風蕭蕭_Frank
以文會友
李顯龍與陳慶珠在2025年新加坡海事周爐邊談話
李顯龍高級部長在2025年新加坡海事周爐邊談話
SM Lee Hsien Loong's Fireside Chat at Singapore Maritime Week 2025
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/SM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-Fireside-Chat-at-Singapore-Maritime-Week-2025
SM Lee Hsien Loong | 24 March 2025
李顯龍高級部長在2025年3月24日新加坡海事周開幕式爐邊談話的文字記錄。
主持人（陳慶珠大使）：
各位閣下，女士們，先生們。首先，請允許我感謝高級部長清晰而廣泛的演講。您為我們提供了充分的提問空間。作為主持人，我將首先提出幾個問題；然後，各位聽眾將有機會向他提問，分享您的想法。現在，請允許我首先發言。
高級部長，您曾將當前的地緣政治前景描述為極度緊張。您如何看待東盟和亞太地區穩定地區秩序？在這個相互依存、互聯互通的時代，我們能否真正保護自己免受其他地區動蕩和變化的影響？
李顯龍部長：
我們可以自我保護，但無法阻止某些影響。您問：地區國家可以做些什麽來改善現狀？或者說，亞太地區可以做些什麽——實際上您指的是亞太國家可以做些什麽？亞太國家包括美國和中國。如果美國和中國能夠穩定兩國關係——這是一個很大的要求，也是一個重要的請求——這將對地區秩序乃至世界產生重大影響。我們不知道事態會如何發展，因為我認為新政府尚未對此給予高度關注，但我們拭目以待。
正如我在演講中所解釋的，就該地區其他國家而言，我認為相當多的國家仍然相信某種國際多邊貿易框架，仍然希望相互合作，擴大貿易往來。我認為誌同道合的夥伴可以攜手合作，共同實現這一目標。大國包括中國、日本、韓國，甚至印度。小國包括東盟成員國。與西方關係密切的國家，例如澳大利亞和新西蘭，都認為必須開展經貿合作。我們可以建立自由貿易協定。區域全麵經濟夥伴關係協定（RCEP）涵蓋了許多太平洋西岸的國家。全麵與進步跨太平洋夥伴關係協定（CPTPP）也涵蓋了美洲國家，但不包括美國。這些協定為各國提供了一些依靠，確保在這個充滿不確定性的世界中擁有集體安全。新加坡正在持續拓展其貿易網絡，不僅在傳統的貿易和服務領域，也在數字和綠色經濟等新興領域。我們擁有6條綠色和數字航運走廊。我們與一些合作夥伴簽署了數字經濟框架協議，並且即將與印度簽署綠色數字航運走廊——所有這些都將在充滿不確定性的時期為東盟提供一些幫助和穩定。
至於東盟，我認為東盟可以做的一件事就是在東盟集團內部加強合作。我們有10個成員國，並且有一個東盟經濟共同體。它不像歐盟，但它為我們加強經濟合作提供了廣泛的基礎。而且我們可以做得更好。經過這麽多年的合作，我們在東盟內部貿易中的份額——占東盟成員國全球貿易的份額——仍然很低。不到四分之一，而且長期以來一直保持在這個水平。而如果你看看歐盟，成員國內部貿易占其全球貿易的80%到90%。因此，我認為在東盟內部，我們可以加強合作。東盟也可以與其外部夥伴更加努力地達成更多自由貿易協定，以加強合作。例如，它正在重啟與歐盟的自由貿易協定談判。我希望所有這些措施都能有所作為。
主持人：是的，我擔心互聯互通和相互依存，在我看來，這使得我們很難完全保護自己。
李世默：這非常困難，毫無希望。如果你想完全脫離外部世界，你就會像朝鮮一樣，甚至他們也需要以某種方式找到比特幣。
主持人：謝謝先生。高級部長，您之前提到美中關係，雙方必須達成某種協議。事實上，這是世界上最具決定性的關係，影響著我們的安全和繁榮。現在，據說特朗普總統不是一個好戰分子。他也尋求達成協議。事實上，他已經為普京和俄羅斯達成了一項“大交易”。您認為美中之間有可能達成“大交易”嗎？
李世默：我認為這會很困難，因為美中之間的問題已經變得根深蒂固。就美國而言，從根本上來說，他們已經評估中國是一個持續不斷的挑戰。這意味著他們必須不僅將中國視為合作夥伴或友好國家，而且還要將其視為可能構成挑戰，甚至威脅的國家。
嗯。這背後的原因是什麽？我認為他們看到中國在發展。他們認為中國可能會變得比他們更大，甚至更強大。我認為這種情況對美國來說是不可接受的，因為他們認為他們與中國在意識形態、全球影響力和世界地位方麵存在著根本性的差異。他們決定不這樣做，他們必須保持領先，無論如何都要保持領先，阻止這種情況發生。
中國方麵，他們看到自己在發展。他們想與世界做生意，但與此同時，他們認為美國試圖阻礙他們的發展，而對他們來說，這是至關重要的。他們有權發展；為什麽任何國家都可以告訴我，我不能做這做那？他們認為自己有權獲得技術，有權享有與發達國家相同的生活水平，他們希望在世界上占據應有的地位。
所以，這是兩種截然不同、根本矛盾的思維模式。而這背後的根源，是一係列非常棘手的問題，涉及主權、安全、價值觀、政治體係、全球貿易失衡、技術、網絡安全入侵等，這些問題很難輕易地被權衡或打包成一項大交易。每個問題本身都是絕對的——至少在各國的基本思維模式中是如此。因此，我看不到任何大交易。
然而，除非美國和中國攜手合作，達成某種有效的協議，否則我認為雙方都會陷入困境，世界也會陷入困境。因為如果它們相互衝突，將會對自身和世界其他國家造成巨大的傷害。我希望能夠達成某種和解。我可以想象為此必須采取的一些措施，但這絕非易事。
主持人：是的，正如您所說，我認為這將是艱難的，有時甚至比艱難更糟糕。現在我想談談我們每天早上在報紙上看到的關稅戰和報複性關稅。這對任何人都沒有好處，也沒有贏家。您如何看待這個過程或軌跡？
