這並不令人擔心……
李總理：不，我們不會將自己與某些南歐國家相比。甚至不會與任何北歐國家相比。我們隻是想保持高標準。當標準達不到要求時，我們必須處理。偶爾，你會發現你們中的一個人沒有完全做到他應該做的事情，或者似乎做了一些不太正確的事情。好吧，我們必須做正確的事情，我們必須讓人們看到我們做了正確的事情，而這正是目前正在進行的。我認為，中國洗錢案對我們來說絕不是醜聞。這是刑事案件。罪犯做壞事。我們發現了，進行了調查，做了該做的事，沒收了錢、汽車、手提包和其他一切。我們在法庭上起訴他們，他們必須證明這些東西是他們合法擁有的，他們沒有做錯任何事。但就我的體製而言，這個體製是幹淨的。這個體製做了它應該做的事，它會保持幹淨。如果我的體製被破壞了……
米克爾思韋特先生：那你就有麻煩了。
李總理：那我就有麻煩了。
米克爾思韋特先生：那你就回到歐洲水平了。
李總理：我不知道歐洲人處於什麽水平。
米克爾思韋特先生：我可以問你一下嗎，正如你所指出的，邁克指出的，明年，在人民行動黨成立70周年之前，你將把權柄移交給黃循財。所以，到那時你已經任職20年了。我想知道您認為這期間發生了什麽變化？我的意思是，如果您看看您的父親，他剛上任時是一位著名的社會主義者，最後卻成了撒切爾主義者。我當時在新加坡四處遊蕩，發現新加坡有這麽多大型項目，為退休人員提供更多資金，以對抗通貨膨脹。您一直在向左轉嗎？
李總理：我們一直在小心翼翼地駛向更舒適的地方。當經濟增長，所有船隻都被潮水推高時，我們可以而且必須非常嚴格地幫助那些還沒有趕上的人。您可以告訴他們跑得更快，工作更努力，這裏有更多的激勵，讓他們取得進步。而且大多數情況下，這種方法效果很好。我們這樣做了很長時間。但隨著時間的推移，隨著比賽的進行，隨著參賽者人數的擴大，有些人走得更遠，有些人走得不那麽遠，然後他們的孩子也走得不那麽遠，您必須考慮如何讓這支隊伍團結在一起？有時，一個人做得很好，但世界卻發生了變化，第一名變成了最後一名。那麽，你會怎麽做？你會說，世界就是這樣嗎？或者我能做些什麽來幫助他重新回到競爭中，再次做出貢獻？我認為我們正處於一個階段，我們必須一起做更多的事情，我們必須互相幫助，政府必須參與其中。我們必須竭盡全力避免政府成為解決所有問題的唯一解決方案。
米克爾思韋特先生：所以，政府不會大幅擴大，但會稍微大一點。
李總理：我們可能是發達國家中最小的政府，因為我們的政府預算占 GDP 的不到 20%。我的政府預算占 GDP 的比例與一些歐洲國家的國家養老金支出大致相同。我的意思是，你的
係統不同，但我們一直保持著非常精簡的體係。我們需要保持非常精簡的體係，但老齡化、醫療成本上升、社會需求上升的壓力正在逐漸推高我們的預算。我們麵臨的挑戰是，我們如何為此提供資金？我們如何在必要時允許這種情況發生，而不會失控？這意味著時不時地說出禁忌詞——稅收。我們現在正在這樣做。我們有商品和服務稅，就像增值稅一樣。它的比例是 7%。今年 1 月 1 日，我們將其提高到 8%，明年 1 月 1 日即將提高到 9%。我們會實現這一目標。但我們正在做的是向收入較低的三分之二人口提供相當慷慨的、幾乎是現金的補貼，這樣我就可以完成這個係統。就我的收入而言，我處於一個新的位置。但就對家庭的影響而言，這要推遲相當長一段時間。
米克爾思韋特先生：您希望人們怎樣記住您？您說的是什麽意思？您希望人們把您看作是讓新加坡保持繁榮的人嗎？
李總理：不，我想我會專注於做好我的工作。我不喜歡……
米克爾思韋特先生：悼詞？
李總理：不，我不喜歡坐下來談論我過去所做的事情。
米克爾思韋特先生：好吧，這引出了我的最後一個問題。有傳言說您會成為高級部長。多年前我第一次見到您時，您剛剛接任總理。然後我去見您的父親，據說他已經半退休了，擔任高級部長。令我略感驚訝的是，他住在您的內閣辦公室樓上，這讓我感到……
李總理：不，他不是住在那裏，而是在那裏工作。
米克爾思韋特先生：所以，他在那裏工作。如果我主持內閣會議，而他在那裏……我的意思是，你會計劃到那種程度嗎？
李總理：沒有發生過。我主持內閣會議，而他在內閣會議室。
米克爾思韋特先生：但他還是在那裏。
李總理：效果很好。我的前任也在內閣會議室。所以，我的兩位前任也參加了會議。我的一位總理同事對我說：“我無法想象你的內閣會議是什麽樣的。”
米克爾思韋特先生：這有效嗎？
李總理：但他們有效。這有效。這是非常微妙的事情，既要監督，又不能專橫跋扈，能夠提供建議和有益的推動，以及恰到好處的明智之言，而不會妨礙繼任者的作風。我聽從繼任者的安排。我已經說過，無論他想讓我做什麽，我都會盡力幫助他成功。所以，你必須問他，他會對我做什麽。
米克爾思韋特先生：李總理，希望明年我們還能見到您。
李總理：不，我會坐在觀眾席上聽您講話。
米克爾思韋特先生：在上麵聽。謝謝。
李總理：非常感謝。
PM Lee Hsien Loong at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum 2023
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/PM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-at-the-Bloomberg-New-Economy-Forum-2023?
SM Lee Hsien Loong | 8 November 2023
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had a moderated dialogue with John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, Bloomberg, at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum Gala Dinner on 8 November 2023.
