In Parliament: SM Shanmugam & WP MP Fadli Fawzi spar for 18 minutes on foreign & national interests

On November 4th, a prolonged parliamentary debate erupted in Singapore between Workers' Party MP Fadli Fawzi and Senior Minister K. Shanmugam. The discord centered on a meeting held earlier this year between Singapore officials and their Israeli counterparts, sparked by allegations that the Israeli delegation had requested confidentiality.

Fadli inquired whether the Israeli settlements in the West Bank were discussed during the meeting, and if the reports suggesting a request for secrecy were inaccurate, why the government hadn't publicly addressed the claims under the POFMA. Shanmugam responded, stating that the discussion centered on security matters, and that talks between the two nations remained confidential.

Fadli took issue with Shanmugam's assertion, asserting that Israel's settlements in the West Bank are a violation of international law and a threat to global security. He argued that Singapore should maintain a whole-of-government stance, upholding international law and the rules-based international order when engaging with foreign counterparts.

Shanmugam countered that foreign policy decisions were the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Cabinet, not individual ministries. He pointed to UN General Assembly Judge Rena Lee as an example, arguing that raising every international dispute during bilateral meetings would undermine Singapore's diplomatic objectives.

The debate grew contentious when Shanmugam claimed that Fadli was sending conflicting messages to different audiences, specifically targeting the Malay-Muslim community. Fadli denied these allegations, emphasizing that his concerns were about maintaining Singapore's commitment to international law and objectivity. Professor Tommy Koh, a Singaporean diplomat and lawyer, further clarified the situation, emphasizing that while international law principles are objective, a country's stance on specific issues often depends on its national interests.

In Singapore's case, Koh argued, the nation's strong national interest in supporting international law and the UN Charter led to consistent condemnation of Israel's settlements.