PM Lee Hsien Loong's Q&A session at the 27th International Conference on the Future of Asia

Shigesaburo Okumura, Editor-in-chief of The Nikkei Asia (Moderator): As you mentioned during your presentation, this year is a future based year and the theme is redefining Asia’s role in divided world. That is a major theme for us. On the outset, I would like to ask you how Asia should face the powers – United States and China. I would like to ask your views on how Asia should get along with those two major powers. 

As you mentioned in today's presentation, on Monday this week in the morning paper of Nikkei, your interview was carried and in that interview and also during your presentation, you mentioned was that you are going to join the IPEF. This was initiated by the United States President Biden. However, China’s application of membership to join the TPP, which the US withdrew from, is welcomed by you. “Far better” was the word that you used, that China should be integrated. 

You joined the IPEF and you agreed to China’s joining of the TPP. For those who are critical about China, they say that perhaps that attitude is a bit lukewarm and should put more distance against China. There is also the view that they envy your independent posture in terms of diplomacy and the economy without siding with one or the other. You mentioned in your presentation that you prefer not to be forced to choose between the United States and China, (the choice) should not be imposed. I think that is the right opinion. 

However, realistically, the United States (uses) the words either democracy or autocracies that is a bifurcation, a choice between the two. How is Singapore going to build relations with those two major powers in terms of economy, diplomacy and security? I would like to have your view on that.

PM Lee Hsien Loong: It is a very difficult balance, but it is something which we have tried to do for a long time, and I think many countries in Asia are also trying to do. You talk about Singapore supporting China joining the TPP, but at the same time we have joined the IPEF. Japan has joined the IPEF but Japan has also joined the RCEP – Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership – in which China is a member. We think that is the better approach, that it is possible for countries to have relations with America, to have relations with China, and to work with both. 

You may be closer to one than to the other. In the case of Japan, you have the US-Japan security partnership, your defence treaty with the US. We do not have a treaty with the US but we are a major security cooperation partner with the US. At the same time, we have a lot of cooperation with China. I think both sides understand that when we speak up, we speak up for Singapore, we are not speaking on behalf of the US or on behalf of China, but for Singapore. If from time to time we disagree with one party or the other, it is because Singapore's interests and principles are at stake. I think that is a sustainable basis on which to work.
You mentioned the US talking about democracies against autocracies as a frame for how they see the battle in Ukraine. We do not see it like that. We do not think that is helpful because if you take that view, then you are already defining China to be on the other side together with Russia, opposed to the United States. If you want to solve the Ukraine problem, and you do not want to worsen difficulties in the Asia Pacific region, then I do not think it is helpful right from the start to toss the US-China relationship into the mix, by saying this is democracies versus autocracies. 

We see it, in Ukraine, as an issue of international rules, international law, the UN Charter, independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity of nations, which should be inviolate, and which have been violated by Russia and therefore we have stood up to oppose it strongly. We have voted for the motion in the General Assembly in the UN, and we have also imposed certain sanctions targeted on Russia and its financial institutions in order to hinder them from pursuing the war in Ukraine. I think that is a principled position which many countries will be able to accept to varying degrees. I think it is a wiser way to deal with conflicts which are going to arise from time to time.

Okumura: Next question is about democracy. China, Russia, North Korea – this is one group. The division between two groups of nations is whether it is a democracy or autocracy. Now, you are celebrating the 57th anniversary of your founding in 1965. You achieved a great deal of economic development, your GDP capital is much higher than ours, good security, your streets are so clean, and you have high education background. All the Japanese want to work in Singapore. Personally, I really respect the leaders since 1965. 

However, when it comes to politics, the one feature of Singapore’s politics is that the People's Action Party has always been so strong, and also the Prime Minister has a long duration of leadership. Do you think that you should maintain this type of mechanism in the future? President of the United States Biden held the Summit for Democracy but Singapore was not invited to the Summit for Democracy. Do you have any comments about the development of democracy in Singapore? 

