When I asked the nation's top business leaders from John Gokongwei, Jr., Lucio Tan, Enrique Zobel to young tycoon Luis Miguel Aboitiz as to who they admire the most for enlightened leadership, they unanimously mentioned the name of 77-year-old Lee Kuan Yew, founding father of Singapore and now Senior Minister.
Zobel says, “Lee is very straightforward, superhonest and he always knew what he was talking about. Lee Kuan Yew is a great leader whom I admire the most.”
Lucio Tan explains： “Lee Kuan Yew has strong political will and selflessness as a leader.” In fact, Gokongwei goes a step further, describing Lee as “the world's greatest businessman.” He adds： “Lee Kuan Yew is the greatest businessman, because he efficiently managed the Republic of Singapore like a successful giant corporation.” Lee is an exceptional Asian leader who personifies excellent management, integrity and discipline.
Even John Chambers, boss of global giant Cisco Systems, says： “There are two equalizers in life： the Internet and education. Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew is a world leader who understands this and is using the power of the Internet to position Singapore for survival and success in the Internet economy.”
Billionaire media tycoon Rupert Murdoch of News Corp. says, “More than 40 years ago, Lee Kuan Yew transformed what was a poor, decrepit colony into a shining, rich and modern metropolis ？all the time surrounded by hostile powers. With his brilliant, incisive intellect, he is one of the world's most outspoken and respected statesmen.”
Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says： “In office, I read and analyzed his every speech. He had a way of penetrating the fog of propaganda and expressing with unique clarity the issues of our times and the way we tackle them. He was never wrong.” Success In Stamping Out Corruption
One of the remarkable successes of Lee Kuan Yew's management of Singapore is his making his nation the least corrupt in Asia, by institutionalizing “clean, no-money elections” and recruiting the best people into government. He says： “They must be paid a wage commensurate with what men of their ability and integrity are earning for managing a big corporation or successful legal or other professional practice. They have to manage a big corporation or successful legal or other professional practice. They have to manage a Singapore economy that yielded an annual growth rate of eight to nine percent in the last two decades, giving its citizens a per capita income that the World Bank rated in 1995 as ninth highest in the world.” He debunked what Western liberals claimed about a free unfettered press exposing corruption, pointing out that the freewheeling press of India, the Philippines, Thailand, South Korea and Japan have not stopped pervasive corruption.
One way Lee Kuan Yew cleaned up Singapore was by shaming corrupt officials. In fact, one of his cabinet ministers took his own life due to “l(fā)oss of face” from corruption charges. “We had established a climate of opinion which looked upon corruption in public office as a threat to society.” Lee laments that in much of Asia, corruption has become a way of life for government officials. He said： “The higher they are, the bigger their homes and more numerous their wives or mistresses, all bedecked in jewelry appropriate to the power and position of their men.” Another method Lee used to stamp out corruption ？in 1960, his government allowed the courts to treat proof that an accused was living beyond his means or had property his income could not explain as corroborating evidence that the accused had accepted or obtained a bribe,“ Lee explains. Surviving Malaysian Expulsion, Accounts Of World Leaders
On a recent visit to Singapore, I called the office of Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew who was then in America. I had requested the statesman to autograph my copy of his latest 778-page memoir entitled From Third Word to First, The Singapore Story： 1965-2000. His secretary explained that Lee's autograph is worth 10,000 Singapore dollars for each signed book, and that the proceeds would be donated to charities. Even in such a seemingly minor detail as the cost of an autographed book, Lee had a specific plan which reflected his pragmatic business-like ways, his efficiency and his public service.
The memoir is an eloquent chronicle of Lee Kuan Yew's extensive experiences in statecraft, politics and international diplomacy. In 1965, when the Muslim majority Malaysia expelled Singapore and forced it to exist as a city-state with no natural resources or army, few people gave it much chance of survival. The world has many tiny states which have languished in obscurity, with even resource-rich small stakes like Nauru mired in problems. In 1965, the Sydney Morning Herald said： “An independent Singapore was not regarded as viable three years ago. Nothing in the current situation suggests that it is more viable today.” The Sunday Times of Britain said in 1965 also predicted the eventual collapse of Singapore without British aid. Today, after decades of good governance and struggle, Singapore is a thriving nation with the world's fourth highest per capita income.
