Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today, our mission
is to really get under the skin of one of the
most, well, fascinating geopolitical stories
out there. We're talking about Singapore, often
called the Little Red Dot. Exactly. Yeah. How
does this tiny island with basically no natural
resources become this absolute global economic
giant? And, you know, such a unique political
entity as well. It's a fantastic question. Because
it's not just about getting rich quick. It's
this incredible case study and intense strategic
planning. They really turn their constraints,
geography, politics, history into advantages.
Yeah. And just to give you a sense of what we're
dealing with here, let's kick off with some facts
that really highlight how unusual Singapore is.
Okay. Geographically, think about this. It's
just one degree north of the equator. Tiny, tropical,
kind of vulnerable, you'd think. Right. But then
you look at the economics, the wealth is just,
well, staggering. Yeah, the purchasing power
parity adjusted GDP per capita. It's estimated
over $156 ,000 for 2025. Which puts it right
near the very top globally, way ahead of many
bigger countries that are packed with resources.
And in terms of stability, it's kind of rock
solid in its region. Singapore is the only Asian
country with that top AAA sovereign credit rating
from all the big agencies. That's a huge signal
to global finance, reliability. Exactly. But
what's really interesting, I think, is the system
behind that AAA rating. You usually associate
that rating with, you know, totally free market,
hands -off economies. But Singapore, it's this
hyper -capitalist engine, sure, but built on
a foundation of really significant state intervention.
Which brings us to maybe the most striking contrast,
the one that really sums up the summer poor model.
Good on. It's always ranked as one of the world's
most expensive cities to live in, right? Often
number one. Yeah, notoriously expensive. Yet
the homeownership rate is something like 88%.
It's incredible. How does that even work? Well,
and this is the key part. Almost 80 percent,
78 .7 percent to be exact, live in public housing.
Subsidized housing run by the H -E -B, the Housing
and Development Board. Ah, OK. So the state provides
that core stability. Precisely. Which then kind
of frees people up to compete in this really
intense, expensive, globalized economy. It's
a tradeoff. A very deliberate compromise that's
central to understanding it all. Okay. So to
really grasp this modern super pragmatic state,
we need to rewind a bit. Look at its history.
Even the name itself, Singapore, the English
name. Yeah. It's just an anglicized version of
the Malay name, Singapura. Right. And Singapura
takes us back into ancient history, the Buddhist
culture, actually. It comes from Sanskrit, Sihapura.
Lion City. Or a lion fortress. The lion, I know,
was a big symbol of power, protection, royalty
across Southeast Asia back then. And there's
that legend, isn't there, about the naming? Yeah,
the story goes that Sang Nala Utama, a Sumatran
prince or Raja from the 13th century, landed
there after a storm. Okay. And he supposedly
saw this strange, impressive animal he thought
was a lion. Now, historians are pretty clear
there weren't actually lions native to Singapore.
Okay. Minor detail. Right. But whether it was
zoologically accurate or not, the name Singapura,
Lion City stuck. And it really set a tone, didn't
it, for how the island saw itself. But it had
names before that too, right? It wasn't unknown?
Oh, definitely. There are Javanese records from
1365 that call it Temasek. That might mean something
like sea town. Which makes sense, given its location.
Exactly. Reinforces that it was always about
maritime trade. And the Chinese knew it, too,
as Pu Luo Zhong, which was basically their way
of writing Pulao Zhong. Pulao Zhong. Yeah, it
means island at the end of a peninsula. Pretty
straightforward description. So these names all
point to the same thing. It's geography. Right
there at that critical choke point for trade
routes between the Indian Ocean and the South
China Sea. Always important. Always understood,
yeah. But it really... exploded onto the world
scene in 1819. That's when Sir Stanford Raffles
showed up. Representing the British Empire. Correct.
And Raffles immediately saw the potential for
an entrepot, you know, a freeport, a place where
goods could be traded back and forth without
heavy taxes. And he set one up. He did. And the
change was incredibly fast, driven purely by
commerce. The population figures from that time
are just wild. Before Raffles, maybe a thousand
people, mostly local Malays. Yeah, very small.