John Micklethwait (Moderator): Prime Minister Lee, thank you for hosting us. We will try to add some humour amongst the seriousness. Normally, as you know, we begin these conversations with the cold war between China and America. But this time we have two hot wars going on – we have Hamas’ with Israel, and we have Russia’s with Ukraine. Can we begin first with Hamas and Israel — On 7th October, you spoke out loudly to condemn what Hamas did then. Since then, as the bombing of Gaza has continued, you have called for a truce or a ceasefire. You have added things about maybe there is a need to investigate possible war crimes. You have talked about the need to refresh the two-state solution. This is a slightly different position to America. I wonder if you could unpack for us how you ended up in that position?
PM Lee Hsien Loong: Well, we have to take a principled position, considering our national interests and considering also the sentiments and human reactions of our people. And the principle is that borders are inviolate, countries have the right of self-defence and killing of innocent civilians, women and children, old folks or any other civilians is against international humanitarian law.
What happened on 7th October was not just against international law, but a horrendous terrorist attack on an enormous scale. So we fully understand how the Israelis feel about it, and why they have reacted the way the way they have done. But what has happened since then in Gaza, as a consequence of Israeli operations, is an enormous human tragedy. The numbers keep on ticking up every day, as many times, as many as what happened on 7th October. Again, women, children and many innocent civilians. The destruction was and is on an enormous scale.
Everybody around the world looked at this in despair, and say surely this has to stop. Whatever the rights and wrongs, you must pay attention to the humanitarian considerations. And we have tried to express that in our statements. I think it is important that we recognise both the evil things which are done at the first attack on 7th October, and also the very tragic things which are happening in Gaza now. We have to exhort the Israelis and everybody else to abide by international norms, and to have a consideration for innocent civilians.
Mr Micklethwait: Do you think there is a long-term solution? You have always been a supporter of the two-state solution, is that still possible?