PM Lee: We do what works for Singapore. You admire our law and order, our growth, our efficient government, I thank you for your kind remarks. But I invite you to consider that perhaps it has something to do with the way our politics work. That the population of Singapore is united and cohesive, understands where its interests lie, and vote for MPs, parties and leaders who will look after the interests of the country and look after their well-being and their future. Because we have been able to deliver on this, therefore in successive elections, the PAP has been able to win a strong mandate from the population. Therefore, we have the opportunity to serve the people and to do better together with them. We hope that this will continue for as long as possible.

How it works out is impossible to say. Every generation, the environment is different, the values and the influences on the children growing up are different. They come up with different expectations, different aspirations, and it will express itself in the politics of the country. So, nobody can say how things will develop in two, three, four elections’ time. But for as long as we can, it is the responsibility of me and my team to govern Singapore well, to maintain the support of the population and to keep Singapore united and cohesive, so that in a dangerous world, we make sure that we are safe, and we can look after ourselves and have a future for our people. 

Okumura: This is related to your long-term administration. As your successor, you designated Finance Minister Lawrence Wong. What was the decisive factor to choose him? In your case, 18 years have passed since you took office in August 2004. When you look back, what is your achievement, accomplishment and what do you have to ask the successor to continue to work on?

PM Lee: First of all, I did not choose my successor. He was chosen by his peers, by the younger Ministers and Cabinet. We had a process. They were individually polled for their views and overwhelmingly they supported Lawrence Wong to be their next leader, and I support that choice. I am sure they have good reasons and I have every confidence that Mr Lawrence Wong will do a good job. 

It is not for me to give myself a report card. I have tried my best to make Singapore work and work well, and to improve the lives of the population, and to keep them safe and secure. At a very general level, that remains a task for my successors. But they will also have to respond to new aspirations, new expectations, deal with new problems in the world and continue to make Singapore grow and improve from what is already quite a high level. 

You said that our per capita GDP is higher than Japan but that is because you have many outlining rural areas of Japan which are not the same as Tokyo. If you compare Singapore with Tokyo or Osaka, I do not think our per capita GDP is higher than the per capita in Tokyo or Osaka. There is room to grow yet, but it is every step higher, the oxygen is thinner, the demand is greater, the competition is fiercer. Yet we must never give up and you must keep on growing. That is my task and my successors’ task.

Okumura: When you yield your Prime Minister’s seat to Mr Lawrence Wong, what type of retirement are you planning? Are you going to be away from the politics completely or are you going to stay as a Senior Minister and try to support the new cabinet? What is your plan?

PM Lee: I am not planning my retirement. I am planning to make myself be in a position to step down and handover as Prime Minister to my successor, after which I see it as my responsibility to do my best to help him succeed, and to help Singapore continue to succeed. Whatever he thinks I am useful to him for, I shall be happy to fulfil.

Speaker: Today’s theme: Democracies versus autocracies, you should not use that framework, in your presentation, I agree with you in that point. What is democracy, how you define democracy, that was mentioned. For instance, in a conference in Alaska between Yang Jiechi and Antony Blinken, United States and China, each has its own democracy. So what is your democracy in Singapore? To make people happy is a very important part of democracy. What do you define Chinese democracy? That is my question.

PM Lee: You should ask Mr Yang Jiechi. I am not in a position to define democracy for other countries. Each country calls themselves democratic. I think even North Korea has the word democratic somewhere in its title. It is a word which can mean any number of things, but basically if I used that word, it means I am good. In Singapore, what we are looking for, is a system where the Government has legitimacy, it has the mandate of the people and is a system which elects a Government which is capable of delivering that mandate, serving the people well, and bringing the country forward. 

If it works well and it works for us, we keep that. If there are aspects which need to be improved, we will adjust it, and amend it as we go along. Not re-inventing it from scratch because when you are talking about the political system of a country, it is like the operating system on a computer. If you suddenly change to a totally different operating system, and it does not fit your hardware, your computer will crash.

