The Chinese have always had a good impression of Singapore and held the republic in high regard - ever since the late paramount leader Deng Xiaoping proposed the idea of learning from Singapore's experience during his whirlwind tour of south China in 1992.
Chinese officials have been coming to Singapore on learning trips in droves. Ordinary Chinese are also fascinated by Singapore as a tourist spot.
There have been numerous publications that make observations or heap praises on Singapore penned by some of the visitors. Some Chinese cities have even looked to Singapore as a model and embarked on a process of “cloning”。 In the eyes of many Chinese, Singapore is a near-perfect Garden City.
But with deeper insights into Singapore and more frequent exchange programmes between officials of the two sides, something has changed - Singapore has begun to lose its attraction to bigger Chinese cities.
The Economic Observer, a newspaper in China, recently published an article comparing developments of the north-eastern coastal city of Dalian and the eastern coastal city of Qingdao.
Dalian is one of the early special zones that were opened to foreign investment.
It is a city that combines Hong Kong's economic model, European-style architecture and Singapore's expertise in city planning programmes. Qingdao began copying Dalian's growth strategies as early as seven years ago. Its economy has now taken off and its total economic output has surpassed Dalian.
Interestingly, while tapping Dalian's experience, Qingdao has begun to raise doubts about Dalian's “model” - Singapore. A Qingdao official, for instance, has said that the Confucian values Dalian has been learning from Singapore have become irrelevant in the information age. Besides, the authoritative style of government in both Dalian and Singapore which bears the imprint of a strong leader, is also deemed unsuitable. According to the official, Singapore's set of uniform values is not compatible with Qingdao's business culture.
At different stages of competition between Dalian and Qingdao, there have been subtle changes in the role and image of Singapore as a growth model. To many Chinese cities, the Singapore model has become increasingly less attractive.
The mild criticisms of Singapore by Guangzhou mayor Lin Shusen some months ago are still fresh in my mind. In an interview with China Central Television, he made an unusual comment on Singapore's policy on city planning. “Singapore is basically a man-made city with a man-made environment,” he said. He also added that Guangzhou would not model its city management on Singapore because “man-made cities are bound to degenerate after some years”。
Dissenting views on Singapore's political system have also been expressed. “Du Shu”, a Beijing magazine which has considerable influence over the intellectuals, has carried a critical three-part commentary on Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore's political model.
The sudden change in attitude by some Chinese cities - from “an overwhelming interest to learn” to “open criticisms” - has taken many by surprise. Some Singaporeans even find it hard to accept. Yet, looking at the transformation of China since the policy of reform and opening, the change seems inevitable.
During these years when Singapore is hailed as a model, the changes that have taken place in China are nothing but phenomenal. While learning from Singapore's success story, China has also cast its net wider to include the United States, Japan, European nations as countries which offer valuable experience to shorten the learning curve. For China, to draw as many useful lessons from as many countries as possible is, of course, far better than to rely on the Singapore model alone. As China benefits from more international experience and exposure, it will naturally see beyond the Singapore experience.
Ironically, what China sees as lacking in Singapore's example of perfectionism is a consequence of its own rapid development. This is not to suggest that Singapore has stagnated, but China is simply growing so fast that it has changed its view of the outside world. About six months ago, I wrote to suggest that Singapore should give some thought to developing a subject on “China studies”。 What I've just discussed is an example that can come under it.