李勝男：嗯，如果您是一位經濟學家，您會建議中國——您的對手正在做這些事情，征收關稅。他可能認為這會損害中國，但實際上，這也損害了他自己的經濟。保持冷靜，繼續前進，不要采取任何行動。因為如果你采取行動，你也會傷害到自己。但從政治角度來看，這是不可能的。當有人在政治上對你這樣做時，即使他是你最好的朋友，你也必須采取行動，表明你已經注意到他對你這樣做了，你必須做出回應。就連加拿大人也在回應或談論回應。因此，你們必須針鋒相對。沿著這條路走下去，不僅僅是關稅。你們有關稅。你們對出口有限製。你們對投資有限製。基本上，你們正在分裂，你們正在分化。而這會導致很多麻煩。
自二戰以來，世界從未見過這種情況。因此，人們可能不記得當時是什麽樣子了。但它在二戰之前就發生過。20世紀30年代，當經濟陷入蕭條時，美國通過了《斯姆特-霍利關稅法案》，征收了極高的關稅。這引發了其他發達國家類似的高壁壘。世界貿易暴跌，加劇了經濟衰退。它給許多國家帶來了巨大的困難，加劇了政治壓力和國家之間的緊張關係，最終導致了第二次世界大戰。人們可能已經忘記了這一點，但在太平洋地區，戰爭是日本偷襲珍珠港事件引發的。偷襲珍珠港事件之前發生了什麽？是美國對日本實施的石油和橡膠禁運——這些是至關重要的原材料。日本人發動太平洋戰爭，就是為了攫取東南亞的原材料——馬來西亞的橡膠和錫，荷屬東印度群島（今印度尼西亞）的石油產品。所以，這種做法會導致糟糕的後果。
1985年，李光耀先生應邀在美國國會兩院聯席會議上發表演講，他就是圍繞這個主題發表演講的。那是一個截然不同的時代。當時的總統是羅納德·裏根。他的演講贏得了全場起立鼓掌。但氣氛變了，時代變了。現在，我們談論的不再是美國與日本的對抗，而是兩個核大國。你們或許會走到盡頭，也或許不會。希望在走到盡頭之前的某個地方，你們能找到一條出口和一條出路，讓我們避免彼此造成最大程度的傷害。但這需要時間，也需要改變思維方式，我認為與此同時，我們必須係好安全帶。
主持人：是的，我知道有些人說，再過兩年，也許美國中期選舉的時候，
將有助於穩定一些事情。
李智英：我不知道。我不認為這是個人偏好或偏見。當然，高層領導人的個人觀點確實會產生影響。但我認為各國已經形成了一種根深蒂固的觀點。
以前，世界的理想是平的——我們隻需彼此做生意，這沒什麽問題。如果你把所有食物都賣給我，我把所有汽車和太陽能電池板都賣給你——那就沒問題。
我想現在你會問：“如果你停止賣給我一些食物怎麽辦？”我會問：“如果有一天我需要把我的汽車生產線改造成裝甲車生產線怎麽辦？我該怎麽做？”我認為現在存在一個根本性的擔憂，那就是安全和韌性必須得到更加重視，或許應該優先於繁榮和相互依存。因此，我認為我們不會回到各國共同推動亞太自由貿易區的時代，就像我們在1990年左右茂物APEC宣言中所表達的那樣。但我希望我們不會走向一個叢林法則的世界——我想做什麽就做什麽，沒人能阻止我，因為這是國家安全，因此至關重要。
即使是國家安全，我也不想把自己花到破產，你也不想把自己花到破產。在軍控領域，我們或許是對手，但你們仍然需要軍備限製。你們仍然需要條約來限製競爭，防止事態真的爆發。我認為在貿易方麵，我們也需要一些類似的規則。
主持人：謝謝。這是我的第四個也是最後一個問題，之後你們就有機會提問了。今年是新加坡獨立60周年。新加坡作為全球港口和航運樞紐的地位日益增強。現在，該地區的其他港口也雄心勃勃。它們也在尋求發展，發揮更大的作用，並爭取更大的市場份額。這都是自然而然的，也是意料之中的。高級部長，您認為新加坡在未來20到30年內，作為全球港口和航運樞紐的地位會如何？我不是在談論未來60年，因為到那時，技術和地緣政治的發展可能已經超出我們的想象。您對新加坡未來的航運業有何展望？
李資政：假設世界和平穩定，全球貿易體係得以維持，人們仍然需要彼此開展貿易——雖然這並非必然——但我敢打賭，並為此而努力——那麽我認為我們總能找到生存之道。我們的港口從所謂的轉口港（但實際上，當時隻有來自鄰國的小型帆船、來自中國和日本的中型帆船，以及來自歐洲的大型船舶，作為貿易中心）發展到如今每年有超過4000萬標準箱經由新加坡港運輸的規模。
我們之所以能做到這一點，是因為我們領先一步，高效運作，充分利用科技，充分發揮我們的人才；我們確保擁有一支致力於打造一流港口並自給自足的團隊，即使我們的國內腹地並不廣闊。
如果我們僅僅依賴新加坡的集裝箱，PSA的規模可能隻有現在的二十分之一。但我們擁有國際業務，而這完全是因為我們高效且值得信賴。在新冠疫情期間，我們證明了這一點，因為我們保持了港口的開放。疫情過後，當其他港口出現貨物擁堵和延誤時，我們成為了人們及時趕到並解決問題的地方。
所以，我認為我們可以繼續增長，而且我們為此製定了相當大膽的計劃。我們正在建設的大士港的目標是每年吞吐量達到6500萬標準箱。去年我們的吞吐量剛剛超過4000萬標準箱，比去年增長了50%。你會問，你夠大膽嗎？你是不是太大膽了？我會說，你必須要有夢想。當我們建造包括巴西班讓港在內的現有設施時，我們的吞吐量大約是1600萬標準箱。而我們的目標是翻一番，達到3000多萬標準箱。當時人們懷疑我們能否實現這個目標。但我們想：我們建設它，我們實現它。而且，它比我們預期的要快。我們大約五六年前就實現了這個目標，現在我們的吞吐量已經超過4000萬標準箱。
從4000萬到6000萬，區域業務已經到位，集裝箱將通過新加坡海峽運輸。有些集裝箱可能會通過北極——或許是東北航道。但我認為很多貨物仍將通過東南亞、新加坡和其他港口抵達，這些港口遍布這條??航線——台灣、馬來西亞、斯裏蘭卡和印度。如果我們效率高，我們就可以成為您集裝箱入港的平台，下一艘船八小時後到達，下一艘船掉頭出港，集裝箱會被追蹤，確保安全，永遠不會丟失。這樣一來，我認為我們就能繼續自給自足，而且我們也會
30年後，我依然在那裏，並期待著更遠的彼岸。