PM Lee: There is no alternative to that. It is very difficult. It looks way over the horizon. But the alternative to a two-state solution is a one-state solution. That means one side or the other has to be squeezed out. That is unimaginable. So if you cannot work towards a two-state solution, you are going to be in this cycle of mutual destruction for generations to come.
Mr Micklethwait: You worry about security in this region. I mean next-door in Malaysia you have Anwar Ibrahim; he has come up quite vocally in support of the Palestinians. I think some people worry, I see you have taken some precautions about more terrorism in this region, because of Israel and Hamas.
PM Lee: I think diplomatic positions is one thing. Some countries support Palestine. Some countries support Israel. Singapore has diplomatic relations with Israel, and we also have friendly relations with the Palestinian Authority. So diplomatic support is not the difficulty, but terrorism is a danger.
You have seen lone wolf, isolated attacks in Europe, in France, and in Belgium. There was an attack and an innocent Palestinian boy got killed in America. It can happen in this part of the world. We have had self-radicalised individuals in Singapore we have picked up – including teenagers who wanted to do terrible things, and had gone and bought bulletproof vests and knives and practised. Some of them wanted to fight in the Middle East on behalf of ISIS. Some of them wanted to emulate the Christchurch terrorists and attack Muslims in Singapore in two mosques.
And there are still terrorist groups within the region who have not disappeared. The Jemaah Islamiah who are affiliated with Al Qaeda, and whom we picked up in Singapore before they were about to do seven truck bomb attacks in Singapore. (They) still exists and they are watching. Some of their followers will surely be riled up and they may plan something. So we have to take it very seriously.
Mr Micklethwait: You are in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza. When do you think we will get one in Ukraine? Do you worry at the moment Russia is winning?
PM Lee: I think Ukraine is going to be a long fight and it is going to be a very difficult fight, because Russia is not going to declare that they have lost. Also, for Ukraine, with its resources and even all the support from Europe and from the US, to be able to keep on fighting and keep it up. You can replenish your guns, your shells, your aeroplanes and tanks, but the human deaths, the casualties, it can go on, but it cannot go on forever.
So I think Russia has already failed in its objective of overcoming Ukraine. And that is a great plus for the world, because if they had actually been able to launch a sudden, overwhelming and successful takeover and then there is a new border, then I think the world would have been much the more dangerous place. But the fact that they have failed, that they are paying a terrible cost, that is a plus. But where will it end? And for how long can Ukraine supporters keep it up? And how will the moods change in America? With this administration, I think you know where President Biden stands, but elections are due next year.
Mr Micklethwait: We will come back to that. But just one quick question on Ukraine. Do you think that is what you described as this horrific experience for Russia – do you think that has changed the thinking in China about potentially going into Taiwan?
PM Lee: I do not think the Chinese would ever have thought lightly about going into Taiwan. They must surely know. And they have soldiers and sailors and airmen who will advise them that an amphibious attack, attacking Taiwan is not like doing Iwo Jima, and Iwo Jima was bloody enough. So I am sure they must make the calculations but I do not believe that they are trigger happy. They have a problem – they would like Taiwan to be part of One China, but how to get from here to there?
And I believe if they are not provoked, if events do not spin out of control – I do not believe that you are going to wake up one day and find that they have decided to launch D-Day.
Mr Micklethwait: Are you more worried at the moment – I was struck coming to this region is that yes, there is still talk about Taiwan. But there is also talk about the Philippines a bit. In the South China Sea, you have President Marcos being quite aggressive with China. They are a treaty ally of the United States. And surely that would be very difficult.
PM Lee: That is another possible flashpoint because four ASEAN countries have claims in the South China Sea, which overlap with Chinese claims – Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam. All of them want to work some arrangement out between themselves in the first place and with China, mostest, because China is really the biggest claimant, and most muscular. But at the same time, all of them have got other stakes with China – China is their biggest trading partner, I think, for all of them. Therefore, the South China Sea is important, but it is not the only thing at stake. And I do not believe that any of them really truly want to push it over the brink.