But the Freeport was like a magnet. Huge numbers
of migrants poured in looking for work, mostly
from southern China. So by 1860, what, something
like 80 ,000 people? Before 80 ,000, yeah. It
completely changed the island's makeup almost
overnight. Suddenly it's cosmopolitan, multicultural,
but also, you know, setting the stage for future
social complexities. And the British cemented
its strategic value militarily, too, didn't they,
with the naval base? Oh, absolutely. The Singapore
naval base. Finished in 1938. It was massive.
Churchill called it the Gibraltar of the East.
Meant to be this symbol of untouchable British
power in Asia. Which makes what happened next
even more shocking. The fall in 1942 to the Japanese.
A huge national trauma you can imagine. The speed
and scale of the defeat. It was stunning. Around
60 ,000 British, Australian, and Indian troops
surrendered to a smaller Japanese force. Churchill
himself called it. What was it? The worst disaster
and largest capitulation in British history.
Wow. So it wasn't just a military loss. No, it
shattered the myth of British imperial power.
For the local population, seeing the Union Jack
lowered, that was profound. And the Japanese
occupation itself. Brutal. They renamed it Saonan
II, Light of the South. But it was a dark period,
especially the Suk Ching Massacre. What was that?
A systematic purge targeting ethnic Chinese perceived
as hostile to Japan. The estimates vary widely,
but thousands, possibly tens of thousands, were
killed. This experience, this vulnerability,
it burned itself into the collective memory.
The need for self -reliance, self -defense, that
came directly from this period. So after the
war, things didn't just snap back to normal.
Far from it. The recovery was tough. Infrastructure
destroyed, crime up, lots of labor strikes, food
shortages. And Britain, having failed to defend
Singapore, didn't look like the reliable protector
anymore. This really fueled the drive for more
autonomy for self -government. Which eventually
led to the rise of the People's Action Party,
the PAP. Right. And the PAP, led by Lee Kuan
Yew, initially saw the solution to Singapore's
economic problems, especially high unemployment,
in merging with its neighbors. Joining the Federation
of Malaya. which became Malaysia. That was in
1963. Yeah, the thinking was they needed access
to a larger common market to survive economically.
But that didn't last long, did it? Less than
two years. It was a really volatile mix. Deep
ideological clashes between the PAP, which was
quite socialist and highly organized, and the
Malay nationalist leadership in Kuala Lumpur.
Plus economic issues. Big time. Singapore faced
trade restrictions. And critically, there was
serious communal tension. The race riots in 1964
were particularly bad. Very bloody. So the whole
thing just fell apart. It became completely unworkable.
The Malaysian prime minister at the time, Tunku
Abdul Rahman, essentially decided Singapore had
to go. He pushed for expulsion through the Malaysian
parliament. So Singapore didn't choose independence
exactly? No, it was kicked out. The vote in the
Malaysian parliament was 126 to 0 for separation,
August 9th, 1965. That must have been terrifying.
Absolutely. There's famous footage of Lee Kuan
Yew crying on television when announcing it.
Suddenly, Singapore is on its own. Independent,
yes, but tiny. No resources, no real military,
no common identity yet. Survival wasn't guaranteed.
It required something extraordinary. OK, so 1965
independence, but forced independence. No resources,
no natural hinterland surrounded by potentially
difficult neighbors. How on earth did they go
from that point to becoming an Asian tiger? Well,
the strategy was incredibly focused and frankly,
quite ruthless. It was all about export oriented
industrialization. Go out and aggressively court
foreign investment. Build factories, create jobs.
Exactly. And it worked spectacularly. well in
that first phase. They averaged something like
8 % real GDP growth per year right up until the
late 90s. Just phenomenal. But they didn't just
stick with that, did they? They evolved. That's
the key thing about Singapore's strategic agility.
By the 1980s, the leadership realized, OK, we
can't keep competing on cheap labor forever.
Other countries are catching up. So they needed
to move up the value chain. Precisely. A very
deliberate pivot towards high technology, high
value added industries. Like what specifically?
Things like petrochemicals, advanced electronics,
and crucially, semiconductor manufacturing, wafer
fabrication. This wasn't accidental. It involved
huge state investment in education and infrastructure
to support these sectors. And did that pay off?
Massively. Today, just the semiconductor industry
alone makes up about 7 % of Singapore's entire
GDP. It's a cornerstone of their modern economy.
Wow. seven percent from just semis. So beyond
high tech manufacturing, what are the other pillars?