主持人：好的，謝謝。現在輪到觀眾提問了。過道兩旁擺著麥克風。如果您想提問，請走到麥克風前。房間裏有人拿著抽認卡吸引我的注意，這樣我就能認出您了。我好像在C區看到一隻手，是的，請。您問的是第一個問題。請告訴我們您的姓名和所在地區。這隻是為了幫助我們更好地理解這個問題。
問：SM Lee，感謝您非常有見地且富有戰略眼光的觀點。我叫Eugene，來自太平洋國際聯盟。減少溫室氣體排放對我們行業至關重要，對每家航運公司來說都具有改變格局的意義。事實上，對一些公司來說，這可能是一種生存風險。國際海事組織設定了雄心勃勃的目標，即到2030年將排放量減少30%，到2050年實現淨零排放。那麽，您如何看待國際航運公司與新加坡合作以實現這些目標，尤其是在當今全球經濟形勢日益不確定以及成本不斷攀升的環境下？
SM Lee：我們必須為此做好準備。坦率地說，解決方案尚不明確，但我們必須尋找有前景的方案，並探索多種不同的途徑。替代燃料是其中一種途徑，無論是氫氣還是氨氣。我認為太陽能不太可能。風能或許可以有所貢獻，但它不能成為主要的解決方案。我們必須探索所有不同的替代方案，並在這些方案被證明可行時，做好可能需要的基礎設施建設，以支持這些方案。正因如此，正如我之前所說，我們正在建設替代燃料，培訓人員，完善基礎設施，提高安全標準等等。
說實話，我認為，到2030年（也就是五年後）將排放量減少30%對世界來說將非常具有挑戰性，尤其是在大國尚未全部同意的情況下。其他國家會問：“我為什麽要竭盡全力勒緊褲腰帶？”
但我認為，長期來看，這個方向是不可避免的，我們應該盡最大努力準備好相關技術並能夠將其付諸實施，以免吃虧。最終，解決方案不能僅僅是綠色能源，因為我認為即使有了綠色能源，供應也可能不足，而且成本會非常高昂。
最終，供應鏈和運輸模式將會發生重構。會出現更多的近岸采購，行業必須適應這種情況。無論你是使用碳稅，還是使用（碳）邊境調整機製，這都會發生。歐洲人在談論碳稅，但世界其他國家卻沒有。所以，如果你進來，我就會在邊境向你收費。無論如何，這意味著整個行業必須重新配置，航運公司也必須重新配置。
航運業應對脫碳的方式有一個亮點。那就是，它以行業整體來應對這個問題，而不是逐個國家地 ...但您可以想象，其他一些行業也應該如此，例如石化行業。
主持人：謝謝。下一個問題？請問，第八個問題。
問：早上好，SM Lee，感謝您非常有見地的演講。我叫Akanksha Batura Pai，來自Sinoda Shipping Agency，也是新加坡航運協會的理事會成員。這可能是我問過的最高級別的問題，謝謝。我從事海運和物流服務行業，為了在全球範圍內競爭，我們確實麵臨著人才短缺的問題，擁有高技能的勞動力對我們來說非常有競爭力。考慮到該行業高度分散，利潤水平的增長速度也遠不及一些數字化程度更高的行業，例如生成式人工智能。坦白說，我們發現勞動力正在流失，他們湧向零工經濟，甚至湧向一些我們從未預料到會與之競爭的行業。那麽您對我們的行業有什麽建議嗎？或者
對我們行業的參與者來說，這真的是一個現實問題。謝謝。
SM Lee：我對海運物流行業的細節不太了解。但我知道，船舶供應和船舶途經新加坡時進行陸路作業一直以來都是一項充滿挑戰的業務。正如您所說，它比較零散；缺乏足夠的技術應用；也缺乏足夠的升級和整合。我認為交通部和新加坡海事與港務局一直在努力解決這個問題。我會把具體問題交給他們處理。
我認為，新加坡普遍存在的人才問題是許多行業都麵臨的問題，我們也意識到了這一點。我們正在努力建立一個框架，使我們能夠最大限度地利用新加坡現有的人才——培訓他們達到標準，並投資於他們從事這些工作。同時，我們也希望能夠引進合格的專業人士，他們能夠為我們的勞動力隊伍做出貢獻，補充我們的勞動力，從而促進我們的經濟增長。
很抱歉，我沒有更具體的細節，但我認為MPA和MOT已經了解這些問題，我們正在努力解決。
主持人：謝謝。下一個問題？是的，四個。
問：先生，早上好。這是我的願望清單。謝謝。我叫Hari Subramaniam船長。我來自海上保險行業，同時也是這裏航海學院的主席。我的問題與我之前的同事Akanksha的問題類似，是關於如何改善航運形象的建議。通常，隻有發生災難性事件並引起人們的關注時，航運才會成為新聞焦點。因此，我覺得很多人因此而不敢進入這個行業。回到人才和人力方麵，海員也是一個正在消亡的群體。沒有人願意把自己的孩子送去航運業。所以，請允許我以您一貫的、鼓舞人心的風格，分享一些見解和建議，告訴我們如何真正做到這一點。
李少華：我目前還沒有製定戰略計劃。我不知道問題是否在於航運宣傳不足。我認為問題在於，隨著各國日益富裕，民眾越來越不願意選擇航海生活。當然也有一些例外——我認為北歐可能是其中之一。挪威仍然有相當一部分人願意出海。但如果你看看亞洲，情況並非如此。因此，許多船員，包括軍官和船長，都來自在岸上生活很艱難的國家，所以他們願意出海。而在新加坡，在岸上生活並不困難。如果生活艱難，我們就會麵臨其他非常大的問題。
所以你需要一定的熱情，對海洋有一定的迷戀。我認為我們有相關的機構、設施和訓練模擬器。我去參觀過一個——我記得在裕廊，我們有一台駕駛艙模擬器，簡直是夢想成真——簡直是僅次於體驗真實台風的體驗。但盡管如此，嚐試的人仍然不夠多。
我認為這種情況可能會持續下去。如果你想做這件事，你必須尋找對它充滿熱情的人。就飛行員而言，他們會尋找年輕人，然後在他們還在上學的時候就教他們飛行。希望他們以後能加入空軍或航空公司。或許在航運方麵，你也應該這樣做，抓住他們年輕時的機會，讓他們對海洋著迷。海洋本身就有一種魔力，但你必須擁有那種個性，那種執著。海軍能夠吸引人們加入。它的形象與海運業截然不同。它不僅僅是製服的一部分；它還展現了高度專業化和高科技的形象。事實上，如果你在超級油輪或現代船舶上，那也體現了高度的專業精神和高科技。所以你必須把這個信息傳達出去。
