Date : 21 September 2011
Synopsis:
DPM Teo Chee Hean highlighted the importance of building community resilience, and maintaining inter-racial and inter-religious solidarity. He pointed out that building community resilience requires passion, honesty and commitment, and also the understanding of group dynamics and what moves people to action. He said that the value of the Community Engagement Programme is in travelling on the journey together and not in attaining a hypothesized end state, and that it is about the friendships and networks of trust that are built up along the way – deep resources that can be called upon in times of need.
________________________________________
Speech by DPM Teo Chee Hean, Deputy Prime Minister, Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs, at the International Conference On Community Engagement at the Grand Copthorne Waterfront Hotel, Grand Ballroom, 21 September 2011
Ambassador Barry Desker, Dean of RSIS
Your Excellencies
Distinguished Speakers and Participants
Ladies and Gentlemen
Good morning.
The Importance of Social Resilience
Let me welcome all our overseas visitors to Singapore. It is a pleasure to see you all here, and I trust that you will enjoy your stay.
Ten days ago, we marked the 10th anniversary of the September-11th attacks. Much has been said over the last week about how those events altered the course of history. Indeed, they changed the way we look at aviation security, and caused us to re-evaluate the seriousness of the threats from religious extremism. The events of 9/11 and its aftermath also showed us that the deepest danger from terrorism is not the immediate loss of life or damage caused, though it is indeed severe and causes great pain, but the injury and scarring of the psyche of an entire generation and the seeding of mistrust over time. Ethnic violence brings out the worst in people. A moment of ethnic violence takes an entire generation and a long history to heal.
In Singapore, we ourselves narrowly averted a major suicide attack when the Internal Security Department took action against terrorists from the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorist group in Dec 2001. The JI members were working with an Al-Qaeda operative who was plotting to bomb high-profile targets in Singapore, including several embassies and commercial buildings housing US firms. While Singapore, in the past, had experienced terrorist attacks in 1974 (Laju incident), when a ferry was hijacked, and 1991 (SQ 117 hijack), where an aircraft was hijacked, what made the difference this time was that we had to confront the stark realisation that there were Singaporeans who were willing to take the lives of their own countrymen, fellow Singaporeans for an ideological cause that had nothing to do with circumstances in Singapore.
If the JI plot had succeeded, the damage done would have gone beyond the immediate loss of life and destruction of property. Indeed, one of the objectives of their actions was to sow mistrust and discord among the various communities in order to create turbulent conditions which they could exploit to achieve their aims. Our racial and religious relations would have been put severely under strain, potentially raising tensions to a point not seen since the tumultuous days of the 1960s, an era marred by constant racial and communal tensions and violence.
When the JI plot was uncovered, we had to deal with the immediate security threat - to track down and detain these terrorists to neutralize the threat – to discover if there were other plots, other people, other parts of the network, who were still out there waiting to strike. But our other major concern was how to reach out to maintain inter-racial and inter-religious solidarity. We had to reach out to the Muslim community; to gain their understanding that the arrests were aimed only at those who were plotting violence, and not at the whole community. We also had to ensure that there was no anti-Muslim backlash – that Singaporeans would realize that only a very small mis-guided minority were extremists who harbored intentions to commit violence. Thankfully, our communal fabric was strong, built on many years of steady and deliberate work to build bonds and trust among the communities and which helped to provide us with a good foundation. The Muslim community did not react negatively, but instead rallied to take ownership of the problem, and deal with the threat of extremism, which they saw as a threat to their own community and also to the larger Singapore. This readiness to recognize and deal with the problem as such, gained the trust and respect of the other communities in Singapore. And as a consequence, communities reached out to each other to further strengthen their bonds of mutual confidence and trust. The Singapore population stood united.
After 9/11 and the discovery of the JI plot in 2001, we experienced in our own region the horrific Bali bombings in 2002. Subsequent to that, there were more episodes of violence in the region and also around the world, including the Madrid train bombings in 2004 and the London 7/7 bombings in 2005, which occurred one day after London won its bid for the 2012 Olympics during the IOC session held here in Singapore. We saw how these events strained community relations in these countries. And we knew what we had done over the years, we were not immune, and that we had to do whatever we could to prepare for a similar event happening here. I once spoke to one of my Thai friends, who had experienced insurgencies in several decades, and he described it as walking with two legs. Indeed the security leg and the leg of community engagement and development. And only with two legs, can you make progress and walk forward. The Security-side provides you with the environment in which development, confidence and trust can occur. And with confidence and trust-building, there is more confidence in the security and the security forces. And you make progress step by step. The proportion between the two – community engagement and security – varies according to the phase you are in your structure. I thought that was a very good analogy to use. And as Ambassador Barry Desker said earlier, you cannot just depend on the security dimension, but you also cannot ignore the security dimension and hope that the community engagement dimension will be sufficient to deal with the problem. This is because we still have to remove from the equation those people who will pour oil on the fire and cause things to become worse even as we try to make things better.