In this latest book, Lee fearlessly expresses his ideas, seeking “to be correct, not politically correct.” He is unapologetic for his aggressive responses to his political opponents, his often unorthodox views on Western-style democratic systems, the Western concepts of human rights. Lee also recounts his impressions of nations, leaders and historic events as diverse as Indonesia from Suharto to President Wahid, Thailand, the Sultan of Brunei, Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia, British leaders, Japan, America to Taiwan, Hong Kong and others. He advised Wahid： “I said if he expected his ministers to be honest, they had to be paid so that they could live up to their status without corruption.” In acerbic Lee Kuan Yew style, he describes Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, China's poetry-quoting Jiang Zemin, the late Mao Zedong （whom he likened to first Chinese emperor Qinshihuang）, the incorruptible Zhu Rongji to the bold reformer Deng Xiaoping （whom he remembers as “a five-footer but a giant among men”）。 Impressions Of Marcos, Cory And Philippine Problems
Among the most interesting parts of the book were Lee Kuan Yew's references to the Philippines and his sadness that our talented nation could suffer so many socio-political and economic troubles. An anecdote recounts the 1985 official trip to Washington, DC where State Secretary George Shultz asked Lee to convince President Ronald Reagan that his old friend Ferdinand Marcos was then the problem of the Philippines, not the solution. During the EDSA uprising the following year 1986, when the US government asked Lee's opinions, he said America should not accept a fraudulent election, and put pressure on Marcos to call new elections. In those days, Lee feared a prolonged crisis might cause bloodshed and chaos, he worried that Marcos might fight it out if he had no place to go, so he invited Marcos to take political asylum in Singapore. Instead of accepting Lee's offer, Marcos accepted Reagan's offer of asylum in Hawaii, where he later encountered many lawsuits. When Marcos sent a message to Lee wanting to flee to Singapore, it was already too late and President Aquino objected.
Lee Kuan Yew is blunt and honest in his assessments of our leaders. He says that Imelda “had a penchant for luxury and opulence. When they （Marcos and Imelda） visited Singapore…… they came in style in two DC-8s, his and hers.” On Corazon C. Aquino, Lee says： “I had hopes that this honest, god-fearing woman would help regain confidence for the Philippines and get the country back on track…… She was a sincere, devout Catholic.” He had the impression that President Aquino believed that democracy would solve the country's economic and social problems. The Aquino government created a Constitution that was once again inspired by the American model. Lee asked the rhetorical question： Is there no incompatibility between the American-type separation of powers with the culture and habits of the Filipino people that had caused so much problems for all past presidents？ Lee got the impression from our leaders that there was none.