主持人：謝謝。
李世默：謝謝。
問：早上好，李先生和女士，我是蘇美達海洋中國公司的徐剛。實際上，我們在新加坡有一家航運公司，在中國也有造船廠。美國將根據美國港口的價格來收取中國造船廠建造的船舶的費用。我的問題是，你對此有何看法？如果你是船東，你會從中國造船廠訂購船舶嗎？
李世默：我會觀察實際情況。我認為每個商界人士都希望擁有一個有序的商業環境，包括政策環境、監管環境和國際環境。自二戰以來，各國就共同認可了一些明智的、符合各方利益的規則。我們都同意彼此進行貿易，我們有一個原則，叫做最惠國待遇（M
如果我和你做生意，我就會給你特權。我也會給其他所有人同樣的特權。我不會歧視任何人。我們想做生意。世界就這樣繁榮了很長一段時間。但即使在那時，這也不是一件完全不用思考的事情。即使在那時，也有一些大國處於體係之外。蘇聯集團長期處於體係之外。中國也長期處於體係之外。當中國加入時，首先與美國建立永久正常貿易關係，然後加入世貿組織，這些都是比爾·克林頓時期的政治決定，美國國會就是否像對待其他國家一樣對待中國，並建立永久正常貿易關係展開了激烈的辯論。這意味著我不會歧視你。現在，他們可能會重新考慮。35年後，國會隨時可以改變主意。從貿易的角度來看，這是一個問題。從整體關係的角度來看，這是一個問題，如果真的發生了，我確信它將成為兩國之間的問題。這個問題必須以某種方式得到解決。我們當然希望世界和平，人與人之間和睦相處，但這也是我們持續努力實現的理想。
問：謝謝。
問：李資政，早上好。我是張誌賢，來自太平洋國際聯盟，今天我代表新加坡航運協會。大家可能知道，新加坡在過去八到十年裏一直是國際航運城市，這是一個偉大的成就。然而，正因為如此，新加坡需要大量的人才。所以，正如你們所見，今天我們不僅有像我這樣的人才，還有來自許多國家的人才。另一方麵，自新冠疫情以來，生活成本一直在上漲，這反過來又對新加坡的人才構成了威脅。請問您對此事有何看法？謝謝。
李雪梅：我不確定您說的生活成本是指新加坡人的生活成本，還是在新加坡工作和生活的外籍人士的生活成本。
問：對於外國人來說。
李雪梅：嗯，我們的成本不像其他許多亞洲城市那麽低，但這也沒辦法。部分原因是租金。我認為租賃市場一段時間以來一直處於緊張狀態，尤其是在新冠疫情之後。但我們正在建設更多房屋，這種情況正在緩解。一般生活成本——如果你讀過一些調查，他們說我們比紐約或倫敦更貴。我覺得這有點難以置信。但是，如果你看看他們買什麽，在哪裏吃飯，然後進行這些計算，你可能會發現——如果你想要那種生活方式——你會遇到問題。但我認為，我們可以把新加坡建設成一個宜居之地，在這裏，人們可以享受良好的醫療保健，孩子們可以接受良好的教育，人們樂於在這裏生活，在這裏工作多年，事業也能蓬勃發展。總的來說，我們可以製定一個對企業有利的方案。這樣，我們就能吸引專業人士、專家以及擁有不同學科和經驗的人才來到這裏。看看數據，想移民的人數，持有就業準證的人數，都在持續增長。仍然有人在不斷湧入。我認為隻要這種情況持續下去，我們就應該能夠繼續發展。
主持人：我想這可能是我們的最後一個問題了，因為時間不多了。
問：早上好，李資政和今天在座的各位。李資政，感謝您富有洞察力的演講。我是薇拉，南洋理工大學倒數第二年的學生，也是新加坡海事青年大使。那麽，關於青年、人才和人力，作為航運業的青年以及希望加入這個行業的未來一代，您能否代表他們，給年輕人一些建議，告訴他們如何應對不確定的浪潮，並在這個行業蓬勃發展？謝謝。
SM Lee：我認為世界上有很多不確定性，但同時也有很多機遇。對於像你們這樣正在大學學習、準備畢業、準備迎接人生的人們，我想說：你們已經擁有了一個年輕人所能擁有的最好的開端，除了經曆過一場徹底的危機，勉強挺過來，最終改變了你們的人生。我們竭盡全力防止你們遭遇那樣的危機。我們為你們提供了學習、接受教育、發展才能、看世界、了解身邊機遇的機會，並讓你們掌握技能和知識，從而為人生中的許多事情做好準備。這不是你們教育的終點，而是你們終身學習和工作的起點。
如果你抱著這種態度，說：“我和其他人一樣準備充分。如果我在中國，可能會有2億人與我競爭。”
我在新加坡，有競爭對手，全世界也都在和我競爭。但我已經做好了準備，我在新加坡有一支高效的團隊，我有一個不錯的品牌。如果我準備好擼起袖子，勇往直前，適應世界的變化，我就能創造出今天尚不存在的更美好的事物。你們的父母和祖父母麵臨著更大的挑戰，但他們沒有那麽多選擇。他們說：“好吧，讓我們一起努力。”他們也確實這麽做了。對於你們這一代人，我想說，這是你們的責任。這也是你們說“讓我們一起努力”的機會。向像我這樣的老一輩人證明，你們可以做到我們無法想象的事情。有一天，在某個地方，我們會看著你們，感到自豪。
主持人：謝謝您，高級部長。我想感謝您就航運業問題進行了一次非常有啟發性、富有洞察力且坦誠的討論。謝謝。
主題：貿易、交通、就業和生產力
相關內容：李顯龍總理在2025新加坡海事講座上
SM Lee Hsien Loong's Fireside Chat at Singapore Maritime Week 2025
https://www.pmo.gov.sg/Newsroom/SM-Lee-Hsien-Loong-Fireside-Chat-at-Singapore-Maritime-Week-2025
SM Lee Hsien Loong | 24 March 2025
Transcript of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong's fireside chat at the opening of Singapore Maritime Week on 24 March 2025.