But if you have to update it, upgrade it, have a fix, have an improvement, keep it up to date, make it work better, that we constantly do. We really do not pay attention to who is inviting whom to what conference. My answer is not who attends a conference but ultimately, who is able to continue to make his country succeed.

Nancy Snow (Nikkei Asia): My name is Nancy Snow and I write for Nikkei Asia. I am also an educator. I have had the privilege of visiting Singapore. What strikes me about Singapore is its welcoming framework in terms of accepting the best and brightest from around the world. As somebody who has advocated very strongly for international education and international education exchange, could you address that in the context of security? So often when we think of security we think of bombs and bullets and devastation, but that which unites us is what we get from the power of education.

PM Lee: You raised a very important point. One of the things which can help us to bridge between countries is that we get to know one another and ideally to get to like one another, and education in a different country is a very powerful way of doing that. You learn something different; you see a different perspective on the world; you see a different way of organising a society. You pick up ideas but hopefully you do not get swept off your feet; so that you come back with a stimulus, but you do not come back totally brainwashed. You bring new ideas, bring it into your own system, and you transform your system. 

During the Meiji restoration, that is what the Genro did. The first generation who went on a world tour. They spend two to three years, they wrote voluminous reports. They came back, they transformed the Japanese system. They ran the Japanese system for a whole generation and brought Japan into the modern world. 

China also sent students to study around the world, including studying in Japan in the early 20th century and they went back with many ideas, and they talked about Mr Science and Mr Democracy, and there was a May 4 movement which was in 1919 in Beijing, which sparked off a tremendous modernisation drive. But the dynamics were different. In the end, China did not modernise the way Japan did. It took a more complicated route and started modernising when Deng Xiaoping did reform and opening up. At which point, China also sent many students around the world to study and many of whom came back with a tremendous desire to make things different in the world, to learn from the rest of the world. 

Now, I am not sure whether at a different stage, they are still pursuing it with the same zeal. They may be less keen to go. The  foreign countries may be less keen to welcome them. I think that is a loss. But unfortunately, these things happen. 

For Singapore, we have always greatly valued foreign talent, international talent from all over the world, coming to Singapore to work, to generate their ideas, to make Singapore stand out in the world. 

In the first place, we stood out because we attracted talent from all over Southeast Asia – from Malaysia, from Indonesia or the Dutch Indies in those days, from China, from India, even from further afield. They came to Singapore, they made Singapore their home, and they made Singapore what it is. 

Now that Singapore is successful, if we want to continue to be successful, you must be able to attract talent the same way Silicon Valley can attract talent, or Tokyo attracts talent from all over Japan, or Shenzhen attracts talent from all over China, or London attracts talent from all over the world. We need that in the universities, we need that in the economy. 

We need to do it right because if we say, we just opened our doors, anybody can come to Singapore, I have a problem. I only have three and a half million Singaporeans and there are several billion people in the region who may queue up to come. I cannot do that, I have to have some way to draw a line and choose who to come, but we are open to talent, and we see that as our future. I think the countries which see that kind of a future are more likely to do well in a very competitive and rapidly changing world. So, I completely agree with you and thank you for your question.

Sandhya Sriram: Good morning, this is Sandhya Sriram from Shiok Meats. I am a very proud Singapore resident. So honoured to meet you, Mr Prime Minister. I run a company that does high tech food manufacturing, so we are setting up our first manufacturing plant in Singapore. We work on meat and seafood using stem cells as a sustainable alternative food production. My question is, I think we all know that Singapore, you cannot expand manufacturing, it is extremely expensive also we do not have the space. I wanted to understand how Singapore is working with other countries to help companies like us expand our manufacturing to Asia and the global level.