There are three things which Lee believes have hampered Philippine progress. First, the traditional power elite who have a detached attitude towards the sufferings of the masses, similar to the mestizo hacienderos of other former Spanish colonies in Latin America. Another obstacle to progress is overpopulation due to the Catholic Church opposition to birth control, which aggravates the poverty crisis. A third obstacle to progress is what Lee describes as “a soft, forgiving culture.” His example of this is the case of the Marcoses, who had been accused of pillaging the nation for 20 years, but they are now back. Lee is even puzzled that the late General Fabian Ver was given by the Estrada government military honors at his burial.
This Singaporean statesman laments that many political and other troubles have hampered Philippine economic progress. He writes： “This was a pity because they had so many able people, educated in the Philippines and the US. Their workers were English-speaking, at least in Manila. There was no reason why the Philippines should not have been one of the more successful ASEAN countries. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was the most developed, because America had been generous in rehabilitating the country after the war…… Some Filipinos write and speak with passion. If they could get their elite to share their sentiments, what could they not have achieved？”
李光耀如何建立亞洲廉潔國家？
威爾遜。李。弗洛雷斯
當(dāng)我問國內(nèi)的商業(yè)界領(lǐng)袖,包括小約翰。戈孔韋（John Gokongwei, Jr）,陳永栽,恩里克。索韋爾（Enrique Zobel）和路易斯。米格爾。阿沃伊蒂斯（Luis Miguel Aboitiz）,誰是他們欽佩的具有啟發(fā)性的領(lǐng)袖這個問題時,他們的答案是一致的——77歲的李光耀資政,新加坡的建國之父。
索韋爾說：“李光耀非常直接和坦率,而且總是言之有物。他是一個偉大的領(lǐng)袖,也是我崇敬的領(lǐng)袖?！?BR> 盧西奧則說：“李光耀是一個無私和具有堅強(qiáng)政治決心的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人?！?BR> 戈孔韋更進(jìn)一步的形容李光耀為“世界上偉大的企業(yè)家”?！耙驗樗卫硇录悠碌男?就像在管理一個龐大的商業(yè)集團(tuán)?！?BR> 李光耀是亞洲一位優(yōu)異的領(lǐng)袖。他是卓越管理、剛正不阿和自律精神的體現(xiàn)。
思科系統(tǒng)總裁約翰。錢伯斯說：“人類生命里有兩個平衡要素：互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和教育。李光耀資政身為世界領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人,深明這個道理,并善于利用互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的力量,讓新加坡在網(wǎng)絡(luò)經(jīng)濟(jì)里重新定位,求存,成功?！?BR> 新聞集團(tuán)主席兼總裁魯珀特。默多克說：“過去四十多年,李光耀把一個貧困衰弱的殖民地發(fā)展成富裕興盛、光芒四射的現(xiàn)代大都會,期間充滿敵意的列強(qiáng)始終虎視耽耽。他才識過人,聰明敏銳,是世界上一位能直抒己見又德高望重的政治家。”
前英國首相撒切爾夫人說：“在執(zhí)政期間,我閱讀和分析李光耀的每一篇演講。他能夠看透宣傳的迷霧,也能以無比清晰的思路去分析當(dāng)代的課題,并有辦法加以解決。他從不會錯?！?BR> 李光耀出色的政績之一,是建立了一個“廉潔,不涉及金錢的選舉制度”和甄選有才干的人才加入政府,使新加坡成為亞洲廉潔的國家。他說：“他們的工資,必須跟能力和正直程度同他們相似的人管理大公司、成功的法律樓或從事其他專業(yè)所獲得的收入相當(dāng)。在他們的管理下,新加坡經(jīng)濟(jì)過去20年來每年增長了8到9%.據(jù)世界銀行評估,1995年新加坡公民的人均國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在世界上排名第九位?！?BR> 他駁斥西方自由主義人士的論點：報章完全不受約束就能暴露貪污,有助于使政府廉潔誠實。他指出,在印度、菲律賓、泰國、南韓以及日本的電視和報章可以為所欲為,卻杜絕不了猖獗和根深蒂固的貪污。