Moderator (Ambassador Chan Heng Chee): Senior Minister, you have described the current geopolitical outlook as one that is severely strained. How do you see ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific stabilising the regional order, and in this age of interdependency and connectivity, can we really shield ourselves from the turbulence and changes happening elsewhere?
SM Lee Hsien Loong:
Well, we can insulate ourselves, but we cannot prevent some impact upon us. You asked: what can the regional countries do to make things better? Or what can the Asia-Pacific do — actually you mean what can Asia-Pacific countries do? And Asia-Pacific countries include the US and China. And if the US and China are able to stabilise their relations — a big ask, but an important request — that will make a big difference to the regional order and, in fact, to the world. We do not know how that will develop, because I think the new administration has not focused on that intensely yet, but we will see.
On the part of the other countries in the region, as I explained in my speech, I think quite a number continue to believe in some international framework for multilateral trade, continue to want to cooperate with one another, to trade more with one another. And I think like-minded partners can get together to do this. Big countries like China, Japan, Korea, even India. Smaller countries like the ASEAN members. Countries which have close links to the West, like Australia and New Zealand. All believe that they have to do business and trade together. And we can make FTAs. The RCEP includes many of the countries which are on the western side of the Pacific. The CPTPP includes the Americas as well, less the US. And these give you some life raft to hang on to and to have collective safety in this uncertain world. And Singapore continues to expand its network, not just in the traditional areas of trade and services, but also in new areas like digital and green economy. We have 6 Green and Digital Shipping Corridors. We have some Digital Economy Framework Agreements with several partners, and we are about to conclude a Green and Digital Shipping Corridor with India — all of which will give you some help and some stability in uncertain times.
As for ASEAN, I think one of the things which ASEAN can do is to cooperate more intensively within the ASEAN group. We have 10 members. We have an ASEAN economic community. It is not like the European Union, but it gives a broad basis for us to enhance our economic cooperation. And we can do better. After all these years of cooperation, our share of intra-ASEAN trade − as a share of our global trade amongst ASEAN members − is still quite low. It is less than one quarter, and it has been about that level for a very long time. And if you look at the EU, the intra-member trade is like 80, 90% of their global trade. Therefore, I think within ASEAN, we can cooperate more. And ASEAN can also work harder with its external partners to conclude more FTAs in order to work together. For example, it is reviving FTA negotiations with the EU. I hope all these measures will make a difference.
Moderator: Yes, I worry about the connectivity and the interdependence, which seems to me to make it a bit difficult to shield ourselves totally.
SM Lee: It is very difficult, it is hopeless. If you want to be completely unrelated to the external world, you will be like North Korea, and even they need to find Bitcoin somehow or other.
Moderator: Thank you, sir. You mentioned, Senior Minister, earlier about the US-China relationship, that they have to work out something between themselves. And indeed, it is the most decisive relationship in the world, affecting our security and prosperity. Now, President Trump is said to be not a man of war. He also seeks to strike deals. In fact, he has come up with a grand bargain for Mr Putin and Russia. Do you think a grand bargain is possible between the United States and China?
SM Lee: I think it would be difficult, because the issues between the US and China have become deep. On the US side, fundamentally, they have made an assessment that China is a pacing challenge. That means it is something which they have to treat − not just as a partner, as a friendly country − but something which could pose a challenge, maybe even a threat to them. And what is behind this? I think they see China growing. They see China possibly becoming bigger than them, maybe stronger than them. And I think it is not acceptable to the Americans to have this happen, because they see differences between them and China quite fundamentally in terms of ideology, in terms of global influence, in terms of their place in the world. And they have decided that no, they must stay ahead, and one way or the other, they will stay ahead, and they will stop this from happening.
On the Chinese side, they see themselves growing. They want to do business with the world, but at the same time, they see America as trying to block their growth, and to them, this is something which is crucial. They have the right to grow; why should any country be able to tell me I cannot do this or I cannot do that? They feel they have the right to technology, they have the right to the same standard of living as the developed countries, and they want to take their rightful place in the world.
And so these are two very different, fundamentally contradictory mindsets. And underlying that, feeding that, are a series of very difficult questions over sovereignty, over security, over values, over political systems, over imbalances in global trade, over technology, over cybersecurity intrusions, which are not easily traded off or packaged together into a grand bargain. Each one is an absolutist thing in its own − at least in the basic mindsets of the countries. And therefore, I do not see a grand bargain.
And yet, unless America and China work together and have some kind of working arrangement, I think both will be in trouble, and the world will be in trouble. Because if they clash with one another, they will do a lot of harm to themselves and to the rest of the world. I hope some accommodation can be worked out. I can imagine some of the things which you have to do to do that, but it will not be easy.
