logo
US tariffs may last well after Trump; crucial for countries to deepen trade ties: SM Lee

US tariffs may last well after Trump; crucial for countries to deepen trade ties: SM Lee

The Star16-07-2025
SINGAPORE: Countries that support free trade should strengthen cooperation and work together to adapt to evolving global trade dynamics in response to the United States' increasingly protectionist stance.
This is crucial, as it may be difficult for the US and the rest of the world to return to the pre-April 2 landscape, when President Donald Trump unveiled his so-called reciprocal trade policy, said Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
The former prime minister was speaking at the Economic Society of Singapore's (ESS') annual dinner on July 15.
SM Lee noted that once tariffs are in place and new businesses emerge that rely on that protection, it becomes politically unfeasible to remove them, as these businesses, now with vested interests, will push back against any rollback.
'It will not go back to the status quo in trade policy, in economic policy. Once you make a move, you can't take it back.'
He noted that former US president Joe Biden did not overturn earlier tariffs that Trump imposed on China in his first term.
SM Lee said that it is unclear if the US will in the future abandon its protectionist stance, but that should not stop other countries from strengthening international cooperation among one another.
He noted that the US has taken a more narrow, bilateral and transactional view of international trade, and, while not perfect, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) framework has nonetheless enabled extensive free trade among many countries.
'We will have to see whether that is (still) possible, because when you have the biggest economy in the world taking a radically different approach and really not just withdrawing from, but expressing its disapproval of, the WTO system, that will have repercussions.'
Acting in defiance of economic laws and the interests of other countries will be very hard to sustain for the US, SM Lee said.
'One thing I have learnt in government is that you can fail to follow economic principles, but you cannot repeal an economic law, whether you follow (it) or not, the economic law exists.
'That's just the way the world works. That's just the way human society works, and if you don't follow it, you may have your reasons and you want to override it and do something different, but market forces, incentives for people to act in certain ways in their own interests are very powerful,' he said.
He noted that the Americans still have to trade with the rest of the world, such as in rare earths.
'Maybe at some point you (the US) can come back and participate again in a more open and constructive way, but that's the best possible scenario. It may or may not happen.'
Asked what other countries should do in the meantime, SM Lee said they can build partnerships with like-minded economies within a region such as Asean, a broader grouping like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or through wider trade pacts such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
'And I think we can also work together on the WTO framework... how to make the WTO work without being paralysed by consensus gridlock.'
He said countries should also diversify their trade relationships by exploring new markets in regions like Latin America and Africa.
SM Lee's dialogue with ESS president Euston Quah also touched on domestic economics and policies, such as on Singapore's certificate of entitlement (COE) system.
A preferential system where COEs are offered at a lower cost to certain groups is not feasible for Singapore, SM Lee said.
He was responding to a question by Professor Quah that made reference to calls for COEs to be made more affordable to some drivers based on need, such as families with young children.
This cannot work in tandem with the current COE system, which is meant to allocate scarce space on the road according to economic principles, SM Lee said.
'It becomes very difficult for the Government to design a system which takes into account how many kids you have, how young they are, whether you've got somebody disabled in the family, whether you have an old folk, whether your job requires you to go place to place, delivering supplies, meeting customers, or whether you are driving to a place of work very far away,' he said.
'I think if you want to design a scheme which worries about all those things, it would fail.'
He likened the COE to a proxy for road space, with prices fluctuating depending on demand from prospective car buyers.
This system is working quite well, SM Lee said, adding that the Government has issued additional COEs to give more people the right to own vehicles.
'If you want the price to be lower, then you must put out more COEs, which is what the Government is now doing. We took from the future. We are putting out 5 per cent, 10 per cent more, and therefore the supply is higher,' he added.
'There's really no easy way to make something which is valuable be distributed fairly, and at the same time, very cheap.'
The Land Transport Authority has said it would add up to 20,000 additional COEs across all five vehicle categories over several years from February 2025.
SM Lee also cited the Chinese city of Beijing, which adopted lotteries to determine which drivers could own licence plates. He said he did not believe this was the right solution for Singapore.
'I can guarantee every Singaporean affordable, convenient transportation. I cannot guarantee every Singaporean an affordable car.'
He added that cars differ from Housing Board flats, where 'every Singaporean can get one, maybe three-room, maybe five-room, maybe two-room, but every Singaporean household can get one. But cars, no'.
SM Lee said it is better to provide direct cash assistance to the group in need, instead of creating complicated schemes to help them.
'You have a special need, for example, you have a kid. Rather than I give you a cheaper COE, I give you a bigger baby bonus, and if you want, you can use that to... help to pay for a little bit of a car,' he said. - The Straits Times/ANN
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Malaysia To Ensure ASEAN Unite For Regional Stability And Peace
Malaysia To Ensure ASEAN Unite For Regional Stability And Peace

