Old Man wants all the glory to himself

The Old Man wants it all. Everything. Every single bit of glory there is, he wants it all to himself. And he is doing it, before he checks into the world beyond.

In the following article published in the Straits Times dated 5 Sep 09, Did Lee become PM by one vote?, Old Man claims he has no knowledge of the one vital vote, casted by Dr Toh Chin Chye (the Chairman of the PAP then), that allowed him to be the PM of Singapore. It was a nail-biting 6-6 vote, casted by the "inner core" of the pioneer PAP leaders. It was a tie between Ong Eng Guan and Lee Kuan Yew.

Being a tie, the chairman, Dr Toh, exercised the chair's vote, and Old Man became the PM.

But, Old Man, being what he is, does not want to admit it. He denies that there was such an event. Phew! Now why did Old Man have to wait for 50 years to say that? All along, it was written in the history books that he won by the chair's vote.

Excerpts from the article above:

When chairman Toh Chin Chye received the votes, he opened and counted them one by one. There was a hushed silence when he declared six for Lee and six for Ong. The deadlock could not have been more dramatic. Then exercising his prerogative as chairman, he used his casting vote to break the tie, and Lee went on to be prime minister and to preside over the miraculous transformation of Singapore for the next 31 years.

This cliff-hanger reconstruction is culled from the reminiscences of Toh and then organising secretary Ong Pang Boon in a series of interviews for this book. It corroborated the account making the rounds in countless publications that there was a CEC vote to decide the premiership.

One oft-quoted source was Thomas J. Bellows' The People's Action Party of Singapore: Emergence of a Dominant Party System in which the American scholar recorded that the CEC met to designate a prime minister after the elections and that party chairman Toh voted twice, first in the original vote and then as the result of a tie, a casting vote.

In 2006, the political science professor recalled that 'the person I interviewed was an individual in whom I had especial confidence and was very courteous to a struggling graduate student'. His dissertation for Yale University was based on extensive interviews with members and supporters of all major political parties in 1964 and 1965.

References to the vote were never refuted publicly. In fact, a column on 12 July 1960 by Gordon Hung in The China Mail, which preceded the South China Morning Post, noted Ong's tremendous popularity saying that 'the only thing that seemed to stop him from becoming Singapore's first prime minister was the formality of a vote by the central executive committee'.

Yak Keow Seng, a former PAP activist and close aide of Ong Eng Guan, remembered the former mayor and minister confiding in him and saying that there was indeed a CEC vote after the elections and that he lost to Lee by one vote.

....In what must surely go down as the greatest mystery of the PAP story, Lee said he was completely puzzled by accounts of such a vote. 'I don't remember any such thing. I cannot understand this, that Ong Pang Boon and Toh Chin Chye would say so. If one said so, I can dismiss it, but two said so...

'I led the elections. I crafted the strategy. I made the major campaign speeches. I made the last major broadcast. It was assumed that I would be the leader. I was the man meeting governor William Goode before, during and after the elections, not Ong Eng Guan. I negotiated with him for the release of the detainees, not Ong Eng Guan.'

Boy oh boy. That shows much about Old Man's character. He wants to be worshiped as a god before he leaves this world. If he could "forget" this very important incident (how he became PM of Singapore), what more about all the other tales in his memoirs? Can he be trusted that history as what he told is accurate? Including the merger, and our eventual ouster?

Another article, in relation to the above was also published in the ST on the same day - Was Lim Chin Siong a communist?

In the article above, we are told that Lim Chin Siong was a communist and the PAP had to lock him up, because he was a dangerous man. However, Discovery Channel aired the documentary "History of Singapore" a few years ago. Chin Siong was portrayed in a very different light.

A search on the internet will also reveal a few startling things about the history of Singapore. Here are some pointers.

Before independence, Chin Siong was Lee's biggest threat. While Chin Siong controlled the Chinese ground, Lee had the favours of the British government. But everything was hanging precariously and power could swing to either side.

Lee then planned a merger with Malaysia. It appeared that the merger was an excellent way to rid Chin Siong. Both the Brits and Tengku were uncomfortable with Chin Siong because he appeared to be a communist.