Mr Micklethwait: But nobody ever does on the whole.
PM Lee: Nobody ever does on the whole, but I would say that in the case of the Southeast Asian countries, their awareness of what the Soviets used to call the “correlation of forces”. In other words, who is on your side and who is on my side, and whose battalions are bigger? I think there is a very healthy sense of realism, and therefore some restraints will be there. And even the Filipinos. The Americans are their treaty ally, but are you sure you want to get into a fight where you will be the battleground?
Mr Micklethwait: Within China, the China you are talking about seems to be one that is getting more realistic. Xi Jinping is thinking harder, that he is prepared to play a kind of more long-term role. Is that the way you look at it?
PM Lee: I think China wants to grow. China is determined to develop, and they believe I think rightly, that they will get there one way or the other, sooner or later. You can hold them back a few years. You can deny them technology. They will develop their own – it may not be as good, but they will have something, and they are determined to show their people and show the world that it can be done. Challenge is, how do they do this and feel pride in themselves? At the same time, inspiring confidence, and a certain tranquillity amongst the rest of the world. And that is very hard, because you may think you are doing nothing very unreasonable, and these are your rights and countries big and small are entitled to do the same things. But when a small country does a certain thing, others can say, “Well, that is alright. I mean, no harm done” but when a big country makes the same kind of action, you can cause reverberations everywhere without quite realising it. I think that it will take a while to get the right feel, for the Chinese to be able to grow taller and stronger and yet, keep everybody onside and on good terms.
I think they are trying, you see the Australian Prime Minister Albanese with whom they have had some difficult moments in recent years, has been in China, and that both sides want to move forward and want to have a relationship. They know that Australia is a US ally – they are buying American nuclear submarines – but they still need a relationship.
Mr Micklethwait: The interesting thing is this new mature China, which perhaps is slightly more different to how you and I began.
PM Lee: I am not sure that it is for us to judge whether they are mature or not. They are in a different phase.
Mr Micklethwait: I am a journalist, I am allowed to.
PM Lee: You are allowed to use words, but I have to use my own.
Mr Micklethwait: This new mature China, or whatever you want to call it, is now about Joe Biden is about to go and meet Xi Jinping in San Francisco. And that is the core of this relationship.
PM Lee: No, that is a necessary step in this difficult moment in the relationship. They met last year in Bali. It was a good meeting. They agreed on some principles that they would respect each other; they would cooperate, it would be win-win. But after that, in 12 months, in fact, less than that, events happened, and things went off-track, and they are trying to put it back on track again. And I think there is a lot of to-ing and fro-ing to tee it up so that the meeting can take place and be productive. But I think that this is a very deep contradiction between the two countries, and you need the meeting to head in the right direction, but you do not expect a meeting to make everything sweetness and light again. It is not possible.
Mr Micklethwait: Your foreign minister put it very well in our conference today, the weather may get better, but the climate, you think of all the conversations you and I ever had, the climate has continued to get worse and worse.
PM Lee: I think that climate is very difficult. On both sides, very entrenched views have taken root. In America, the only thing that the two parties agree on is that China is a grave threat. And in China, there is also a very strong consensus that America is out to block them, and it is difficult to coexist with America. And that you should not try, you should prepare to protect yourself against America. So, when you have these such views on both sides, even to want to think about stretching out and talking about a more constructive future is difficult.
Mr Micklethwait: Note the imponderable in that is the American election. I noticed that, as Mike said, you announced that next year you would give over to Lawrence Wong, just before the party’s 70th anniversary.
PM Lee: I did not say “just before”, I said “by the time of”.
Mr Micklethwait: As you know, that is in November, which is also curiously the date of the American election. And if we look at the polls now, a man called Donald Trump is ahead. Did you look and think, “Oh god, not him again, I will hand him over to you”?