You've got three main engines, really. Financial
services. It's the sixth largest financial center
in the world now. Then there's logistics, which
we'll definitely get into. And oil refining and
trading. Oil refining. I didn't realize that
was so big. Oh, yeah. It's the third largest
oil refining and trading hub globally. Plus,
they're huge in building oil rigs and ship repair.
It's all about sophisticated, high -value industrial
services. That's how they command premium prices.
And all this economic activity is totally intertwined
with being this massive global hub, right? For
traffic, for trade. Absolutely inseparable. Let's
start with air. Changing airport. It's not just
an airport. It's like a whole city dedicated
to aviation. Connecting Singapore to, what, over
300 cities? Yeah. The network is vast. And it's
consistently ranked the world's best airport.
It got the top spot again in 2023. And the airline,
Singapore Airlines. Also top tier. Skytrax, world's
best airline winner. It's like 12 times. It's
all part of this national obsession with quality,
efficiency, and connectivity. Okay, so air travel
was top notch. What about by sea? The port must
be critical. Critical is an understatement. The
port of Singapore is, well, the scale is hard
to comprehend. It's the world's second busiest
port overall in terms of shipping tonnage handled.
Think about that volume, 626 million tons of
cargo a year. Huge numbers. But here's the really
crucial part. It's the world's busiest port for
transshipment traffic. Transshipment. What does
that mean exactly? It means most of the containers
moving through Singapore aren't actually for
Singapore itself. They arrive on one giant ship,
get efficiently unloaded and then loaded onto
other ships heading to different ports in the
region or around the world. So Singapore acts
as this massive sorting center for global trade.
Exactly. The ultimate global middleman facilitated
by incredible efficiency. And on top of that,
it's also the world's largest center for. bunkering
ship refueling. So basically, if you're a major
ship involved in global trade, chances are you're
passing through or stinking in Singapore. Very
high probability. Yes. OK, let's talk finance
then. How does that fit in? Well, it's the third
largest foreign exchange center globally. Huge
amounts of currency trading happen there. And
to cement its place, Singapore has been really
proactive about economic integration, signed
over 10 free trade agreements. We're its biggest
partners. China has been the largest trading
partner since 2013, which really shows its ability
to balance East and West. Now, this financial
success, it leads to the tax haven label that
often gets thrown around. Is that fair? Well...
It's complicated. The personal income tax rates
are relatively low, yes. But the big draw for
the super rich is often the exemption on foreign
sourced capital gains. If you make money outside
Singapore, you generally don't pay Singaporean
tax on it. Which attracts wealthy individuals.
Definitely. Like Eduardo Saverin, the Facebook
co -founder, famously moved there and renounced
his U .S. citizenship. The Tax Justice Network
did rank it fourth on their financial secrecy
index back in 2015, highlighting that role in
holding offshore wealth. But they're not on official
blacklists anymore. No, they were taken off the
OECD's gray list back in 2009. But, you know,
the reputation as a safe, discreet place for
global capital, that persists. OK, one really
unique thing you mentioned is how they manage
their economy. The Monetary Authority of Singapore,
the MAS, they don't really use interest rates
like the Fed or the Bank of England. That's right.
It's quite unusual for a major economy. Instead
of adjusting interest rates up or down to control
inflation or stimulate growth, the MAS focuses
almost entirely on managing the exchange rate
of the Singapore dollar, the SGD. How do they
do that? They basically allow the SUD to trade
within a secret undisclosed band against a basket
of currencies, the currencies of their main trading
partners. They intervene in the market to keep
it within that band. Why that approach? Why not
interest rates? Because Singapore is a small,
incredibly open economy. It imports almost everything
it needs, food, energy, raw materials, and it
exports high value goods and services. Right.
So managing the exchange rate is the most direct
lever they have to control inflation coming.
from imports while also keeping their exports
competitive. If the SGD gets too strong, imports
are cheap, but exports suffer. Too weak, exports
boom, but import costs and therefore inflation
soar. So it's about finding that sweet spot within
the band. Exactly. It's a highly tailored monetary
policy for a very specific kind of economy, very
pragmatic. That kind of precise, almost surgical
control we see in the economy. It definitely
seems mirrored in the political system, doesn't
it? Oh, absolutely. On paper, Singapore is a
unitary parliamentary republic. It's based on
the British Westminster system, parliament, prime
minister, cabinet. But the reality on the ground
is different. It's dominated by one party, the
People's Action Party, the PAP. And they've been
in power continuously since 1959, even before
full independence. Long time. It's an incredibly
long time, which is why you often hear political
scientists describe Singapore as an illiberal
democracy or maybe a soft authoritarian state.