This reconsideration of Singapore as a model for growth is for the time being confined to major and medium-sized Chinese cities. But when Shanghai outshines well-established cities like Hong Kong, Taipei and even Singapore, and when the Singapore “brand name” loses its lure to the more developed areas in China, Singaporeans will have to start thinking： apart from the easy availability of funds, what measures are needed to maintain Singapore's unique charm and advantage？
（The writer is a Senior Sub-editor of Lianhe Zaobao.Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
中國(guó)重新思考新加坡模式● 周兆呈
自從中國(guó)元老鄧小平1992年南巡時(shí)提出向新加坡學(xué)習(xí)以來(lái),新加坡一直在中國(guó)人心目中享有很高的地位和極佳的國(guó)家形象。
大連港。
政府官員不斷前來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)訪問(wèn),民間訪客流連忘返。中國(guó)訪客回國(guó)后,所出版的對(duì)這座花園城市的考察著作或贊美之辭,更是多不勝數(shù)。不少城市更以新加坡為發(fā)展楷模,進(jìn)行“克隆”。在不少中國(guó)人的眼中,新加坡已成為幾近完美的國(guó)家。
隨著中國(guó)對(duì)新加坡了解的日益加深,人員交流的日益頻密,一個(gè)值得人們關(guān)注的現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)了。在中國(guó)一些大中城市眼中,新加坡的光環(huán)似乎正出現(xiàn)褪色的趨向。
中國(guó)《經(jīng)濟(jì)觀察報(bào)》最近刊登一篇文章,比較大連和青島這兩座城市的發(fā)展。大連是中國(guó)早期開(kāi)放的特區(qū)之一,其功能定位學(xué)香港、建筑風(fēng)格學(xué)歐洲、城市管理學(xué)新加坡。早在7年前,青島就向大連學(xué)習(xí),克隆其發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略。近年來(lái)迅速崛起,經(jīng)濟(jì)總量已超越大連。
頗具玩味意義的是,青島在向大連再學(xué)習(xí)的過(guò)程中,開(kāi)始質(zhì)疑大連的“老師”新加坡。該市一位政府官員就認(rèn)為,大連學(xué)習(xí)的新加坡儒家價(jià)值觀在信息時(shí)代已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)。由新加坡而大連,其所帶有的深刻個(gè)人印痕的權(quán)威主義——如新加坡的整齊劃一的價(jià)值觀,并不適用于青島的商業(yè)文明。
在這兩個(gè)城市競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的不同階段,新加坡的角色和形象已前后迥異。新加坡在中國(guó)大中城市發(fā)展中航標(biāo)的地位,已悄悄地處在改變的軌道之中。
廣州市長(zhǎng)林樹(shù)森幾個(gè)月前對(duì)新加坡的微詞言猶在耳。他在中央電視臺(tái)的訪談節(jié)目中,罕見(jiàn)地對(duì)新加坡的城市規(guī)劃作出尖銳批評(píng),認(rèn)為“新加坡太過(guò)新加坡了,基本上都是人工環(huán)境”。廣州不會(huì)以新加坡作為城市戰(zhàn)略規(guī)劃的仿效模式,因?yàn)椤叭斯ご蛟斐鰜?lái)的城市幾年后勢(shì)必老化”。
對(duì)于新加坡的政治模式,中國(guó)也開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)另一種聲音。在知識(shí)界影響甚大的北京《讀書(shū)》雜志,今年以來(lái)用連續(xù)三期的篇幅,刊載《成者王侯》的評(píng)論文章,對(duì)李光耀和新加坡的政治制度提出批評(píng)。
由“蜂涌而至的學(xué)習(xí)訪問(wèn)”到“不留情面的批評(píng)”,中國(guó)一些城市的突然轉(zhuǎn)彎,讓人頗覺(jué)意外,更讓一些新加坡人難以接受。但縱觀中國(guó)開(kāi)放的格局演變,這一轉(zhuǎn)變似乎又具必然因素。
新加坡被視為中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)對(duì)象以來(lái)的這些年,中國(guó)發(fā)生的一切可以用“巨變”來(lái)形容。在學(xué)習(xí)新加坡的同時(shí),中國(guó)也瞄上了美國(guó)、日本、歐洲等學(xué)習(xí)對(duì)象。對(duì)中國(guó)而言,“拿來(lái)主義”是博采眾長(zhǎng),不會(huì)完全照搬新加坡的模式,見(jiàn)多識(shí)廣之后,自然是水漲船高。
新加坡完美主義形象的“缺角”,正成為中國(guó)開(kāi)放發(fā)展的見(jiàn)證。這并非因?yàn)樾录悠峦磺?而是中國(guó)發(fā)展太快,改變了對(duì)外部世界的看法。筆者曾在半年前提出新加坡應(yīng)重視發(fā)展“中國(guó)學(xué)”,此亦應(yīng)屬其中范疇。
雖然重新勾勒新加坡的形象還只是集中在中國(guó)一些大中城市,但當(dāng)上海的鋒芒開(kāi)始超越香港、臺(tái)北甚至新加坡等亞太城市時(shí),當(dāng)新加坡“商標(biāo)”對(duì)中國(guó)一些先進(jìn)地區(qū)的吸引力逐漸下降時(shí),人們就需要深思,除了資金之外,怎么樣來(lái)繼續(xù)保持島國(guó)的獨(dú)特魅力和優(yōu)勢(shì)？
Chinese officials have been coming to Singapore on learning trips in droves. Ordinary Chinese are also fascinated by Singapore as a tourist spot.