Moderator: Yes, I think it will be rocky, as you say, and maybe at times worse than rocky. I would like to come now to what we read in the newspapers every morning, the tariff war and the retaliatory tariffs. It is not good for anyone, and there are no winners. How do you see this process or trajectory playing out?
SM Lee: Well, if you are an economist, you would advise China — your opponent is doing these things, imposing tariffs. He may think that it costs China, but actually it is also costing his own economy. Just stay calm and carry on, do not do anything. Because if you do something, you will also hurt yourself. But politically, that is not possible. When somebody does this to you, politically, even if he is your best friend, you have to do something to show that you have taken note that he has done this to you, and you have to respond. Even the Canadians are responding or talking about responding. Therefore, you have tit for tat. And you go down the road, and it is not just tariffs. You have tariffs. You have restrictions on exports. You have restrictions on investments. Basically, you are bifurcating, and you are dividing. And that way leads to a lot of trouble.
The world has not seen it since the World War II. Therefore, maybe does not remember what it is like. But it happened before the War. In the 1930s, when the economies went into a depression, there was a Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act– very high tariffs – passed by the US. It triggered similar high barriers from the other developed countries. World trade plummeted. It deepened the recession. It caused great hardship in many countries, and it contributed to the political pressures and the tensions between countries, which eventually led to the Second World War. And people may have forgotten this, but in the Pacific, the war started with the attack on Pearl Harbor by Japan. What immediately preceded the attack on Pearl Harbor? It was a US embargo on Japan of petroleum and rubber − vital raw materials. And the Japanese started the Pacific War to secure those raw materials from Southeast Asia − rubber and tin from Malaysia, petroleum products from the Dutch East Indies (today’s Indonesia). So that way leads to bad outcomes.
In 1985, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was invited to address a joint session of the US Congress, and he made a speech on this theme. Those were different days. Ronald Reagan was the President. He got a standing ovation. The mood has changed. The times have changed. Now you are not talking about the US versus Japan. You are talking about two nuclear powers. You may or may not go all the way to the end of the road. And hopefully somewhere before the end of the road, you will find an off-ramp and a way out which will enable us to stop short of doing maximum damage to one another. But it will take time, and it will take changes in mindsets, and I think meanwhile, we just have to fasten our seat belts.
Moderator: Yes, and I know that some people are saying give this two years, and maybe with the midterm elections in the United States, that will help stabilise something.
SM Lee: I do not know. I do not put this as personal predilections or prejudices. Certainly, personal views of top leaders make a difference. But I think there is a deep view which has formed in countries.
Previously, the ideal of the world is that it is flat − that we just do business with one another, and it is okay. If you sell me all my food and I sell you all your cars and all your solar panels − that is fine.
I think now you will ask, “What if you stop selling me some of my food?” And I will ask, “What if one day I need to convert my car line into an armoured vehicle line? How do I do that?” I think there is now a fundamental concern that security and resilience must be weighted more heavily, and perhaps given priority over prosperity and interdependence. And therefore, I do not think we will go back to the days when countries push for a free trade area in the Asia-Pacific, as we expressed in one of the APEC declarations in Bogor around 1990. But I hope that we will not go to a world where it is the law of the jungle − where I say I can do what I like, and nobody can stop me, because this is national security, and therefore is paramount.
Even if it is national security, I do not want to spend myself to bankruptcy, and you do not want to spend yourself to bankruptcy. In the fields of arms control, we may be opponents, but you still have arms limitations. You still have treaties to keep the competition within limits and prevent things from really blowing up. And I think in trade too, we need to have some rules like that.
Moderator: Thank you. Now this will be my fourth and last question, and then you will have your chance. This is the 60th year of Singapore's independence. Singapore as a global port and maritime hub has grown from strength to strength. Now, other ports in the region also have big ambitions. They are also seeking to grow and to play a bigger role and to have a larger share of the business. This is all natural and to be expected. Where do you see, Senior Minister, Singapore in the next 20 to 30 years as a global port and maritime hub? Now I am not talking of the next 60 years, because by then, technology and geopolitics may have developed in a way beyond our imagination. What is your vision for Singapore's maritime industry in the future?
SM Lee: Assuming there is peace and stability in the world, that the global trading system holds, that people still need to do business with one another which is not a given thing − but I would bet on that and work for that − then I think there will always be a living for us. We have built our port from what we call an entrepot (but really it was little sailing boats coming in from our immediate neighbours, junks coming in from China and Japan, and maybe somewhat bigger ships coming from Europe and being the trading centre), to what we are now, with 40 plus million TEUs shipped through Singapore every year.
And we have done it by being one step ahead, by being efficient, by making full use of technology and making full use of our people; making sure that we have a team which wants to build a first-class port and give ourselves a living, even though we have not much of a domestic hinterland.
If we just depend on Singapore containers, PSA would be maybe 1/20th its present size. But we have got international business, and we have that only because we are efficient and we can be relied upon to deliver. We proved that during COVID, because we kept the port open. And after COVID, when there were pile-ups and delays in other ports, we were the place where people would catch up on time and sort things out.
So, I think we can continue to grow, and we have quite bold plans to do that. Tuas Port, which we are building, has targeted for 65 million TEUs per year. We are now just over 40 million TEUs last year. It is 50 per cent more. You ask, are you bold enough? Are you too bold? I say, you have to dream. When we built our present facilities, including Pasir Panjang Port, we were at about 16 million TEUs. And we were building for double that, 30 plus million TEUs. And people wondered whether you would ever get there. But we thought: we build it, we make it happen. And it happened faster than we expected. We got there about five or six years ago, and we are now 40+ million TEUs.
From 40 to 60 million, the regional business is there, the containers will flow past us through the Strait of Singapore. Some may go via the Arctic − Northeast passage, perhaps. But I think a lot will still come through Southeast Asia, will come past Singapore and the other ports, which are up and down along the string − in Taiwan, in Malaysia, in Sri Lanka, in India. And if we are efficient, we can be the place where you ship the container in, the next ship comes in eight hours, the next ship turns around, it goes out, the container is tracked, it is safe, and it never gets lost. Then I think we can continue to make a living for ourselves, and we will still be there 30 years from now and looking for the next bound beyond that.