公開揭發(fā)貪污官員是李光耀保持新加坡廉潔的方法之一。一位部長因為貪污指控感到“丟臉”而自殺。他說：“我們已經(jīng)建立起輿論的氛圍：人們把擔(dān)任公職貪污受賄的人看成社會公敵?！?BR> 對于在大部分的亞洲地區(qū),政府官員貪污已經(jīng)成為一種生活方式,他感到可悲?！八麄兊牡匚辉礁?妻妾情婦便越多,房子也越大,女人們佩戴的首飾都跟男人的權(quán)力和地位相配。”
另外,李光耀的政府在1960年修訂法律條文,控方一旦證明被告生活闊氣,超過他的收入所能承受的程度,或是擁有同收入不相稱的財產(chǎn),法庭就可以以此作為被告已經(jīng)受賄的佐證。
近到新加坡時,我打電話到李光耀的辦公室。他當(dāng)時身在美國。我請求這位政治家為我的一本李光耀回憶錄下冊簽名。他的秘書向我解釋,每本由李光耀親筆簽名的回憶錄下冊,價值是一萬新元,售書的所有收入則將捐給慈善機(jī)構(gòu)。即使是在這樣的細(xì)節(jié)上,李光耀也作了具體的計劃,充分反映了他務(wù)實和有條不紊的作風(fēng)、效率和公共服務(wù)精神。
回憶錄對李光耀的治國才能、政治和國際外交的豐富經(jīng)驗有生動流暢的記載。
1965年,當(dāng)新加坡被回教徒占大多數(shù)的馬來西亞逐出,成為一個沒有天然資源和軍隊的城市國家時,沒有幾個人認(rèn)為它能生存下去。全球有許多默默無聞的小國家,就算資源豐富的西太平洋島國瑙魯,也面對重重困難。
那年,《悉尼先驅(qū)晨報》寫道：“三年前,新加坡獨立是行不通的概念。從目前的情況看來,它依然是行不通的?！?BR> 英國的《星期日泰晤士報》預(yù)測,沒有英國的援助,新加坡終將垮掉。
今天,經(jīng)過三四十年的良好管理和奮斗,新加坡已經(jīng)成為一個繁榮的國家。新加坡公民的人均國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在世界上排名第四位。
在回憶錄的下冊,李光耀無畏的表達(dá)了他的想法,嘗試“做到凡事正確,但卻不是政治上正確”。他對自己對政敵的強(qiáng)烈回應(yīng),對西方民主制度和人權(quán)觀念的獨特見解,從來不感到抱歉。
李光耀也在書中談到他對一些國家、領(lǐng)袖和歷史事件的看法,包括蘇哈多、印尼總統(tǒng)瓦希德、泰國、文萊蘇丹、越南、緬甸、柬埔寨、英國領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人、日本、美國、臺灣和香港等等。
他向瓦希德提出忠告：“我說,他要部長們當(dāng)清官,就得確保他們獲得足夠的報酬,不必貪污也能過得合乎身分地位。”
以他獨特的方式,他描述了撒切爾夫人、里根、喜歡引用詩句的中國國家主席江澤民、已故中共領(lǐng)袖毛澤東（李光耀將他比作中國第一位皇帝秦始皇）、正直廉潔的朱（金容）基和中國改革開放的總設(shè)計師鄧小平（在李光耀的記憶中,盡管鄧只有五英尺高,卻是人中之杰）。
李光耀也在書中提及菲律賓。對于菲律賓擁有許多人才,卻頻頻面對社會、政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)問題,他感到惋惜。
李光耀敘述他在1985年到華盛頓作正式訪問時,當(dāng)時的美國國務(wù)卿舒爾茨要求他說服里根總統(tǒng),告訴后者他的老朋友馬可斯是菲律賓問題的癥結(jié)所在,不是解決問題的答案。1986年,*發(fā)生后,美國政府征求李光耀的意見。李光耀認(rèn)為美國不應(yīng)該接受一個出現(xiàn)舞弊的選舉,應(yīng)該向馬可斯施加壓力,要他重新舉行選舉。李光耀擔(dān)心延長危機(jī)會帶來流血和混亂的局面,馬可斯如果走投無路也可能斗爭到底。因此,他邀請馬可斯到新加坡尋求政治庇護(hù)。然而,馬可斯卻接受里根的邀請,飛往夏威夷。在那里,他面對了多起訴訟。馬可斯后來給李光耀送來便條,要求逃到新加坡。但是,一切已經(jīng)太遲了,科拉?？偨y(tǒng)也反對。
李光耀率直和公正的評估了菲律賓的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人。他說馬可斯夫人伊美黛“崇尚豪華闊綽的生活。當(dāng)他們（馬可斯和伊美黛）到訪新加坡時,兩人個乘一架DC-8型專機(jī)抵步,派頭十足。”
至于科拉桑,他說：“我對這名誠實、虔誠的婦女寄予厚望,相信她能幫助菲律賓重拾信心,步上正軌……她是個虔誠的天主教徒?！?BR> 李光耀的印象是科拉桑相信有了民主,一切的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會問題都能迎刃而解?？评Ｕ瓿闪艘粋€以美國為榜樣的憲法。李光耀提出一個問題：難道美式分權(quán)概念和菲律賓人民的文化習(xí)俗之間就真的沒有相互矛盾之處,并曾給馬可斯之前的歷屆總統(tǒng)制造過麻煩嗎？李光耀得到的印象是顯然沒有。
李光耀相信有三個原因阻礙了菲律賓的發(fā)展。
一、傳統(tǒng)的精英階層對普通人的苦難無動于衷,就像拉丁美洲大莊園的西班牙混血兒對待他們的奴隸一樣,高高在上。
二、人口過多。這是因為天主教會不鼓勵節(jié)育,結(jié)果貧窮加劇。
三、李光耀形容它為一種“寬恕待人的溫和文化”。他舉馬可斯家族為例子。馬可斯被指斂財窮國超過20年,他的遺孀和孩子卻能獲準(zhǔn)回國參政。埃斯特拉達(dá)政府為阿奎諾遭暗殺時負(fù)責(zé)保安事務(wù)的武裝部隊總司令費維安。弗爾舉行軍隊葬禮,也令李光耀感到費解。
許多政治和其他問題防礙了菲律賓的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展,李光耀感到非常惋惜。他寫道：“菲律賓擁有許多在國內(nèi)和美國受教育的人才,它們的員工都能說英語,至少在馬尼拉是如此。菲律賓沒有理由無法成為亞細(xì)安比較成功的國家之一。在五六十年代,因為美國慷慨資助菲律賓戰(zhàn)后的重建工作,菲律賓曾是本區(qū)域發(fā)達(dá)的國家……有一些菲律賓人的言論筆鋒充滿澎湃的感情。如果他們能在思想感情上引起國內(nèi)精英的共鳴并付諸行動,還有什么事情難得倒他們？”
Zobel says, “Lee is very straightforward, superhonest and he always knew what he was talking about. Lee Kuan Yew is a great leader whom I admire the most.”
