Born in 1941, Goh Chok Tong studied economics at the University of Singapore where he graduated with top honors. He joined the administrative service of the Singapore government in 1964 where he served in the economic planning unit. After receiving his master’s degree in the US, he returned to Singapore to enter the Ministry of Finance. In 1976 he was elected to parliament and nine months later, appointed senior minister of state for finance. He subsequently served as trade, health, defense and deputy minister. In November 1990, Goh Chok Tong succeeded Lee Kuan Yew as the Prime Minister of Singapore.

Bernard Krisher and Seth Meixner: What should be the relationship of the richer Asean countries toward the poorer countries?

A: We decided some years ago on an initiative of integrating Asean, which means it is important for the better off countries to help build the capacity of the less-developed nations. Otherwise, Asean will be a two-tiered Asean. The relationship should be one where we are able to render meaningful and constructive assistance to one another.

Q: You have a country that has the highest rate of development in Southeast Asia, and you have countries like Laos, Burma and Cambodia. What can a country like Singapore, with its experience and wealth, contribute?

A: We’d be happy to share our experience with them on how Singapore, with our natural resources, with the right qualities and political/economic policies, achieved economic parity. We have the Singaporean Cooperation Program where we train officials from these countries. In the case of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, we train them in Singapore.

Q: What particular training?

A: English is one of the training areas. Tourism promotion and government administration are some other examples.

Q: How did the events of Sept 11 affect the Asean countries?

A: We are now very much alert to the real possibility of terrorism taking place in Southeast Asia. This Bali incident set a grave precedent for Asean. Asean is a new set of soft targets. We have to react positively by working together to stamp out terrorism in the area and coming up with projects that can shore up confidence in Asean. It is much more important now to show the world terrorism is there, and that we are on top of the situation. If you are not on top of the situation no investments will come in.

Q: Do you see the Asean countries as a soft target for terrorism?

A: I’m afraid so. We have known for some time that Southeast Asia could become the next theater of operations for terrorists. The breeding ground is outside of East Asia, the financial backing will be outside of East Asia, even the brainwork—the strategies and tactics—will be developed outside. But the terrorists know it is much more difficult to operate in the Middle East, probably because of the brutal way the governments of the Middle East handle terrorists. So they would gravitate to other areas where governments are in much less control of the problem.

Q: What do you see as the long-range goal of Asean? Will it become another EU, with relaxed immigration policies or establishing a single currency?

A: Not an evolution to that stage, unless we drive it in that direction. At the moment there are many pillars. For example, the Asean free trade area, the tourism programs and an e-Asean commerce. These are pillars which are now not yet put into a coherent whole to achieve a central vision. I hope the [Asean] leaders can decide how we can give a coherent shape to these various initiatives to arrive at a possible end point. I don’t see an EU possibility over the next 10 or 15 years but rather to consider an economic community similar to the European economic community of the 1960s.

Q: But that became the EU eventually.

A: We should take one step at a time. The better off countries are not so many as to be able to help the poor ones and make a difference.

Q: How about China’s growing role in the region. What effect is this having on the Asean economy?

A: You want to have a China that grows, not a China that remains weak, poor, and therefore destabilizing to the region. In the short term all countries will be forced to adjust their economic policies and take measures to compete with China, an economy with lower cost of labor, more productive labor and the ability to learn very quickly, competing with us for investments in the market. But we see in the mid-term possibilities for China’s growth. China will be like another United States, another Japan, taking in products from the area and bringing tourism to Asean. Overseas investments from the Chinese companies are also beginning to come to the area.

Q: The next two years are going to be difficult on labor and on production?

A: The next two years will be very difficult for all of us. It’s just up to seizing the bull by the horns and changing our own economic structure, which is what Singapore is doing.

Q: Is China’s political power a threat?

A: There’s always the concern that a powerful China may behave in a way which may be uncomfortable for the others. But you cannot assume China will be an aggressive, hostile nation. If you assume China will be an enemy, a threat, then you will be the enemy. What we want is that China joins the international community and abides by the rules of the international organizations, which China is now doing. You’re going to see a China that understands that if it threatens the others, these others will very quickly gang up on China, but I think China wants to be respected by the members of the international community.

Q: Do you envision North Korea at some point joining Asean as a Plus member?

A: No. There may be contact later on but as a Plus member I don’t think it will happen for quite some time because the whole idea of the plus membership of the other three countries is: Can these three countries, which are much better developed than Asean, prop up capacity building.

Q: What is your major expectation of the summit?

A: Foremost we have to discuss terrorism and focus on cooperation between the Southeast Asian countries to see how we can prevent further bomb blasts and terrorist acts. It is real now. We just can’t talk about it and say: “There are no terrorists in my country.” On the economic side, I see us discussing how we can offset this negative impression of Asean as a result of terrorists. Before we used to say: As a result of the financial crisis, but now we say as the result of terrorism.