PM Lee: That was not my principal consideration.
Mr Micklethwait: But is it an additional incentive?
PM Lee: No, the world is a difficult place. I mean, whether I hand over next year or in five years’ time, there will be things outstanding and there will be clouds on the horizon. This just happens to be the most, the one which is closest to you and most prominent.
Mr Micklethwait: But a Trump election would, in this way, it would put I think, more pressure on China to be the kind of grown-up in the room which I know you want it to be.
PM Lee: Well, Trump took actions which Biden did not reverse. For example, impose tariffs on Chinese products, and generally made the relationship much less predictable. Biden's approach is much more predictable. But on China, he has not reversed what Trump did. And I think his attitudes are also quite firm, a feeling that you do not want to clash but neither is he going to give way on things which he feels very strongly about.
And if you go back to Mr Trump, as he was the previous time, I suppose that gives you some idea of his approach to foreign policy. But it is a long game and four years is a long time in politics, but not a long time in the history of the relations between two great powers. So even if, in America, you are preoccupied with things other than the most important bilateral relationship in the world, on the other side and in the rest of the world, this should still be a major preoccupation. And hopefully there will be the perspective and equanimity and the reach to say, “My partner, is in a difficult moment, let us see how I can manage this” without giving anything away, but neither doing anything worse.
Mr Micklethwait: Sounds a bit like being the grown-up in the room, but is there now a third figure which is India?
PM Lee: I think India is growing rapidly. Last year, they were one of the fastest growing countries in the world. And Mr Modi with his economic reforms and his drive towards digitalisation is making progress; getting India to move up another level. But it is a distance because the Indian economy is one-fifth of the Chinese, their international trade is about one-fifth of the Chinese. Their population is younger, and still growing, unlike the Chinese one which is older and already stable and beginning to come down.
But they have to make the most of it and they have to extend that reach beyond the subcontinent to influence East Asia, Southeast Asia and the wider world. And I think that you can see they are starting to do that with the Quad . But I do not think that they have put quite as much resources into the wider game beyond the subcontinent.
Mr Micklethwait: They are behind China in that respect, they are not looking at a kind of global system.
PM Lee: I think also their system is not as amenable to the Chinese system; if they decide to do a Belt and Road for example. I do not think they would be able to say “Ok, I want to invest in infrastructure” and then suddenly you find ports, roads, airports, trains sprouting up all over the region — which is for the good and maybe for the bad.
Mr Micklethwait: We have talked about Singapore through your time here. You have been in the middle of the America-China one. The other one, you are the great symbol of globalisation and yet you see during all these conversations we have had – every year the world has felt more regional, and less global. I mentioned Trump — Trump has now said that if he comes in, he is going to put 10% tariffs on everything. Surely that will be the end of the global age, if it has not ended already.
PM Lee: Well, it is trending not in a favourable direction – and even without Trump – the Inflation Reduction Act, you are making industrial policy, you are deciding to do CHIPS, you are deciding to do greener technology. But basically, you are deciding that we need to make rules for ourselves and not depend on rules which are negotiated multilaterally. And if we are talking about a rules-based order, it becomes difficult to understand exactly how the rules are being made. And if everybody takes that approach, then in effect, there will not be any rules and we will all be in difficulty. I think the Europeans have made that point quite forcefully.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you about something which is one of those areas where people do want rules? AI. And I looked it up — you were the first, what do you call, a Senior Wrangler? You were the first person to get top math marks at Cambridge University which Mike did not mention. I did not sadly get that at Oxford. But you were the first person to get that from Singapore. So you understand math. And I suppose the basic question to you is: Do you think AI is a bigger change than the internet?