Moderator: Yes, thank you. Now we come to questions from the audience. There are mics along the aisle. If you could just step to the mic if you wish to ask a question, and there are people around the room with flash cards to attract my attention so I recognise you. I think I saw a hand in Section C, yes, please. You have the first question. Please give us your name and where you come from. It is just to help us get a fix on the question.
Q: Thank you, SM Lee for your very insightful and strategic view. My name is Eugene. I am from Pacific International Alliance. Greenhouse gas emissions reductions is an imperative for our industry and a game changer for every shipping company. In fact, for some, it could be an existential risk. The IMO has set ambitious targets to reduce emissions by 30% by 2030, and net zero by 2050. Now, how do you see the role of international shipping companies collaborating with Singapore to meet these targets, especially considering today's increasingly uncertain global economic situation, and in an environment of escalating costs?
SM Lee: We have to prepare for this. I would say candidly, the solutions are not yet clear, but we have to look for what is promising and explore multiple different avenues. Alternative fuels are one avenue, whether it is hydrogen, whether it is ammonia. I think solar is not likely. Wind, maybe, could have a contribution, but it cannot be the main solution. We have to explore all the different alternatives, and prepare ourselves in terms of the infrastructure likely to be needed as they prove viable, in order to support them. And that is why, as I said earlier, we are building up, training people to handle alternative fuels, building up the infrastructure, the safety requirements, and so on.
I think, honestly, to reduce emissions by 30% by 2030, which is five years from now, will be very challenging for the world, particularly if the big countries are not all on board. Other countries will ask: “Why should I exercise maximum effort to tighten my belts?”
But the direction in the longer term, I think, is unavoidable, and we should do our best to get the technology ready and be able to implement it and not lose out. In the end, the solution cannot just be greener energy because I think even with greener energy, the supply may not be enough, and the cost will be very high.
You will end up with reconfiguration of supply chains, of shipping patterns. There will be more near-sourcing, and the industry will have to adjust to that. And this is going to happen whether you are doing it using carbon taxes, or using (Carbon) Border Adjustment Mechanism. The Europeans are talking about carbon taxes, but the rest of the world is not. So if you come in, I am going to charge you at the border. And either way, it means that the industry will have to reconfigure, and that means the shipping lines will have to reconfigure too.
There is one bright spot in this, in the way the maritime industry is dealing with decarbonisation. And that is, it is dealing with the problem as an industry, as opposed to country by country. Because if you go country by country, places and individual countries with big ports – Singapore happens to be one of them – we will die because the bunkering is done here, therefore it is blamed on Singapore. But actually it is not Singapore; it is the bunker used for shipping, which many countries benefit from. It just happened to be the port where this physical operation took place. And so, as an industry, we can find a solution which is sensible end to end, and you put the costs where the costs deserve to be, and where the industry can work. Now, how to do that? We have to negotiate, and there will be a hard bargain. But that is the sensible way to think about this, and I wish that is how we thought about more things. Aviation fuel is like that. But there are other industries which you could imagine which should be like that too, for example, petrochemicals.
Moderator: Thank you. The next question? Over there, number eight.
Q: Good morning SM Lee, thank you for your really insightful presentation. My name is Akanksha Batura Pai. I am from Sinoda Shipping Agency, and I am also part of the Council at the Singapore Shipping Association. Likely this is the highest-level question I have ever asked, so thank you. I belong to the services industry in maritime and logistics, and we are truly facing a talent crunch to compete on the global scale, and to have a very upskilled workforce is quite competitive for us. Considering the industry is also highly fragmented, the profit levels are also very not increasing in line with some of the higher-digitised industries as well, like generative AI. So we find ourselves losing workforce frankly to the gig economies and even to industries we never even anticipated competing with. So would you have any suggestions for our sectors, or even for players in our sector? This is a real problem we are facing on the ground. Thank you.
SM Lee: I am not very familiar with the details of the maritime logistics industry. I do know that the business of supplying the ships and doing the landward part of the work when ships pass through Singapore has been a challenging business for some time. As you say, it is fragmented; there is not enough technology being applied to it; there is not enough upgrading and consolidation being applied to it. I think MOT has been working on this, and MPA. I would defer to them to deal with the specific issues.
The general problem of talent in Singapore, I think, is one which many industries are facing, and we are conscious of. And we are trying to make a framework which will enable us to make the most of the people we have in Singapore − to train them to be up to scratch, and invest in them to do these jobs. And also at the same time, to be able to bring in professionals who are qualified, who can contribute and complement our workforce and therefore enable our economy to grow.
I am sorry I do not have more specific details, but the problems, I think, MPA and MOT know about them, and we are working on that.
Moderator: Thank you. The next question? Yes, four.
Q: Good morning, sir. This is a bucket list item for me. Thank you. My name is Captain Hari Subramaniam. I am from the marine insurance industry, and I also chair the Nautical Institute here. My question is along the lines of my colleague Akanksha previously, and it is about advice on improving the image of shipping. Shipping usually hits the news only when something disastrous happens and catches everybody's attention. To which, I feel a lot of people are being deterred from coming to this industry. Back to talent and manpower, seafarers also are a dying breed. Nobody wants to send their children out to join the shipping industry. So if I may say, in your normal, inspiring style, would you be able to share some insight and some advice on how we can actually go about that?
SM Lee: I do not have a strategic plan straightaway. I do not know whether the problem is lack of publicity over shipping. I think the problem is as countries become more affluent, their populations become less willing to go for a seafarer’s life. There are a few exceptions — I think the Nordics may be one of them. The Norwegians still have a significant number of people who are prepared to go to sea. But if you look at Asia, it has not been so. Therefore many of the crews, including officers and their captains, are from countries where being onshore is tough, and therefore you are prepared to go to sea. And in Singapore, being onshore is not tough. If it were tough, we would have other very big problems.