The structures of democracy are there, but the
system is heavily managed to ensure stability
and paid dominance. What's the justification
for that from the PP's perspective? Often it's
framed around Asian values, the idea that community
harmony, social order and collective well -being
should take precedence over the kind of radical
individualism sometimes seen in the West. They
argue that strong, stable governance was essential
for Singapore's survival and progress, especially
in the early days. It's like they took the old
British colonial structures, which were pretty
authoritarian, and just... Repurpose them. In
a way, yes, they adapted them for nation building,
focusing on efficiency, anti -corruption and
long term planning. But control is definitely
woven into the system. Look at the electoral
setup. The GRC's. Group representation constituencies.
Exactly. These are large electoral districts
where political parties have to field a team
of candidates, usually four or five. And crucially,
at least one member of that team must be from
a designated minority community, Malay, Indian
or other. The stated aim is to ensure minorities
are always represented in parliament. That's
the official rationale, and it does achieve that.
But critics argue the GRC system makes it much
harder for opposition parties. Why? Because instead
of needing just one strong candidate for a single
seat, an opposition party needs to find and fund
a whole team of credible candidates to contest
a GRC. Plus, the way the boundaries are drawn
can sometimes lump opposition strongholds together
with PAP strongholds diluting their vote. It
raises the bar for challenging the PAP significantly.
So elections happen, they're clean, but the structure
favors the incumbent. That's a fair summary.
Even in 2011, when the PIP got only 60 percent
of the vote, which was seen as a big swing against
them, they still won almost all the seats because
of how the system works. OK, then there's the
elected presidency. That's another unusual feature,
isn't it? Very much so. It's not just a ceremonial
head of state. The president has real power,
specifically custodial powers over the country's
past financial reserves and key public service
appointments. They can veto government spending
plans if they draw on past reserves. on the government's
power then? In theory. But the eligibility criteria
to even run for president are incredibly strict.
Like what? You need to be at least 45. You need
to have held a very senior public office, like
a cabinet minister, speaker of parliament, chief
justice O .R. And this is the key one for private
sector candidates. You must have been the chief
executive of a company with at least $500 million
in shareholders' equity, and it must have been
profitable during your tenure. $500 million.
That rules out pretty much everyone, surely.
It rules out almost anyone not already part of
the established state or corporate elite. It
ensures the president comes from a very specific,
experienced, and arguably like -minded pool of
people. And there's another layer to the reserved
election. Right. This is quite controversial.
The Constitution says that if no one from a particular
racial community, Malay, Chinese, Indian, other,
has held the presidency in the last five terms,
the next election must be reserved exclusively
for candidates from that community. And that
actually happened recently. Yes. In 2017, the
election was reserved for Malay candidates. Only
one person, Halima Yacob, who had been Speaker
of Parliament, met the stringent eligibility
criteria. So she was declared president without
an election taking place. Which, again, highlights
how managed the political process can be. Exactly.
It ensures representation, but critics argue
it limits democratic choice. So this focus on
ordering control. How does it play out in international
rankings? It's a real paradox. The World Justice
Project's rule of law index ranks Singapore incredibly
high on things like order and security number
three globally and absence of corruption, also
number three, world class in those aspects. But
on fundamental rights, it ranks much lower, 38th
in that same index. There's a clear tradeoff
being made. prioritizing stability and economic
well -being over certain individual liberties.
That seems to be the operating philosophy, yes.
And you see it very clearly in the legal system.
Which is known for being strict. Very strict
and quite conservative on many social issues.
They retain corporal punishment caning for certain
offenses, and they retain and actively use capital
punishment, usually hanging. Particularly for
drug trafficking, right? That gets a lot of international
attention. It does. Groups like Amnesty International
strongly condemn it. But the Singapore government's
position is unwavering. They argue it's a necessary
deterrent, citing what they call clear evidence.