Lucio Tan explains： “Lee Kuan Yew has strong political will and selflessness as a leader.” In fact, Gokongwei goes a step further, describing Lee as “the world's greatest businessman.” He adds： “Lee Kuan Yew is the greatest businessman, because he efficiently managed the Republic of Singapore like a successful giant corporation.” Lee is an exceptional Asian leader who personifies excellent management, integrity and discipline.
Even John Chambers, boss of global giant Cisco Systems, says： “There are two equalizers in life： the Internet and education. Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew is a world leader who understands this and is using the power of the Internet to position Singapore for survival and success in the Internet economy.”
Billionaire media tycoon Rupert Murdoch of News Corp. says, “More than 40 years ago, Lee Kuan Yew transformed what was a poor, decrepit colony into a shining, rich and modern metropolis ？all the time surrounded by hostile powers. With his brilliant, incisive intellect, he is one of the world's most outspoken and respected statesmen.”
Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says： “In office, I read and analyzed his every speech. He had a way of penetrating the fog of propaganda and expressing with unique clarity the issues of our times and the way we tackle them. He was never wrong.” Success In Stamping Out Corruption
One of the remarkable successes of Lee Kuan Yew's management of Singapore is his making his nation the least corrupt in Asia, by institutionalizing “clean, no-money elections” and recruiting the best people into government. He says： “They must be paid a wage commensurate with what men of their ability and integrity are earning for managing a big corporation or successful legal or other professional practice. They have to manage a big corporation or successful legal or other professional practice. They have to manage a Singapore economy that yielded an annual growth rate of eight to nine percent in the last two decades, giving its citizens a per capita income that the World Bank rated in 1995 as ninth highest in the world.” He debunked what Western liberals claimed about a free unfettered press exposing corruption, pointing out that the freewheeling press of India, the Philippines, Thailand, South Korea and Japan have not stopped pervasive corruption.
One way Lee Kuan Yew cleaned up Singapore was by shaming corrupt officials. In fact, one of his cabinet ministers took his own life due to “l(fā)oss of face” from corruption charges. “We had established a climate of opinion which looked upon corruption in public office as a threat to society.” Lee laments that in much of Asia, corruption has become a way of life for government officials. He said： “The higher they are, the bigger their homes and more numerous their wives or mistresses, all bedecked in jewelry appropriate to the power and position of their men.” Another method Lee used to stamp out corruption ？in 1960, his government allowed the courts to treat proof that an accused was living beyond his means or had property his income could not explain as corroborating evidence that the accused had accepted or obtained a bribe,“ Lee explains. Surviving Malaysian Expulsion, Accounts Of World Leaders
On a recent visit to Singapore, I called the office of Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew who was then in America. I had requested the statesman to autograph my copy of his latest 778-page memoir entitled From Third Word to First, The Singapore Story： 1965-2000. His secretary explained that Lee's autograph is worth 10,000 Singapore dollars for each signed book, and that the proceeds would be donated to charities. Even in such a seemingly minor detail as the cost of an autographed book, Lee had a specific plan which reflected his pragmatic business-like ways, his efficiency and his public service.
The memoir is an eloquent chronicle of Lee Kuan Yew's extensive experiences in statecraft, politics and international diplomacy. In 1965, when the Muslim majority Malaysia expelled Singapore and forced it to exist as a city-state with no natural resources or army, few people gave it much chance of survival. The world has many tiny states which have languished in obscurity, with even resource-rich small stakes like Nauru mired in problems. In 1965, the Sydney Morning Herald said： “An independent Singapore was not regarded as viable three years ago. Nothing in the current situation suggests that it is more viable today.” The Sunday Times of Britain said in 1965 also predicted the eventual collapse of Singapore without British aid. Today, after decades of good governance and struggle, Singapore is a thriving nation with the world's fourth highest per capita income.