Till today, there is still controversy if he was communist. I would be inclined to believe the Chin Siong sounded communist because he used the Chinese race card to rally the people. (Hey, hasn't Old Man used the same Chinese race card for decades too? And no one dares claim he is a commie?)

I do not believe Chin Siong was a communist. The Brits (whom LKY was very much aligned to) were only too keen to link Chin Siong with the commies to contain him. With the merger planned, Lee had an excellent excuse to get Chin Siong locked up since both the Brits and Tengku did not like to have Chin Siong around.

You can do a search on "Lim Chin Siong" to get more news about the Lim Chin Siong vs Lee Kuan Yew dispute. That was really something.


My opinion on the Lim vs Lee episode

It was either Lim Chin Siong or Lee Kuan Yew. The fight for power to control was on the balance. While Lim used the Chinese ground for his support, Lee used the Brits for his support. What probably tilted the balance was the merger. Lee got the Tengku on his side too, because the Tengku was wary of Lim as well.

After the threat of Lim was over, it was time for Lee to create enough trouble for the Tengku, so that Singapore could be fully independent. Lee's story was that the Tengku kicked Singapore out. Tengku's story was that Lee wanted out and hence created problems.

So who is to be believed?

With the fact now exposed that Old Man is willing to twist history about the single vote by Dr Toh Chin Chye, who knows what other facts he has been twisting since the 1950s? After all, the Tengku is no longer around to dispute the story.


My viewpoint on the merger

The merger probably served Lee very well. It was the perfect way to rid of his biggest adversary, Chin Siong. At the same time, he could engineer for Singapore's independence so that he could be the PM of a truly independent Singapore.

It was not that Lee did not know that Malaysia's constitution stated the special privileges for the Malays. He asked for the merger with his eyes opened. Yet, after merging, he contested that very special privilege. It is like asking your neighbour to invite you to a party, then when he graciously lets you in, you start ordering him how he should host the party.

The merger itself caused Malaysia to have problems with Indonesia and Philippines. Malaysia's plan was to include Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei. Singapore was initially NOT on the list. Singapore asked to be invited and was accepted.

Indonesia and Philippines saw the merger as an expansionist plan by Malaysia and felt threatened. This was the Confrontation period. There were terror attacks from Indonesia against Malaysia. And Singapore, being part of Malaysia by virtue of the merger, was also attacked.

A point that I would like to make here is that, the PAP cites this incident was that the "sea of Malays around us" seeked to attack the majority Chinese Singaporeans.

I feel that Lee is trying to play the race card that Singapore being majority Chinese, are seen as enemies by the Malays around us. The fact was that this was actually about one Malay country (Indonesia) against another Malay country (Malaysia). Singapore was dragged in, because we were part of Malaysia. Not because the Malays were against the Chinese.

The above is yet another twist and lie, in the books of the PAP, headed by Old Man.


My Conclusion

Lee can claim that he is the "Father of Singapore" and that he is the one behind Singapore's success. But we have seen how he twists history, such that he is seen that he has attained a godlike status.

My opinion is that if Ong Eng Guan had been PM, he would have taken Singapore the same path. Perhaps, we would see the Ong Dynasty instead of the Lee Dynasty.

As for Lim Chin Siong, I also feel that if he had been Singapore's PM, we would still be the same Singapore, more or less. Some critics say that he was a communist and would steer away from Western technology, which brought about Singapore's economic success.

I dispute the above. Firstly, it was never proven he was communist. Secondly, if he had been PM, I am sure he would have abandoned his reference to China, changed allies, and taken advantage of the Western influence.

If Lee could have changed so quickly from let's merge with Malaysia to let's create trouble for Malaysia, surely Chin Siong could have changed his spots as quickly as Old Man.

Of course, also if Lim had been PM, in all probability, we would have to tolerate the Lim Dynasty instead.

Singapore does not depend on one man alone. Singapore's success is due to a group of hardworking leaders and citizens. The man at the top is shaped by what the group of leaders and the community do. He is dispensable.....no, he is expendable.