It saves lives by preventing widespread drug
abuse. They seem to have absolutely no doubts,
as they've said, about its effectiveness for
their society. What about freedoms like speech
and assembly? Also tightly regulated. Reporters
without borders ranked Singapore 129th out of
180 in their 2023 Press Freedom Index. Public
gatherings generally need police permits, and
protests are usually restricted to a designated
area called Speaker's Corner. But the system
isn't totally rigid, is it? There has been some
social change. That's true. A major example was
in 2023 when the government repealed Section
377A of the Penal Code. That was the law criminalizing
sex between men, wasn't it? A colonial era law.
Correct. Prime Minister Lee Sai and Leung presented
the repeal as a kind of pragmatic compromise.
Society was changing. Attitudes were shifting,
especially among younger Singaporeans. Keeping
the law was becoming increasingly divisive. They
didn't legalize same -sex marriage at the same
time. No. Crucially, they simultaneously moved
to amend the Constitution to protect the existing
definition of marriage between a man and a woman
from legal challenges. So decriminalization,
yes, but maintaining the traditional definition
of marriage, it shows that balancing act again.
OK, let's shift to defense. Given its size and
location, national security must be paramount.
Absolutely. It's taken incredibly seriously.
They spend about 2 .7 percent of GDP on the military,
which is quite high. And Singapore Armed Forces,
the SAF, is widely seen as the most technologically
advanced military in Southeast Asia. It's viewed
as the ultimate guarantor of their independence.
And there's an interesting historical connection
here, isn't there, with Israel. Yes, a really
fascinating and crucial piece of their early
history. When Singapore was suddenly independent
in 65, it had no army to speak of. It needed
to build one fast, surrounded by larger neighbors.
So they turned to Israel. They did. Israel, facing
its own existential threats, understood Singapore's
situation. They provided military advisors, helped
set up the structure, including the system of
mandatory national service, conscription and
reserve duty, which is still the backbone of
the SAF today. Maintain that relationship, even
though Singapore's neighbors, Malaysia and Indonesia,
didn't recognize Israel. Yes, it was pure pragmatism.
Survival came first. National interests trumped
regional political sensitivities. And then that
pragmatic, somewhat neutral stance plays out
in their diplomacy, too. Definitely. Singapore
positions itself carefully. It's a regular participant
in G20 meetings, even though it's not formally
a member, and it leverages its reputation for
neutrality and efficiency to host major international
events. Like the Trump -Kim summit in 2018. Exactly.
Or the historic meeting between the leaders of
China and Taiwan back in 2015. Being seen as
a trusted, neutral venue is a key part of their
foreign policy. They make themselves indispensable.
OK, so if you really want to see the Singapore
model in action, look at how they deal with their
fundamental geographic limits. Being a tiny island
city state means every single square kilometer
matters. And one way they've dealt with that
is just making more land, right, land reclamation.
It's incredible when you think about it. Through
decades of reclamation projects, they've actually
increased Singapore's total land area by about
22%. 22 %? Wow. Yeah, it grew from about 580
square kilometers at Independence to over 710
square kilometers by 2015. They've even merged
separate smaller islands together, like creating
Jurong Island for industry. But that must have
consequences. Where does all the sand come from?
Exactly. That became a huge issue. Their massive
demand for sand led to neighbors like Indonesia,
Malaysia and Vietnam getting worried about the
environmental impact and restricting or banning
sand exports to Singapore. There were even reports
about sand wars. So what did Singapore do? They
couldn't just stop needing land. They had to
pivot their engineering strategy. They started
moving towards using polders, which is the Dutch
method. Polders. How does that work? You build
a dike around a section of the seabed, pump all
the water out, and then you let the exposed land
consolidate and settle over time. It's much more
complex and expensive than just dumping sand,
but it dramatically reduces the need for imported
fill material. Ingenious, but necessary. Absolutely.
But here's the other side of that coin. Even
with this intense pressure for space, for housing,
for industry, they've deliberately maintained
a focus on green space. The Garden City idea.
That's right. Started way back in 1967 by Lee
Kuan Yew. The policy mandates setting aside significant
land, about 10 % currently, for parks, nature
reserves, and greenery. To counterbalance the
density. Precisely. It's about quality of life.
The Singapore Botanic Gardens, which is a UNESCO
World Heritage Site, is probably the most famous
example. It's this very conscious effort to avoid
becoming just a concrete jungle. Okay, so land
is scarce, but maybe even more critical is water.