PM Lee: First of all, we can grow our manufacturing. Space is a constraint, but we make the most of our space and we try to improve the usage of our space which is available in Singapore. We build taller, we make multi-storey factories. We take back land from factories which were established 40, 50 years ago which maybe are no longer a good fit for our economy, and if we can redevelop that land, that regenerates more land for the industry in Singapore. 

We also are looking for industries which are more environmentally friendly, and do not have huge footprints or huge safety areas. So that you can put more of them in, and they fit in Singapore and can take advantage of our strengths, our connectivity, our technical capabilities, our standards of governance, our finance, all the strengths which Singapore have, and have manufacturing in Singapore. 

There are companies still coming into Singapore, high tech companies which are doing that. At the same time, we are also working with our neighbours in Southeast Asia, with Malaysia, Indonesia, other countries in the region in order to have joint activities – maybe the headquarters is in Singapore, but the production, some of it is offshore. In the Riau islands in Indonesia, there are manufacturing companies, and their management and staff, some of them actually live in Singapore and they commute. Their families are in Singapore. 

You talked about stem cells to make food. We have not stem cells but we have other high-tech agriculture, for example growing Barramundi, the fish, and we grow some of it in Singapore, but we do not have enough ocean, so we are also talking about growing Barramundi in Brunei, and we are exploring it with Australia. There are opportunities. 
We are in the middle of a very exciting region. It is not quite as predictable as being in Europe, but as you can see even in Europe, not everything is predictable. There are many opportunities in Singapore, around us, in Malaysia, in Thailand, in Vietnam, in Indonesia, even Philippines, and we make the most, trying to work together with our neighbours so that we can exploit those opportunities.

That is why we think deglobalisation is not a good idea. You need to take precautions to make your supply chains more resilient. You may want to make sure that in a crisis – I need N95 masks, I can make masks, and not have to depend on a single source of foreign supply. 

I do not want to make everything at home, otherwise I think I will starve to death. It is not possible. I think by cooperating with our neighbours, and by strengthening regional security as well as mutual interdependence economically, there is a good future for all of us in Asia.

主持人: 正如你在演讲中提到的，今年是聚焦未来的一年，重点是重新诠释亚洲在这个分裂的世界中所扮演的角色。首先，我想问你，亚洲应如何面对美国和中国两个大国，如何与这两大强权相处。你也在接受《日本经济新闻》访问及刚才的演讲中，提到新加坡会加入由美国总统拜登发起的印太经济框架（IPEF）。对于中国申请加入美国退出的跨太平洋伙伴关系协定（TPP），新加坡表示欢迎，而你也认为中国应该被纳入其中，并以这会“更好”来形容。

新加坡加入了印太经济框架，并同意中国加入跨太平洋伙伴关系协定。在那些批评中国的人看来，新加坡的态度有点不愠不火，应该要跟中国拉大距离才对。另一种观点是羡慕你在外交和经济课题上的独立姿态，不偏向任何一方。你在演讲中提到，不希望被迫在美国和中国之间选边站，我认为这是明智的。

然而，现实是，美国用民主或专制这样二分法的字眼，即二选一的选择。那么新加坡要如何在经济、外交和安全议题上，和这两大强权建立关系呢？我想听听你的看法。

李显龙总理: 要取得平衡，非常困难，但这是我们长久以来不断努力的事，而且我认为很多亚洲国家也尝试这么做。你提到新加坡一方面支持中国加入跨太平洋伙伴关系协定，另一方面我们却加入了印太经济框架。日本也加入印太经济框架，及有中国参与的区域全面经济伙伴关系协定（RCEP）。我们认为这是较好的做法，各国可以和中美建立关系，也可以同时与两国合作。

你可以与其中一方更亲近。以日本为例，在国防上，你们有美日安全伙伴关系协定。我们和美国之间没有这样的协定，但我们是美国的主要安全合作伙伴。此外，我们也与中国有许多合作关系。我想中美两方都能理解，新加坡只会为自己发言，而不是代美国或中国发声。如果在某些时候，我们与其中一方意见相左，那是因为新加坡的原则和利益受到了威胁。我认为这是可持续的处事之道。