In this latest book, Lee fearlessly expresses his ideas, seeking “to be correct, not politically correct.” He is unapologetic for his aggressive responses to his political opponents, his often unorthodox views on Western-style democratic systems, the Western concepts of human rights. Lee also recounts his impressions of nations, leaders and historic events as diverse as Indonesia from Suharto to President Wahid, Thailand, the Sultan of Brunei, Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia, British leaders, Japan, America to Taiwan, Hong Kong and others. He advised Wahid： “I said if he expected his ministers to be honest, they had to be paid so that they could live up to their status without corruption.” In acerbic Lee Kuan Yew style, he describes Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, China's poetry-quoting Jiang Zemin, the late Mao Zedong （whom he likened to first Chinese emperor Qinshihuang）, the incorruptible Zhu Rongji to the bold reformer Deng Xiaoping （whom he remembers as “a five-footer but a giant among men”）。 Impressions Of Marcos, Cory And Philippine Problems
Among the most interesting parts of the book were Lee Kuan Yew's references to the Philippines and his sadness that our talented nation could suffer so many socio-political and economic troubles. An anecdote recounts the 1985 official trip to Washington, DC where State Secretary George Shultz asked Lee to convince President Ronald Reagan that his old friend Ferdinand Marcos was then the problem of the Philippines, not the solution. During the EDSA uprising the following year 1986, when the US government asked Lee's opinions, he said America should not accept a fraudulent election, and put pressure on Marcos to call new elections. In those days, Lee feared a prolonged crisis might cause bloodshed and chaos, he worried that Marcos might fight it out if he had no place to go, so he invited Marcos to take political asylum in Singapore. Instead of accepting Lee's offer, Marcos accepted Reagan's offer of asylum in Hawaii, where he later encountered many lawsuits. When Marcos sent a message to Lee wanting to flee to Singapore, it was already too late and President Aquino objected.
Lee Kuan Yew is blunt and honest in his assessments of our leaders. He says that Imelda “had a penchant for luxury and opulence. When they （Marcos and Imelda） visited Singapore…… they came in style in two DC-8s, his and hers.” On Corazon C. Aquino, Lee says： “I had hopes that this honest, god-fearing woman would help regain confidence for the Philippines and get the country back on track…… She was a sincere, devout Catholic.” He had the impression that President Aquino believed that democracy would solve the country's economic and social problems. The Aquino government created a Constitution that was once again inspired by the American model. Lee asked the rhetorical question： Is there no incompatibility between the American-type separation of powers with the culture and habits of the Filipino people that had caused so much problems for all past presidents？ Lee got the impression from our leaders that there was none.
