Denial
The Singapore government has just made an incomprehensible congratulatory statement to Britain. The congratulatory message noted that because Blair stood firm on his right decision to wage the war with Iraq, his party was returned by the people as the majority party in the parliament.
The curious thing was that this flew in the face of all the commentaries in local papers and in Britain's own papers that though Labour won, the great slash in their majority was the voters' protest over Iraq. The implicit message was that "We the British people want Labour despite Iraq". So the Iraq war cost Labour quite some brownie points, without which their victory could be greater. The reason was obvious. The Brits generally exhibited greater intelligence than the Americans. They have seen through the veil of lies and damned lies put up by Bush and Blair about the whole bullshit about Saddam's regime's production of WMD and its affilitation to the Al Qaeda. And they gave Blair a kick in the butt for it and for his kowtowing to his master across the Atlantic Ocean. The dumb Americans have however given Bush a greater victory than his first election and handed their country on a silver platter to the most right wing Administration they had ever seen (they might as well start saluting Heil Bush) and to a leader who seemed more interested in benefiting his rich friends in Wall Street and in the energy industry than even making a pretense to govern his country properly. I would like to see America pay the price for their stupidity a few years down the road when Bush has stepped down with glory. But that is another story and I digressed.
As mentioned earlier, Singapore's congratulatory message was curious. Either our top people were living in their own world and totally ignorant about electoral politics in Britain or they were in a state of denial. Our country has lauded Bush's war on Iraq and even supported their efforts. We might have bought in to their lies and so we were now trying to save face by asserting that Labour won the election because of Iraq so that our support of the war appeared right. But more likely, it was not so much that we bought the Bush's Administration's lies than that we were willing to kowtow to the States in order to get the USFTA. (And Bush did reward us handsomely for our undying support.) No matter why we REALLY support US's war on Iraq (oh please, we did not support it because we believe it was the right thing, our diplomacy has always been based on supporting powerful nations as long as it could bolster our interests), the congratulatory message was a statement of denial. I can only hope that we don't look as stupid as the Americans.


1 Comments:
What an aptly named entry!
Singapore's congratulatory message was a diplomatic gesture. As the word implies, DIPLOMACY always has a tinge of political nuances and correctness. In this instance, the content of that message is designed for two purposes:
1) To augment ties with a fellow ally of the US; and
2) To reaffirm to the world and her citizens that Singapore Government's sagely decision to support the war is correct. You (Singaporeans) should follow the British electorate's example and return us to power. This piece of rhetoric aims to silence critics and chest-beat their loyalty to the Bush Administration.
If I am correct in postulating these undeclared aims of the Singapore government, then if will be a case of 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' (Latin for post-hoc reasoning).
Timur
Post a Comment
<< Home