Water is treated as a fundamental national security
issue in Singapore. Historically, they were very
dependent on agreements to buy water from Malaysia.
That's a vulnerability they've worked incredibly
hard to overcome. Through the four national taps
strategy. That's the framework, yes. Tap one
is imported water, mainly from Johor in Malaysia,
under agreements that are decades old. Tap two
is using local catchments, basically collecting
rainwater from about two -thirds of the island's
surface area and storing it in reservoirs. Okay,
two taps down. Tap three is reclaimed water,
which they brand as in -water. This is highly
purified wastewater treated using advanced membrane
technologies. Is that... Safe to drink. It meets
WHO drinking water standards, absolutely. It's
rigorously tested. A lot of it is used for industrial
purposes, requiring high purity water. But some
is also blended into the reservoir supply for
drinking. It's a huge part of their water story.
And the fourth tap. Desalination. Turning seawater
into freshwater. They have several desalination
plants now. It's energy intensive, but essential
for security. So the goal is complete water independence
eventually. The target is self -sufficiency by
2061. That's when the main water agreement with
Malaysia expires. The projections are that by
2060, new water will meet 50 % of demand and
desalination will meet 30%. That's a massive
shift. Must have cost a fortune. Billions. Around
is $10 billion just for recent upgrades to the
water treatment infrastructure. But like defense,
securing water is seen as non -negotiable. Okay,
let's talk about moving people around this small,
dense island. Transportation must be a nightmare
to manage. They realized very early on, back
in the 70s, that if everyone owned a car, the
island would just grind to a halt. Total gridlock.
So they tackled it head -on with the ERP system.
Yeah, electronic road pricing. It actually evolved
from the world's first urban congestion pricing
scheme, which they started way back in 1975 with
paper licenses. The ERP gantries that automatically
charge you when you drive into congested areas
during peak hours came later. To discourage driving
at busy times. Exactly. Make people think about
the cost of using that road space. They're actually
upgrading it now to a satellite -based system.
It's supposed to be more precise. Is that running
smoothly? Well, it was meant to launch in 2020,
but it's been delayed, apparently until 2026.
And interestingly, one of the main reasons cited
is the global semiconductor shortage. Ah, even
Singapore, a semiconductor hub, gets hit by the
chip shortage for its own infrastructure. Shows
how interconnected everything is. But the ERP
is only part of the story for managing traffic.
The really big lever is making cars incredibly
expensive to own. Right, the COE. Certificate
of entitlement. Yes. Before you can even buy
a car, you have to bid for a COE and a quarter
system. These certificates are limited in number
and only last for 10 years. And they're expensive.
Extremely expensive. The price fluctuates with
demand, but it can easily add tens of thousands
of dollars to the cost of a car. And that's on
top of very high registration fees, the ARF,
additional registration fee, and excise duties.
So what's the end result? Owning a car is just...
prohibitively expensive for most people? For
the vast majority, yes. It makes Singapore arguably
the most expensive place on the planet to own
a car. A basic family car can cost two or three
times what it would in Europe or the U .S. Which
forces people onto public transport. Which is
exactly the point. It pushes demand towards their
very efficient mass rapid transit, MRT, subway
system, and bus network. It's all about managing
that scarce road space. So we've talked about
the economy. The politics, the resource management.
But Singapore's success also hinges on managing
its people, right? Yeah. Keeping social harmony
in such a dense, diverse place. Absolutely crucial.
And they approach this with that same kind of
deliberate structure. Look at language, for instance.
Four official languages. Right. English, Malay,
Mandarin Chinese, and Tamil. recognizing the
main ethnic groups. But English is specifically
designated as the common language, the lingua
franca. For practical reasons. Yeah. Government,
business, schools. Exactly. Ensures everyone
can communicate. And it plugs Singapore directly
into the global economy. But this creates a bit
of tension. With Singlish. Yeah. The government
actively discourages Singlish, that unique, very
vibrant local creole, mixing English with words
and grammar from the other languages. The official
line is that it hinders... proficiency in standard
global English. But people still speak it. Oh,
absolutely. For many Singaporeans, Singlish is
a core part of their identity, is how they talk
to each other informally. It's a real cultural
marker. So you have this ongoing push -pull between
the state wanting standardization and the people
having their own distinctive way of speaking.