There are three things which Lee believes have hampered Philippine progress. First, the traditional power elite who have a detached attitude towards the sufferings of the masses, similar to the mestizo hacienderos of other former Spanish colonies in Latin America. Another obstacle to progress is overpopulation due to the Catholic Church opposition to birth control, which aggravates the poverty crisis. A third obstacle to progress is what Lee describes as “a soft, forgiving culture.” His example of this is the case of the Marcoses, who had been accused of pillaging the nation for 20 years, but they are now back. Lee is even puzzled that the late General Fabian Ver was given by the Estrada government military honors at his burial.
This Singaporean statesman laments that many political and other troubles have hampered Philippine economic progress. He writes： “This was a pity because they had so many able people, educated in the Philippines and the US. Their workers were English-speaking, at least in Manila. There was no reason why the Philippines should not have been one of the more successful ASEAN countries. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was the most developed, because America had been generous in rehabilitating the country after the war…… Some Filipinos write and speak with passion. If they could get their elite to share their sentiments, what could they not have achieved？”
李光耀如何建立亞洲廉潔國家？
威爾遜。李。弗洛雷斯
當(dāng)我問國內(nèi)的商業(yè)界領(lǐng)袖,包括小約翰。戈孔韋（John Gokongwei, Jr）,陳永栽,恩里克。索韋爾（Enrique Zobel）和路易斯。米格爾。阿沃伊蒂斯（Luis Miguel Aboitiz）,誰是他們欽佩的具有啟發(fā)性的領(lǐng)袖這個問題時,他們的答案是一致的——77歲的李光耀資政,新加坡的建國之父。
索韋爾說：“李光耀非常直接和坦率,而且總是言之有物。他是一個偉大的領(lǐng)袖,也是我崇敬的領(lǐng)袖?！?BR> 盧西奧則說：“李光耀是一個無私和具有堅強(qiáng)政治決心的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人?！?BR> 戈孔韋更進(jìn)一步的形容李光耀為“世界上偉大的企業(yè)家”?！耙驗樗卫硇录悠碌男?就像在管理一個龐大的商業(yè)集團(tuán)?！?BR> 李光耀是亞洲一位優(yōu)異的領(lǐng)袖。他是卓越管理、剛正不阿和自律精神的體現(xiàn)。
思科系統(tǒng)總裁約翰。錢伯斯說：“人類生命里有兩個平衡要素：互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和教育。李光耀資政身為世界領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人,深明這個道理,并善于利用互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的力量,讓新加坡在網(wǎng)絡(luò)經(jīng)濟(jì)里重新定位,求存,成功?！?BR> 新聞集團(tuán)主席兼總裁魯珀特。默多克說：“過去四十多年,李光耀把一個貧困衰弱的殖民地發(fā)展成富裕興盛、光芒四射的現(xiàn)代大都會,期間充滿敵意的列強(qiáng)始終虎視耽耽。他才識過人,聰明敏銳,是世界上一位能直抒己見又德高望重的政治家。”
前英國首相撒切爾夫人說：“在執(zhí)政期間,我閱讀和分析李光耀的每一篇演講。他能夠看透宣傳的迷霧,也能以無比清晰的思路去分析當(dāng)代的課題,并有辦法加以解決。他從不會錯?！?BR> 李光耀出色的政績之一,是建立了一個“廉潔,不涉及金錢的選舉制度”和甄選有才干的人才加入政府,使新加坡成為亞洲廉潔的國家。他說：“他們的工資,必須跟能力和正直程度同他們相似的人管理大公司、成功的法律樓或從事其他專業(yè)所獲得的收入相當(dāng)。在他們的管理下,新加坡經(jīng)濟(jì)過去20年來每年增長了8到9%.據(jù)世界銀行評估,1995年新加坡公民的人均國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在世界上排名第九位?！?BR> 他駁斥西方自由主義人士的論點：報章完全不受約束就能暴露貪污,有助于使政府廉潔誠實。他指出,在印度、菲律賓、泰國、南韓以及日本的電視和報章可以為所欲為,卻杜絕不了猖獗和根深蒂固的貪污。