PM Lee: Well, the first thing you must know is that there are a lot of things you do not know. And on AI, most of us do not know where it is going. I do not think even the researchers know where it is going. And I do not pretend to understand how the technology works. I have a vague idea of the principles, but I do not understand how they have made all these magical consequences happen. And I do not know how far the present approach can go. It took 50, 70 years from the time the idea of AI came about, and people started inventing computer languages like LISP to be used for AI programming, to ChatGPT. 1950s until now, it is an enormous, long duration. And all along that path, the thought was we are about to make a breakthrough, which eventually did come. Now you think you are on the run, but will it go all the way to the point where you can have a conversation and either the chatbot can interview me or I may interview the chatbot.
Mr Micklethwait: Or I could interview the chatbot.
PM Lee: Or two chatbots may be talking to each other better than us. We do not know — it could go there just by putting in 10 times more chips and 10 times more computing. It could be you reach a limit, and then you need another breakthrough conceptually to take it to the next level where it has got insight, understanding, judgment, reasoning and empathy. But I think in principle, there is no reason why you cannot build a machine which can think, act, speak, maybe possibly look like it is feeling like a human being. Some philosophers think it is not possible; I do not believe that. I think it is possible, but I do not know how long it will take. I do know that when it does happen, we will have very profound questions to answer, and it will be very difficult to answer, because if it is as smart as you, you will not be able to pre-program it to be stupid enough to be killed. That is a fundamental contradiction — I mean, you think that you can make a special push button somewhere and press it and it will suddenly say yes and obey you. But if it is really that smart, you will have not thought of all of the consequences.
Mr Micklethwait: But in that sort of technological balance of power, do you sense that America is a long way ahead of China?
PM Lee: I think right now they are ahead, both, because of the tech they make, the chips; also because they attract so much of human talent, and even Asian, Chinese, Indian researchers, they are in America making breakthroughs. And also because of their free enterprise system. I mean, Silicon Valley, you may have your views about the tech companies, but they are able to take an idea and use it to transform the world, for better or for worse. And now, here we have something which is happening, already making an impact on the world, not to become a super cyborg, but just to be your AI assistant to help you draft a paragraph or to write a short note.
And we need to gain experience operating with it and understand what the pitfalls are so that we can make smart decisions to regulate it as we go along. Right now, I can safely say that in the government, in my government, and I think in most governments, the tech people know more about this than the government people. It is inherent in the way the breakthroughs are happening. We are not the ones making the breakthroughs. The people who are doing that are in the universities and the companies, and they know much more about it than us. Some of them are worried and I think there is reason for us to pay attention.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you quickly about Singapore, and then about yourself, and then end on Singapore. It has been a slightly tougher year than normal in Singapore — you had this money-laundering thing with some Chinese business people, you even had one or two officials in the government, not being pulled into that, but being probed and so on, which I know compared with certain Southern European countries would not really worry…
PM Lee: No, we do not compare ourselves with certain Southern European countries. Not even with any Northern European countries. We just want to maintain high standards. And when the standards fall short, we have to deal with it. And once in a while, you will find that one of your own did not quite live up to what he should have done or appears to have done something not quite right. And well, we have to do the right thing and we will have to be seen that the right thing is done, which is currently underway. I do not think the Chinese money-laundering cases is in any way a scandal for us. It is a criminal case. Criminals do bad things. We find out, we investigate it, we do what we need to do, we seize the money, the cars, the handbags, and everything else. And we charge them in court and they have to prove that these are things which they legitimately own, they did not do anything wrong. But as far as my system is concerned, the system is clean. The system did what it was supposed to do, and it will keep itself clean. If my system had been corrupted…
Mr Micklethwait: Then you will be in trouble.
PM Lee: Then I will be in trouble.
Mr Micklethwait: Then you would be back in the European levels.
PM Lee: I do not know what levels the Europeans are at.