And that multiculturalism extends deeply into
religion too, doesn't it? Massively. Singapore
is often cited as the world's most religiously
diverse nation. A Pew Research study from 2014
highlighted this. There's no single majority
religion. What are the main groups? Buddhism
has the largest share, around 31%. But then you
have a large group, 20%, identifying with no
religion. Christianity is next at about 19%.
And significant populations of Muslims and Hindus
as well. So tolerance isn't just a nice idea.
It's essential for peace. It's a non -negotiable
necessity. The government actively promotes racial
and religious harmony and comes down hard on
anything seen as inciting hatred. They can't
afford not to. Where does this cultural fusion
really come alive? Maybe the food? Oh, definitely
the food. Singaporean cuisine is famous for its
hybridity. Peranakan or Nyonya cuisine is a classic
example, blending Chinese ingredients and cooking
styles with Malay spices and flavors. Delicious.
And the hawker centers. You can't talk about
Singapore food without mentioning them. Absolutely
iconic. These are basically large, open -air
food courts. The government set them up originally
to get street food vendors off the streets and
into more hygienic, organized spaces. And they're
still central to daily life. Totally. People
from all walks of life eat there. And they are
meticulously graded for hygiene by the National
Environment Agency ABCD ratings displayed prominently.
Food safety is serious business. It's like the
ultimate blend of grassroots, food culture, and
state oversight. Perfectly put. And the quality
can be amazing. Some hawker stalls have even
earned Michelin stars or big gourmands. There's
that famous stall selling soya sauce, chicken
rice, or noodles. Or like two Singapore dollars.
Yeah. The world's cheapest Michelin meal. That's
the one. Though the universally agreed upon national
dish is probably Hennany's chicken rice. Simple,
but perfect when done well. Okay, one last area
before we wrap up. Sports. For such a small country,
they seem to punch above their weight sometimes.
They do. It reflects that same national drive
for excellence you see elsewhere. Regionally
in the Southeast Asian Games, they often dominate
in swimming, for example. But they've had global
successes, too. Yeah, some really standout moments.
Joseph Schooling winning Olympic gold in swimming
in 2016, beating Michael Phelps in the 100 -meter
butterfly. That was a huge deal nationally. A
massive moment of pride. Definitely. And just
recently, in 2024, Max Mader won bronze in sailing,
becoming the country's youngest ever Olympic
medalist at 17. These wins matter. They build
national identity. Any other notable ones? Well,
maybe not as universally known, but in table
tennis, the women's team did something incredible
in 2010. They beat China to win the world team
table tennis championships. Beating China in
table tennis. That's like the ultimate challenge.
Exactly. China had won it for something like
19 years straight. So, yeah, these sporting achievements,
while maybe unexpected for a small nation, fit
that pattern of strategic investment and aiming
high. Hashtag, hashtag, outro. So we've taken
our deep dive into this little red dot. And what
really emerges, I think, is this core identity
built on just relentlessly managing constraints.
Yeah, turning limitations into strengths almost.
Right. Land scarcity, engineer new land, water
scarcity, master water technology, economic vulnerability,
become hyper -connected globally, potential social
friction, manage diversity tightly to ensure
stability. It's a fascinating mix, isn't it?
Almost contradictory in places. You've got state
intervention that feels almost socialist, like
the public housing. Alongside this incredibly
competitive free market capitalism. Governed
by a system that looks democratic on the surface,
but has these strong authoritarian characteristics.
It's pragmatic above all else, highly successful,
undeniably unique. So as we finish up, here's
something to think about, a final provocative
thought for you. The Singapore model, for all
its success, faces real challenges now. The birth
rate, the total fertility rate, is incredibly
low around 1 .1. Which means they rely heavily
on immigration, on foreign talent, to keep the
economy growing. Exactly. And that creates a
tension. How does this system, which has always
prioritized stability through strong central
control, balance that with the need for perhaps
more openness, more freedom, more dynamic innovation
to attract and keep the global talent it needs?
Can it maintain that tight social and political
order while fostering the kind of environment
top global talent increasingly expects? And looking
outwards. How much of Singapore's success story,
the planning, the pragmatism, maybe even the
control, can other small resource poor nations
realistically copy? What parts are truly replicable?
Lots to ponder there. Indeed. Well, thank you
for joining us for The Deep Dot. We hope you
found that journey into the Singapore model insightful.
We'll see you next time.