你提到美国以民主对抗专制，作为他们看待乌克兰战争的框架。我们并不如此看待。我们认为这样的观点于事无补，因为这就等于认定中国站在俄罗斯那一边，与美国抗衡。如果你要解决乌克兰问题，而且不希望看到亚太地区陷入更大的困境，那我认为，用民主对抗专制的说法，把中美关系搅在其中，从一开始就毫无益处。

在乌克兰问题上，我们认为这是一个涉及国际规则、国际法、联合国宪章、独立、主权、国家领土完整的问题，是不可侵犯的。俄罗斯已侵犯了这些权利，因此我们站出来强烈反对。我们在联合国大会上投票赞成谴责动议，我们也对俄罗斯和其金融机构做出一些制裁，以便对他们继续入侵乌克兰制造阻力。我认为，这样的原则立场，许多国家是可以在不同程度上接受的。我也认为，这是在面对时而有之的冲突上较明智的处理方式。

主持人: 下一个问题是关于民主。中国、俄罗斯、朝鲜是一组。各国以民主或专制体系分成两大组。今年，你们庆祝自1965年独立以来的建国57周年，你们取得了巨大的经济发展，国内生产总值（GDP）比日本高出许多，社会安全、街道清洁、教育水平高。日本人都想在新加坡工作，就我个人而言，真的很敬重你们自建国以来的各个国家领袖。

但是，谈到政治，新加坡政治的一个特点是人民行动党向来强势，总理的任期也很长。你认为这样的机制未来应该持续下去吗？美国总统拜登举行的民主峰会，并未邀请新加坡参加，你如何看待新加坡的民主发展呢？

李总理: 我们因地制宜，做适合新加坡的事。你欣赏我们的法治与秩序、我们的增长，还有我们有效率的政府，我谢谢你的美言。但我也要请你想想，这也许和我们的治国之道有关，也许和新加坡人团结和睦、了解国家利益所在，并投票给他们相信能照顾好他们的福祉与未来的议员、政党和领导人有关。由于我们能够实现目标，因此在历届大选中，人民行动党都能获得新加坡人的强力委托，取得机会为民服务，并和他们携手合作。我们希望这能维持下去，越久越好。

但能否如此，很难说。每一代的环境不同，价值观和孩子在成长中受到的影响也不同。他们有不同的期望、抱负，这都会反映在一个国家的政治上。所以，接下来的二、三、四届大选会如何发展，没有人能说得准，但是只要我们力所能及，我和我的团队就有责任把新加坡治理好，确保持续获得人民的支持，并维系新加坡的团结与和谐，确保我们在这个危机不断的世界中，国泰民安，照顾好自己并给人民一个好的未来。

主持人: 这题与你的长期领导团队有关。财政部长黄循财被选为你的接班人，决定性因素是什么？就你而言，你自2004年8月上任以来，已经18年。你认为你有哪些成就？你达成了哪些目标？你希望下一任总理在哪些方面继续努力？

李总理: 首先，我没有选择自己的接班人。黄循财是由他的同僚、年轻的部长们和内阁推选出来。我们有一个程序，我们让他们个别表达意见，而绝大多数人支持黄循财成为他们下一个领导人，我也支持这个选择。我相信他们有充分的理由，我也有绝对的信心黄循财会做得很好。

我不认为应该给自己打分。我已竭尽所能，让新加坡良好运作，改善人民的生活，保障人民的安全。基本上，这仍是下一任总理的职责。但是，新领导班子也必须满足人民的新期望与要求，及应对世界的新问题，让已经处在高水平的新加坡继续茁壮成长。