公開揭發(fā)貪污官員是李光耀保持新加坡廉潔的方法之一。一位部長因為貪污指控感到“丟臉”而自殺。他說：“我們已經(jīng)建立起輿論的氛圍：人們把擔(dān)任公職貪污受賄的人看成社會公敵?！?BR> 對于在大部分的亞洲地區(qū),政府官員貪污已經(jīng)成為一種生活方式,他感到可悲?！八麄兊牡匚辉礁?妻妾情婦便越多,房子也越大,女人們佩戴的首飾都跟男人的權(quán)力和地位相配。”
另外,李光耀的政府在1960年修訂法律條文,控方一旦證明被告生活闊氣,超過他的收入所能承受的程度,或是擁有同收入不相稱的財產(chǎn),法庭就可以以此作為被告已經(jīng)受賄的佐證。
近到新加坡時,我打電話到李光耀的辦公室。他當(dāng)時身在美國。我請求這位政治家為我的一本李光耀回憶錄下冊簽名。他的秘書向我解釋,每本由李光耀親筆簽名的回憶錄下冊,價值是一萬新元,售書的所有收入則將捐給慈善機(jī)構(gòu)。即使是在這樣的細(xì)節(jié)上,李光耀也作了具體的計劃,充分反映了他務(wù)實和有條不紊的作風(fēng)、效率和公共服務(wù)精神。
回憶錄對李光耀的治國才能、政治和國際外交的豐富經(jīng)驗有生動流暢的記載。
1965年,當(dāng)新加坡被回教徒占大多數(shù)的馬來西亞逐出,成為一個沒有天然資源和軍隊的城市國家時,沒有幾個人認(rèn)為它能生存下去。全球有許多默默無聞的小國家,就算資源豐富的西太平洋島國瑙魯,也面對重重困難。
那年,《悉尼先驅(qū)晨報》寫道：“三年前,新加坡獨立是行不通的概念。從目前的情況看來,它依然是行不通的?！?BR> 英國的《星期日泰晤士報》預(yù)測,沒有英國的援助,新加坡終將垮掉。
今天,經(jīng)過三四十年的良好管理和奮斗,新加坡已經(jīng)成為一個繁榮的國家。新加坡公民的人均國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值在世界上排名第四位。
在回憶錄的下冊,李光耀無畏的表達(dá)了他的想法,嘗試“做到凡事正確,但卻不是政治上正確”。他對自己對政敵的強(qiáng)烈回應(yīng),對西方民主制度和人權(quán)觀念的獨特見解,從來不感到抱歉。
李光耀也在書中談到他對一些國家、領(lǐng)袖和歷史事件的看法,包括蘇哈多、印尼總統(tǒng)瓦希德、泰國、文萊蘇丹、越南、緬甸、柬埔寨、英國領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人、日本、美國、臺灣和香港等等。
他向瓦希德提出忠告：“我說,他要部長們當(dāng)清官,就得確保他們獲得足夠的報酬,不必貪污也能過得合乎身分地位。”
以他獨特的方式,他描述了撒切爾夫人、里根、喜歡引用詩句的中國國家主席江澤民、已故中共領(lǐng)袖毛澤東（李光耀將他比作中國第一位皇帝秦始皇）、正直廉潔的朱（金容）基和中國改革開放的總設(shè)計師鄧小平（在李光耀的記憶中,盡管鄧只有五英尺高,卻是人中之杰）。
李光耀也在書中提及菲律賓。對于菲律賓擁有許多人才,卻頻頻面對社會、政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)問題,他感到惋惜。
李光耀敘述他在1985年到華盛頓作正式訪問時,當(dāng)時的美國國務(wù)卿舒爾茨要求他說服里根總統(tǒng),告訴后者他的老朋友馬可斯是菲律賓問題的癥結(jié)所在,不是解決問題的答案。1986年,*發(fā)生后,美國政府征求李光耀的意見。李光耀認(rèn)為美國不應(yīng)該接受一個出現(xiàn)舞弊的選舉,應(yīng)該向馬可斯施加壓力,要他重新舉行選舉。李光耀擔(dān)心延長危機(jī)會帶來流血和混亂的局面,馬可斯如果走投無路也可能斗爭到底。因此,他邀請馬可斯到新加坡尋求政治庇護(hù)。然而,馬可斯卻接受里根的邀請,飛往夏威夷。在那里,他面對了多起訴訟。馬可斯后來給李光耀送來便條,要求逃到新加坡。但是,一切已經(jīng)太遲了,科拉?？偨y(tǒng)也反對。
李光耀率直和公正的評估了菲律賓的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人。他說馬可斯夫人伊美黛“崇尚豪華闊綽的生活。當(dāng)他們（馬可斯和伊美黛）到訪新加坡時,兩人個乘一架DC-8型專機(jī)抵步,派頭十足。”
至于科拉桑,他說：“我對這名誠實、虔誠的婦女寄予厚望,相信她能幫助菲律賓重拾信心,步上正軌……她是個虔誠的天主教徒?！?BR> 李光耀的印象是科拉桑相信有了民主,一切的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會問題都能迎刃而解?？评Ｕ瓿闪艘粋€以美國為榜樣的憲法。李光耀提出一個問題：難道美式分權(quán)概念和菲律賓人民的文化習(xí)俗之間就真的沒有相互矛盾之處,并曾給馬可斯之前的歷屆總統(tǒng)制造過麻煩嗎？李光耀得到的印象是顯然沒有。
李光耀相信有三個原因阻礙了菲律賓的發(fā)展。
一、傳統(tǒng)的精英階層對普通人的苦難無動于衷,就像拉丁美洲大莊園的西班牙混血兒對待他們的奴隸一樣,高高在上。
二、人口過多。這是因為天主教會不鼓勵節(jié)育,結(jié)果貧窮加劇。
三、李光耀形容它為一種“寬恕待人的溫和文化”。他舉馬可斯家族為例子。馬可斯被指斂財窮國超過20年,他的遺孀和孩子卻能獲準(zhǔn)回國參政。埃斯特拉達(dá)政府為阿奎諾遭暗殺時負(fù)責(zé)保安事務(wù)的武裝部隊總司令費維安。弗爾舉行軍隊葬禮,也令李光耀感到費解。
許多政治和其他問題防礙了菲律賓的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展,李光耀感到非常惋惜。他寫道：“菲律賓擁有許多在國內(nèi)和美國受教育的人才,它們的員工都能說英語,至少在馬尼拉是如此。菲律賓沒有理由無法成為亞細(xì)安比較成功的國家之一。在五六十年代,因為美國慷慨資助菲律賓戰(zhàn)后的重建工作,菲律賓曾是本區(qū)域發(fā)達(dá)的國家……有一些菲律賓人的言論筆鋒充滿澎湃的感情。如果他們能在思想感情上引起國內(nèi)精英的共鳴并付諸行動,還有什么事情難得倒他們？”