There have been numerous publications that make observations or heap praises on Singapore penned by some of the visitors. Some Chinese cities have even looked to Singapore as a model and embarked on a process of “cloning”。 In the eyes of many Chinese, Singapore is a near-perfect Garden City.
But with deeper insights into Singapore and more frequent exchange programmes between officials of the two sides, something has changed - Singapore has begun to lose its attraction to bigger Chinese cities.
The Economic Observer, a newspaper in China, recently published an article comparing developments of the north-eastern coastal city of Dalian and the eastern coastal city of Qingdao.
Dalian is one of the early special zones that were opened to foreign investment.
It is a city that combines Hong Kong's economic model, European-style architecture and Singapore's expertise in city planning programmes. Qingdao began copying Dalian's growth strategies as early as seven years ago. Its economy has now taken off and its total economic output has surpassed Dalian.
Interestingly, while tapping Dalian's experience, Qingdao has begun to raise doubts about Dalian's “model” - Singapore. A Qingdao official, for instance, has said that the Confucian values Dalian has been learning from Singapore have become irrelevant in the information age. Besides, the authoritative style of government in both Dalian and Singapore which bears the imprint of a strong leader, is also deemed unsuitable. According to the official, Singapore's set of uniform values is not compatible with Qingdao's business culture.
At different stages of competition between Dalian and Qingdao, there have been subtle changes in the role and image of Singapore as a growth model. To many Chinese cities, the Singapore model has become increasingly less attractive.
The mild criticisms of Singapore by Guangzhou mayor Lin Shusen some months ago are still fresh in my mind. In an interview with China Central Television, he made an unusual comment on Singapore's policy on city planning. “Singapore is basically a man-made city with a man-made environment,” he said. He also added that Guangzhou would not model its city management on Singapore because “man-made cities are bound to degenerate after some years”。
Dissenting views on Singapore's political system have also been expressed. “Du Shu”, a Beijing magazine which has considerable influence over the intellectuals, has carried a critical three-part commentary on Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore's political model.
The sudden change in attitude by some Chinese cities - from “an overwhelming interest to learn” to “open criticisms” - has taken many by surprise. Some Singaporeans even find it hard to accept. Yet, looking at the transformation of China since the policy of reform and opening, the change seems inevitable.
During these years when Singapore is hailed as a model, the changes that have taken place in China are nothing but phenomenal. While learning from Singapore's success story, China has also cast its net wider to include the United States, Japan, European nations as countries which offer valuable experience to shorten the learning curve. For China, to draw as many useful lessons from as many countries as possible is, of course, far better than to rely on the Singapore model alone. As China benefits from more international experience and exposure, it will naturally see beyond the Singapore experience.
Ironically, what China sees as lacking in Singapore's example of perfectionism is a consequence of its own rapid development. This is not to suggest that Singapore has stagnated, but China is simply growing so fast that it has changed its view of the outside world. About six months ago, I wrote to suggest that Singapore should give some thought to developing a subject on “China studies”。 What I've just discussed is an example that can come under it.