你说新加坡的人均国内生产总值比日本高，但那是因为日本有许多与东京不一样的农村地区。如果只是跟东京或大阪相比，我不认为新加坡的人均国内生产总值会比这两个地方高。因此，我们还有成长的空间，但向上的每一步，氧气就会更稀薄，要求会更大，竞争也更激烈。然而，我们绝不能放弃，我们必须继续成长。这是我的任务，也是我的接班人的使命。

主持人: 交棒后，你打算以何种方式退休？是完全离开政治圈，还是担任资政辅助新内阁？你有什么计划？

李总理: 我没有在计划退休。我计划的是让自己可以卸任，把总理职位交给我的接班人。之后，我认为我有责任尽力帮助他取得成功，使新加坡继续成功。此外，在他认为能用得上我的地方，我乐意配合。

参与者提问: 今天的主题是“民主国家与独裁国家”，你发言的时候说我们不应该使用这个框架，我同意这个观点。什么是民主？如何定义民主？例如，在杨洁篪与美国国务卿布林肯（Antony Blinken）于阿拉斯加举行的会议上，美国和中国都有各自的民主。那么新加坡的民主是什么？让人民满意是民主非常重要的部分。你如何定义中国式的民主？

李总理: 这个问题你应该问杨洁篪。我没有资格为其他国家定义民主。每个国家都称自己为民主。我想即使是朝鲜，全名中也有“民主”。这个词可以有多种含义，但基本上如果我使用这个词，就意味着我很好。在新加坡，我们所追求的是政府有合法的执政地位，由人民授权，有一个制度通过选举选出有能力执行人民授权的政府，能为人民提供良好服务，推动国家进步。

一个制度如果运行良好而且对我们有利，我们就保留它。如果有任何地方需要改进，我们会作出调整，并在过程中修正。我们不会从零开始建立另外一套新制度，因为当你在谈论一个国家的政治制度时，它就像电脑上的操作系统。如果突然换成一个完全不同的操作系统，而它不适合现有硬件的时候，电脑就会当机。

如果制度必须更新、升级、修复和改进，使它与时俱进、运作得更好，那我们会不断地这么做。我们专注的，不是谁邀请谁参加什么会议。我的答案不是谁参加会议，而是最终谁能够继续使他的国家取得成功。

参与者提问: 我是南希·斯诺（Nancy Snow），为《日经亚洲》撰稿，也是一名教育工作者。我曾到访新加坡，新加坡给我的印象是有一个良好的框架，广纳全球最好和最优秀的人才。作为一个大力倡导国际教育和国际交流的领导者，你能谈谈安全这个课题吗？当我们想到安全时，往往会想到炸弹、子弹和毁坏，但使我们团结起来的是教育。

李总理: 你提出了一个非常重要的观点。能够帮助我们在国家之间搭起桥梁的方式之一，是我们相互了解，最好是相互喜欢，而在不同国家受教育是一个非常有效的途径。你学到了不同的东西，你看到了不同的世界观，也看到了不同的社会组织方式。你吸收了一些想法，但希望你不至于为之倾倒而全盘接受。这样你回来时就会有新的想法，但你不会完全被洗脑。你把新想法带到自己的体制，使现有体制优化提升。

在明治维新时期，这就是元老 所做的。他们到世界各地考察，花了两到三年时间，写了大量报告。他们回国后，改变了日本的体制。他们管理了整整一代日本的制度，把日本带入了现代文明。

中国也派学生到世界各地学习，包括在20世纪初到日本学习，他们带着许多想法回去，他们谈论科学和民主，1919年在北京有一个五四运动，引发了巨大的现代化运动。但是动力是不同的。最后，中国并没有像日本那样实现现代化。它走了一条更复杂的路线，到邓小平进行改革开放时开始现代化。这时，中国也派出了许多学生到世界各地学习，有许多人回来时都有一个很大的愿望，要做出改变，要向世界其他国家学习。