And so you need a certain passion, a certain fascination with the ocean. And I think we have the institutions, we have the facilities, we have got the training simulators. I went to visit one — I think in Jurong we have one bridge simulator, which is a dream − the next best thing to being in a real typhoon. But despite that, the numbers of people taking it up are not enough.
I think that may continue to be the case. If you want to do it, you would have to look for people who have a passion for it. In the case of pilots, they look for people who are young, and then they teach them to fly while they are still in school. And hopefully later on, they join the Air Force and they join one of the airlines. And maybe in the case of shipping, you have to do the same and catch them young and get them fascinated with the oceans. There is something magical about it, but you have to have that personality, that obsession, almost. The Navy is able to get people to join it. It has a different kind of image from what is in the maritime industry. It is only partly the uniform; it is also the image of great professionalism and high technology. And in fact, if you are on a super tanker or on a modern ship, it is great professionalism and high technology, too. So you have got to get that message across.
Moderator: Thank you.
SM Lee: Thank you.
Q: Good morning, Mr Lee and Madam, my name is Xu Gang from Sumec Marine China. Actually, we have a shipping company in Singapore, and have shipyards in China. America is going to charge the ships built by Chinese shipyard according (to the) United States port. My question is, what is your opinion? If you were a ship owner, are you going to order ships from Chinese shipyards?
SM Lee: I will watch and see what actually happens. I think everybody in business prefers to have an orderly business environment, which includes policy environment, which includes regulatory environment, and the international environment. There have been certain rules which, since the Second World War, particularly, countries have collectively agreed are wise and in everybody's interests. We all agree that we will trade with one another, that we have a principle called Most Favoured Nation (MFN). If I trade with you, then I give you a privilege. And I will give the same privilege to everybody else. I will not discriminate between one and the other. We want to do business. And the world prospered for a long time like that. But even then, it was not completely a no-brainer matter. Even then, there were big countries which were outside the system. The Soviet bloc was outside the system for a long time. China was outside the system also for a long time. And when China came in, first to have Permanent Normal Trade Relations with the US, and then to join the WTO, these were political decisions under Bill Clinton, and there was a hot debate in the US Congress on whether to treat China like other countries, and to have Permanent Normal Trade Relations. Means I will not discriminate against you. Now, they may reconsider. 35 years later, Congress can always change its mind. From the point of view of trade, it is a problem. From the point of view (of) an overall relationship, (it) is an issue, which will become a problem between the two countries − I am sure − if it happens. And somehow it will have to be sorted out. We hope, of course, that there will be peace on earth and goodwill among men, but that is an ideal we continue to work towards.
Q: Thank you.
Q: SM Lee, a very good morning to you. I am TS Teo, I am from Pacific International Alliance but today I am representing the Singapore Shipping Association. As you may know, Singapore has been an international maritime city for the past eight to 10 years, a great achievement. However, because of that, Singapore needs a lot of talents. So we have today, as you can see, not only guys like me, but talents of many countries here. On the other hand, since COVID-19, cost of living has been going up, and this, in turn, has been a threat to talent in Singapore. May I know what is your comments and how you look at this matter? Thank you.
SM Lee: I am not sure when you say cost of living, what you are talking about, cost of living for Singaporeans or cost of living for foreign expatriates who are working and living in Singapore.
Q: For foreigners.
SM Lee: Well, we are not as low cost as many other Asian cities, but it cannot be helped. Part of it is rentals. I think there has been tightness in the rental market for some time, particularly after COVID-19. But we are building more, and it is easing. General living costs − if you read some of the surveys, they say we are more expensive than New York or London. I find that a little bit hard to believe. But then, if you look and see what they are shopping for, and where they are dining at, to make those calculations, it may be − if you want that sort of a lifestyle − you will have an issue. But I think that we can make ourselves a place where it is good to live, where you have got good health care, where you have got good education for the kids, where you are happy to spend time here and spend years here and your career can prosper. And if I think overall, we can have a package which makes sense for the businesses. Then we will be able to have professionals, have experts, have people who have different disciplines and experiences come here. If you look at the data, the numbers of people wanting to come in, the numbers of Employment Pass holders, continue to grow. There are still people coming in. And I think as long as that is the case, we should be able to continue to grow.
Moderator: I think this may be our last question, because time is running out.
Q: Good morning, Senior Minister Lee and everyone here today. So SM Lee, thank you for your insightful speech. I am Vera, a penultimate year student at NTU and a Singapore Maritime youth ambassador. So building on the topic of youth and talent and manpower, and representing the youth of the maritime industry, as well as the future generations who hope to join this industry, could you perhaps give one advice for the youth on how we can navigate the waves of uncertainty and also to thrive here. Thank you.
SM Lee: I think there is a lot of uncertainty in the world, but at the same time, there are many opportunities. And for people like you studying in university, preparing to graduate, preparing to go on to life, I would say: you have had about as good a start as is possible for a young person to have, short of having gone through a drastic crisis and barely survived it, that changes your life. We have tried our best to prevent you from having a drastic crisis. We have given you the opportunities to learn, to be educated, to grow your talents, to see the world, to understand what the opportunities are around you, and to grow up with skills and knowledge which can prepare you to do many things in life. It is not the end of your education, but it is the beginning of a lifetime of learning and working.
And if you take it with that attitude, and say, "I am as well prepared as anybody. If I were in China, there would be maybe 200 million people competing with me. I am in Singapore, I have competition, and the world is still there competing with me. But I am prepared, I have a team in Singapore which works, I have a brand name which is good. And if I am prepared to roll up my sleeves and go to it and adapt to the world as it comes, I can create something better which does not exist today". Your parents and your grandparents faced much more daunting odds, but they did not have as many choices. They said, well, "Let's do it together". And they did. To your generations, I would say it is your responsibility. It is also your chance to say, "Let's do it together". Show the old folks like me that you can do things that we did not imagine. And one day, somewhere, we will be looking at you and being proud.
Moderator: Thank you, Senior Minister. I would like to thank you for a very stimulating and a very insightful but frank discussion of the issues on the maritime industry. Thank you.