This reconsideration of Singapore as a model for growth is for the time being confined to major and medium-sized Chinese cities. But when Shanghai outshines well-established cities like Hong Kong, Taipei and even Singapore, and when the Singapore “brand name” loses its lure to the more developed areas in China, Singaporeans will have to start thinking： apart from the easy availability of funds, what measures are needed to maintain Singapore's unique charm and advantage？
（The writer is a Senior Sub-editor of Lianhe Zaobao.Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
中國(guó)重新思考新加坡模式● 周兆呈
自從中國(guó)元老鄧小平1992年南巡時(shí)提出向新加坡學(xué)習(xí)以來(lái),新加坡一直在中國(guó)人心目中享有很高的地位和極佳的國(guó)家形象。
大連港。
政府官員不斷前來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)訪問(wèn),民間訪客流連忘返。中國(guó)訪客回國(guó)后,所出版的對(duì)這座花園城市的考察著作或贊美之辭,更是多不勝數(shù)。不少城市更以新加坡為發(fā)展楷模,進(jìn)行“克隆”。在不少中國(guó)人的眼中,新加坡已成為幾近完美的國(guó)家。
隨著中國(guó)對(duì)新加坡了解的日益加深,人員交流的日益頻密,一個(gè)值得人們關(guān)注的現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)了。在中國(guó)一些大中城市眼中,新加坡的光環(huán)似乎正出現(xiàn)褪色的趨向。
中國(guó)《經(jīng)濟(jì)觀察報(bào)》最近刊登一篇文章,比較大連和青島這兩座城市的發(fā)展。大連是中國(guó)早期開(kāi)放的特區(qū)之一,其功能定位學(xué)香港、建筑風(fēng)格學(xué)歐洲、城市管理學(xué)新加坡。早在7年前,青島就向大連學(xué)習(xí),克隆其發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略。近年來(lái)迅速崛起,經(jīng)濟(jì)總量已超越大連。
頗具玩味意義的是,青島在向大連再學(xué)習(xí)的過(guò)程中,開(kāi)始質(zhì)疑大連的“老師”新加坡。該市一位政府官員就認(rèn)為,大連學(xué)習(xí)的新加坡儒家價(jià)值觀在信息時(shí)代已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)。由新加坡而大連,其所帶有的深刻個(gè)人印痕的權(quán)威主義——如新加坡的整齊劃一的價(jià)值觀,并不適用于青島的商業(yè)文明。
在這兩個(gè)城市競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的不同階段,新加坡的角色和形象已前后迥異。新加坡在中國(guó)大中城市發(fā)展中航標(biāo)的地位,已悄悄地處在改變的軌道之中。
廣州市長(zhǎng)林樹(shù)森幾個(gè)月前對(duì)新加坡的微詞言猶在耳。他在中央電視臺(tái)的訪談節(jié)目中,罕見(jiàn)地對(duì)新加坡的城市規(guī)劃作出尖銳批評(píng),認(rèn)為“新加坡太過(guò)新加坡了,基本上都是人工環(huán)境”。廣州不會(huì)以新加坡作為城市戰(zhàn)略規(guī)劃的仿效模式,因?yàn)椤叭斯ご蛟斐鰜?lái)的城市幾年后勢(shì)必老化”。
對(duì)于新加坡的政治模式,中國(guó)也開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)另一種聲音。在知識(shí)界影響甚大的北京《讀書(shū)》雜志,今年以來(lái)用連續(xù)三期的篇幅,刊載《成者王侯》的評(píng)論文章,對(duì)李光耀和新加坡的政治制度提出批評(píng)。
由“蜂涌而至的學(xué)習(xí)訪問(wèn)”到“不留情面的批評(píng)”,中國(guó)一些城市的突然轉(zhuǎn)彎,讓人頗覺(jué)意外,更讓一些新加坡人難以接受。但縱觀中國(guó)開(kāi)放的格局演變,這一轉(zhuǎn)變似乎又具必然因素。
新加坡被視為中國(guó)學(xué)習(xí)對(duì)象以來(lái)的這些年,中國(guó)發(fā)生的一切可以用“巨變”來(lái)形容。在學(xué)習(xí)新加坡的同時(shí),中國(guó)也瞄上了美國(guó)、日本、歐洲等學(xué)習(xí)對(duì)象。對(duì)中國(guó)而言,“拿來(lái)主義”是博采眾長(zhǎng),不會(huì)完全照搬新加坡的模式,見(jiàn)多識(shí)廣之后,自然是水漲船高。
新加坡完美主義形象的“缺角”,正成為中國(guó)開(kāi)放發(fā)展的見(jiàn)證。這并非因?yàn)樾录悠峦磺?而是中國(guó)發(fā)展太快,改變了對(duì)外部世界的看法。筆者曾在半年前提出新加坡應(yīng)重視發(fā)展“中國(guó)學(xué)”,此亦應(yīng)屬其中范疇。
雖然重新勾勒新加坡的形象還只是集中在中國(guó)一些大中城市,但當(dāng)上海的鋒芒開(kāi)始超越香港、臺(tái)北甚至新加坡等亞太城市時(shí),當(dāng)新加坡“商標(biāo)”對(duì)中國(guó)一些先進(jìn)地區(qū)的吸引力逐漸下降時(shí),人們就需要深思,除了資金之外,怎么樣來(lái)繼續(xù)保持島國(guó)的獨(dú)特魅力和優(yōu)勢(shì)？