现在，我不确定他们在这不同的阶段，是否还保持着同样的热忱。他们可能已不太渴望这么做。外国也可能不太欢迎他们。我认为这是一种损失。但很无奈的，这些事发生了。

而新加坡一向非常重视外来人才。我们欢迎世界各地的国际人才来新加坡工作，出谋献策，让新加坡在国际舞台上发光发亮。

首先，我们表现突出，是因为我们吸引了来自东南亚各地的人才，包括马来西亚、印度尼西亚或以往的荷属东印度群岛、中国、印度，甚至更远的地方。他们来到新加坡，在这里安居乐业，成就了今天的新加坡。

现在，新加坡取得了成功，如果我们希望继续取得成功，就必须像硅谷一样不断招揽人才，或像东京吸引日本各地的人才，或像深圳吸引中国各地的人才，或像伦敦吸引世界各地的人才。我们的大学需要这么做，我们的经济亦然。

我们需要以正确的方式进行，否则如果我们只是说，我们敞开大门，任何人都可以来新加坡，那么我们就会面对问题。新加坡只有350万人，而本区域有几十亿人可能排着队要来新加坡。因此，我不能这么做，我必须设法界定谁可以来。但我们欢迎人才，将来也会同样采取开放态度。我认为这样的国家更有可能在一个竞争激烈、瞬息万变的世界里取得成功。因此，我完全同意你的观点，也感谢你的提问。

参与者提问: 早上好，我是Shiok Meats公司的桑迪亚·思利然（Sandhya Sriram）。我对自己是新加坡居民感到非常自豪。很荣幸与你见面，总理先生。我经营一家高科技食品制造公司，我们正在新加坡设立第一家制造厂。我们利用干细胞培植肉类和海鲜，作为一种可持续的替代食品生产。我的问题是，我想我们都知道，新加坡的成本高，而且空间有限，我们无法扩大制造业。我想了解新加坡如何与其他国家合作，协助像我们这样的企业把制造业扩展到亚洲和全球水平。

李总理: 首先，我们可以发展制造业。我们的空间有限，但我们懂得充分利用空间，我们尽力提高新加坡现有空间的使用率。我们建造更高、更多楼层的工厂。我们向四五十年前建造的工厂收回土地，这些工厂可能已不合适宜，如果我们能够重新发展这些土地，就能为新加坡的工业制造更多空间。

我们也在寻求那些更环保、没有太大的碳足迹或安全隐患的工业。这么一来，我们就可以让更多的企业在新加坡发展，借助我们的连通性、科技能力、治理标准、金融等优势，在新加坡生产。

现在仍有一些高科技企业进驻新加坡。此外，我们也同东南亚的邻国如马来西亚、印尼及本区域的其他国家合作开展业务，例如在新加坡设立总部，并在岸外进行部分生产。有些制造公司设在印尼的廖内群岛，而部分管理层和员工则住在新加坡并往返两地。他们的家人也住在新加坡。

你谈到利用干细胞制造食物。我们没有干细胞，但我们有其他高科技农业，例如养殖澳大利亚肺鱼（Barramundi）。我们在新加坡建造一些养殖场，但我们没有足够的空间，因此我们与文莱和澳大利亚探讨在那里养殖这种鱼。机会是有的。

我们处于一个令人振奋的区域。它不像在欧洲那样可以预测，但正如你所看到的，即使在欧洲，也不是一切都可预料得到。我们在新加坡、马来西亚、泰国、越南、印尼，甚至菲律宾，都有很多机会。我们抓紧这些机会，与邻国合作，互惠互利。

这就是为什么我们认为去全球化（deglobalisation）不是一个好主意。你必须采取防范措施，确保供应链更具韧性。你可能要确保当危机发生时，你需要N95口罩，你可以自己生产，而不需要依赖单一的外国供应来源。

我不要自己制造所有东西，否则我想我会饿死。这是不可能的。我认为，通过与邻国合作、加强区域安全，及各国在经济上相互依赖，会为所有身处亚洲的人民带来更美好的未来。