Q: Could that include a multi-jurisdictional police force that would have authority to operate across borders?

A: That has to be discussed. We would have to respect each other’s national borders but we would, if possible, have to have cooperation between the police along the borders. I feel the issue will be fleshed out, but I have to say the major thing is that each of the authorities watch over their own jurisdictions within the modality of cooperating and sharing information.

Q: Asean has a tradition of non-intervention but if you look at recent history you’ve had people like Hitler and Pol Pot. Is that principle still valid, should one permit people like that to continue to harm their own people without intervention?

A:The principle idea is not to comment or interfere in someone else’s domestic affairs.

Q: You said earlier that Asean countries have many diverse traditions, religions and cultures. What then actually binds Asean?

A: The diversity itself binds us together. We are fearful that because of the diversity, the region may be torn apart and the countries may possess much hatred toward each other. It is quite complicated so the founding members of Asean thought we could get together, to bind the region as one. Over the years Asean has been successful at creating a certain cohesion.

Q: Is there any concern within Asean that the United States or its Western allies are aiming to exert too much pressure or influence over this region?

A: On the economic side, and even culturally, you have to recognize the influence is there. Therefore, each country has to decide how it wants to move forward—whether you want to protect your own culture and how you protect it. In the case of Singapore, we came to the decision that we must be more cosmopolitan and that’s the way to survive in the future world. If we just wanted to be a Singapore with a very distinctive identity—shut down all the influences—we could not survive. So we opted for being cosmopolitan.

Q: How do you feel about the pressure from the Western countries and the United States to adopt a certain system, democracy?

A: You have to learn to deal with it. We always regard the US like a good boy scout with a mission, with a zeal to convert others to its beliefs. Fortunately for us, these beliefs are something that, over time, we can follow. But we do have disagreements with the US.

Q: Some leaders say their countries aspire to democracy but the people are not yet ready for a democracy.

A: We take that view. Democracy is not an easy thing to practice. You just can’t, from the Stone Age, with different tribes in the country, move on to democracy. You must have a good middle class that understands how to work the system.

Q: But Singapore has a middle class, and a very educated middle class.

A: We are democratic.

Q: But your press is not totally free, there are certain taboos.

A: Well, there are certain taboos, but if you don’t have those taboos you will not be able to practice democracy in Singapore. We have a different language press. Without taboos the Chinese press will be spouting issues that are dear to the Chinese—the language, the importance of China, to influence people toward China. The Malay press will just espouse Islamic beliefs and lead to diminished interaction between the other [ethnic groups]. The English press, they’re pro-democracy. You can’t run this place without certain taboos—race, religion and language—you keep out.

Q: But don’t you think the population of Singapore is highly educated. By now, aren’t they smart enough to...

A: People are highly educated, but when it comes to race, language and religion, we descend to the lowest common denominator. So these are three areas where we say lay off.

Q: Many people criticize aid as continuously creating a dependency. You are concentrating on training and education. Is that the way to go?

A: We don’t believe that handing out grants and funds will do the trick, and evidence shows that just handing out funds is not working. From our own experience with development we find it is better to learn from other people and then use those skills to help ourselves.

Q: When you look at the success of Singapore and then the rest of Southeast Asia, why have those countries failed in reducing poverty?

A: Ask them. Don’t ask me. I speak for Singapore. I shouldn’t speak for anyone else and analyze why they are so slow. We took the right economic approach. When many other countries were wary of multinational companies we rode on the capital, the expertise and the markets of these companies. We have had very open economic policies, and the world was going through a growth phase which we benefited from. So it was the right policies along with plenty of luck.

Q: We noticed that many women are leaders of Asian countries but within those countries women do not rise very high in politics or government and industry. What is the situation in Singapore and how do you view the role of women?

A: There is nothing to stop women from rising as far as they can go, but we are still an Asian society that expects the women and the men to play complementary roles. In Singapore, we find women moving into the workplace, into politics. But by-and-large, women still recognize they have to play domestic roles. So we are an evolving society, but still an Asian society.

Q: Do you see a woman prime minister some day?

A: I wouldn’t see it happening over the next 10 years, but it isn’t impossible.

Q: What is the highest-ranking woman in your Cabinet?

A: In this current Cabinet, there are no women.

Q: Do you appoint [Cabinet members]?

A: I appoint them.

Q: Why don’t you appoint a woman?

A: We appoint people on the basis of merit, not gender.

Q: You don’t have any women who have reached that point?

A: No, women in our parliament is a recent phenomenon. Earlier on we just could not get them to join up. It will come. If you look at our women now they are active, expressive, with a point of view.

Q: Asean countries face a host of problems, from corruption and crime to health issues. How should those be best attacked, as Asean or individual countries?

A: In many areas you need a united front—AIDS, for example, you can’t confine within a country. So you have to attack it through common policies and through cooperation. But the political will must be there in a country, and you can’t force political will on a country.