The Community Engagement Programme
In 2006, we launched the Community Engagement Programme. This programme brings together stakeholders across the sweep of our society, and encourages them to co-create a vision of Singaporean society which is resilient against terrorism and other external threats. It then challenges them to bring this vision to fruition at the local level by putting in place actionable response plans, and by being individually prepared.
Let me give you one concrete example of how the programme has worked on the ground. The Geylang Serai area has the largest concentration of racial and religious organizations in Singapore. It’s a very small area, with several streets parallel to each other.There are some 120 religious institutions, clan associations and civic organisations in the Geylang Serai constituency. It was one of the places involved in the 1964 racial riots. But over time, the various parties learned to live in harmony with each other, build trust with one anotherand learn how to share and live with each other.
Since the CEP was launched, the Member of Parliament for the area, Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, has harnessed the positive conflict resolution experiences of the past, and shared them with the new generation of Geylang residents. This has made them appreciate much better the importance of give-and-take, and of finding win-win solutions.
One positive example of how this has strengthened the community is when a fire broke out in February this year, at Chong Hood Lim Association, a Buddhist temple housed within a shophouse unit at Lorong 25A Geylang. As a result, the temple, as well as the Coronation Baptist Church, which was located just next to it, became structurally unstable. Upon learning that the church would be unable to conduct its service sessions, Assoc Prof Lateef discussed the issue with the temple management, who agreed to share its newly acquired activity centre nearby to temporarily allow the church to continue conducting service sessions. The church later found its own space, but the important thing is that the spirit of helping , sharing and dealing with a common problem together, is inspiring.
Another example was in March 2007, when the anti-Islamic video “Fitna” was released by Dutch politician Geert Wilders. This attracted violent demonstrations and counter-demonstrations in several countries. Muslims in Singapore reacted calmly to the film despite being deeply offended. The non-Muslim public also rejected the views contained in the video. More importantly, they stepped up to make their stand known, showing the measured response and mutual respect in our society.
We have learnt from campaigns of the past that a top-down approach may get a project started expeditiously. However, to have it take root and be sustainable in the long term, it has to inspire the ground and gain traction. It is only when the people on the ground take ownership and see meaning in it, that the programme works.
An example is what has been done in the grassroots sector. For a long time, we have had an emergency preparedness programme for the constituencies. It was however often something of an addendum in their busy calendar of events and priorities. Today, through innovative re-fashioning and refreshing of the basic emergency preparedness programme by the People’s Association, a revitalized and common framework to develop emergency preparedness teams in every constituency has emerged to make it more relevant for the residents and people who participate. The PA calls this the “CEP Ready” certification programme. Today we have 84 CEP Ready constituencies. The PA also introduced the CEP Unity Award and 42 constituencies have attained it.
It has been an eventful journey of learning and discovery. In the process, we have learnt much about ourselves, and about each other. The journey has had its challenges, but the nature of community building is that the more effort you put in, the richer and deeper the experiences and the rewards. The value of the programme is in travelling on this journey together, not in attaining some hypothesized end state. It is about the friendships and networks of trust that are built up along the way – deep resources that can be called upon in times of need.
The programme has inspired many people to come forward and take ownership of their own future; younger Singaporeans and elderly residents; students and workers. We should all be proud of what we have achieved, and strive to bring even more people into the programme from all walks of life.
Becoming Stronger though the Sharing of Knowledge and Experiences
Building community resilience is an art as well as a science. It requires passion, honesty and commitment. But it also requires a method to it – a scientific understanding of how people behave under stress, and what makes them retain their humanity under conditions of extreme pressure. It is about understanding group dynamics and what moves people to action, whether rational or irrational; and also about what interventions are effective when communities turn against each other. This conference brings together experts in the area of community engagement both from academia and government, representing a wide range of disciplines and experiences.
Even though your different communities share a different history and face different challenges, it is precisely because of these differences that there are many insights that we can learn from one another – so that we can learn from the experiences of others and find common threads of understanding within a very diverse set of circumstances.
Conclusion
The pace at which the world is changing means that our communities are constantly facing new challenges and stresses that will test our social fabric. It is increasingly difficult to anticipate all possible threats. For all the good that it does, the internet also allows for the rapid propagation of irresponsible and divisive ideas. Because the Net offers anonymity, people sometimes act without a sense of accountability, without thinking through the consequences of their actions before pressing the “send” button.
Resilience therefore must be built between all segments of community, from the bottom up. The Government’s role is to enable and encourage this to happen. But we need everyone to take a moment to pause and reflect upon the consequences of our actions, words, deeds before hitting the “send” button in times of conflict so that incidents do not escalate irrationally. In a sense, the government and the people have to work together, so that we can walk together forward with two legs.
Every generation in every society has to find its own balance, and build its own social contract and social compact. How strong that compact is, and whether it will stand the test of time, depends on how much time and energy is put into it. Your presence here gives us great encouragement that we have started upon the right road.
I thank you for your presence and participation, and wish you all a fruitful and enriching time in Singapore. And may we all have peace in this world of ours.
Thank you.
___________________________
Related links:
Details on the International Conference on Community Engagement can be found at the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research’s website at http://www.pvtr.org/theUpcomingEvent.htm