Mr Micklethwait: Can I ask you, as you pointed out, Mike pointed out, you are next year, sometime before the PAP 70th Anniversary, you are going to hand over to Lawrence Wong. So, you will have done 20 years by then. And I wonder how much you think, what has changed during that? I mean, if you look at your father, your father came in famously as a socialist and ended up as a Thatcherite. I had been wandering around Singapore at the moment, and there are all these big programmes to hand out more money to people in retirement, fight off inflation. Have you been drifting to the left?
PM Lee: We have been sailing carefully to a more comfortable place. When the economy is growing and all boats are lifted by the tide, we can afford to be and we need to be, very rigorous in how we help those who are not quite catching up. You can tell them run faster, work harder, here is a bit more incentive, get ahead. And mostly it works very well. And we did that for a very long time. But over time as the race goes on, and as the field spreads out, and some are further forward and some are not quite so far ahead, and then their kids are not so far ahead, you have to think how are you going to hold this team together? And when sometimes, somebody who is doing perfectly well, their world changes on him and suddenly the first shall be last. Well, what do you do? Do you say, that is just the way the world is? Or is there something I can do to help him get back into the race again and be contributing again? And I think that we are in a phase where we have to do more together, where we have to help each other, and the government has to be there. And we have to try very hard to avoid the government being this sole solution to all problems.
Mr Micklethwait: So, the government is not going to get massively bigger, but it will get a bit bigger.
PM Lee: We are probably the smallest government in the developed countries because we spend about less than 20% of the GDP that is the government budget. My government budget is about the same percentage of the GDP as some European countries spend on state pensions. I mean, your system is different, but we have kept ours very lean. And we need to keep it very lean, but the pressures of ageing, of higher healthcare costs, of higher social needs are pushing us up gradually. And our challenge is, how do we fund that? And how do we allow that to happen where necessary, without just blowing up out of control? And that means from time to time, uttering the forbidden word – taxes. And we are in the middle of doing that now. We have a Goods and Services Tax, like a VAT. It was 7%. We pushed it up to 8% on the first of January this year, and it is about to go up to 9% on the first of January next year. And we will make it happen. But what we are doing is to provide quite generous, practically cash subsidies to the lower two-thirds of the population, so that I can get the system through. I am in a new place in terms of my revenues. But as far as impact on the households, that is deferred for quite some time.
Mr Micklethwait: How would you like to be remembered? What is the bit out of that? Do you want to be seen as the person who kept Singapore…
PM Lee: No, I think I will just focus on doing my job. I am not into…
Mr Micklethwait: Eulogies?
PM Lee: No, I am not into the point where I sit down and talk about what I used to do.
Mr Micklethwait: Well, that brings me to my last question. There is talk of you becoming Senior Minister. When I first met you many years ago, you had just taken over as Prime Minister. And then I went to go and see your father, who supposedly had semi-retired, to be Senior Minister. And I discovered to my slight surprise, he was living above your Cabinet room, which struck me as being…
PM Lee: No, he was not living there, he was working there.
Mr Micklethwait: So, he was working there. If I was running a Cabinet meeting, and he was up there… I mean, are you going to be planning to that degree?
PM Lee: It did not happen. I was running the Cabinet meeting and he was in the Cabinet Room.
Mr Micklethwait: But he was still somewhat there.
PM Lee: It worked quite well. My predecessor was in the Cabinet Room too. So, I had two of my predecessors in the meeting. And one of my fellow Prime Ministers said to me, ‘I cannot imagine what your Cabinet meetings are like’.
Mr Micklethwait: Does this work?
PM Lee: But they worked. It worked. It is a very delicate thing to be overwatching but not overbearing, and to be able to give advice and a helpful nudge, and just the right, wise word, and not cramp the style of your successor. I am at the disposal of my successor. I have already said whatever he wants me to do, I will do to help him succeed. So, you have to ask him what he will be doing with me.
Mr Micklethwait: Well Prime Minister Lee, I hope we will see you next year as well.
PM Lee: No, I shall be in the audience listening to you.
Mr Micklethwait: Listening from up above. Thank you.
PM Lee: Thank you very much.