Barnama

time31 minutes ago

  • Barnama

Malaysia To Ensure ASEAN Unite For Regional Stability And Peace

KUALA LUMPUR, July 29 (Bernama) -- Malaysia will ensure that ASEAN will be stronger and move in step or in tandem for global stability, prosperity and peace, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. He said Malaysia is committed to driving the implementation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), accelerating the ASEAN Power Grid and finalising the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement to ensure an open, fair and sustainable economic future for the 660 million people in the region. "Therefore, ASEAN will continue to speak out, ensure harmony and lead with determination, and not just follow the global order," he said in a Facebook post today. The Prime Minister said the world is currently beset by great power tensions, a gruelling geo-economic race and the collapse of multilateralism. Anwar said in this regard, ASEAN must not weaken, divide and lag behind but must unite to strengthen ASEAN's role and ensure that the region's voice continues to be respected. For example, he said Malaysia as the 2025 ASEAN Chairman has led efforts to reconcile Cambodia and Thailand, two neighbouring countries that were almost dragged into a more serious conflict. "With the active involvement of China and the United States, we have succeeded in reaching an agreement on an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. "This is proof that diplomacy must underpin our efforts to embody peace and firm leadership," he said. Anwar, who is currently on a working visit to Indonesia, also announced that he was appearing for the first time at the ASEAN Secretariat Building based in Jakarta in conjunction with Malaysia's important role as ASEAN Chairman this year.

NST Leader: 'AI is too important not to regulate'
NST Leader: 'AI is too important not to regulate'

New Straits Times

time32 minutes ago

  • New Straits Times

NST Leader: 'AI is too important not to regulate'

TECH titans have finally got what they were clambering for: a free pass to artificial intelligence (AI) development, thanks to United States President Donald Trump's AI Action Plan unveiled on Wednesday in Washington, at a tech summit attended by the elites of the industry. Calling it "Winning the AI Race", he said his action plan is designed to put the US ahead of other nations. "America must once again be a country where innovators are rewarded with green light, not strangled with red tape", the media quoted him as saying. There is only one way to read Trump's "green light" message: whatever regulations that stand in the way of AI "innovation" will be removed. First to go will be whatever that remains of the former administration's regulations. Is this the right path to take on AI? While tech titans will say yes, there are others who say no because AI comes with so many unknowns. Not even the AI entrepreneurs know where the technology is taking us. Certainly, AI has promises of benefits, but they come clothed with known and unknown risks. Alphabet and Google chief executive officer Sundar Pichai writing an opinion piece in the Financial Times on May 23, 2023 said that "AI is too important not to regulate and too important to regulate well", meaning regulating in a way that balances innovation and potential harms. But a race to be first will certainly not strike the right balance. Google's promise is to develop AI responsibly, but when the profit chase becomes hot would the pledge still hold? Pichai must know AI is fast becoming a crowded space, with every company racing to shape the technology according to its business needs. In other words, profit before people and planet. Our bad old free market economic model — the myth that markets perform best when they are free of regulations — has followed us into the digital world. Myth-busting economist Ha-Joon Chang has made it crystal clear that the free market doesn't exist anywhere in the world. With this "free-to-choose" mindset, nothing can be developed responsibly, let alone AI. We have long been witnesses of irresponsible capitalism, at times victims even. Hence the call for "compassionate capitalism", a sign that the free-to-choose market model has hit the lowest of low. Innovative AI development is only possible in a regulation-free space is a similar myth by another name. This is why the European Union has opted for the AI Act, one of whose aims is to make the technology "work for people and is a force for good in society". It came into effect on Aug 1 last year, claiming the honour of being the first-ever legislation to address the risks of AI. Whether or not such a goal is enforced is a question of political will, not the fault of the law. The EU model isn't the only way to tame AI. A better approach is a global AI treaty. But this will only work in a rules-based world order. Ours isn't. The Paris Treaty on climate change is in a bit of a shambles. So are the Rome Statute and the Law of the Sea. Regional or national approach may be inevitable.

Analysis-World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments
Analysis-World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments

The Star

time2 hours ago

  • The Star

Analysis-World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments

THE HAGUE (Reuters) -A landmark opinion delivered by the United Nations' highest court last week that governments must protect the climate is already being cited in courtrooms, as lawyers say it strengthens the legal arguments in suits against countries and companies. The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, last Wednesday laid out the duty of states to limit harm from greenhouse gases and to regulate private industry. It said failure to reduce emissions could be an internationally wrongful act and, found that treaties such as the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change should be considered legally binding. While not specifically naming the United States, the court said countries that were not part of the United Nations climate treaty must still protect the climate as a matter of human rights law and customary international law. Only a day after the World Court opinion, lawyers for a windfarm distributed copies of it to the seven judges of the Irish Supreme Court on the final day of hearings ona case about whether planning permits for turbines should prioritise climate concerns over rural vistas. It is not clear when the Irish court will deliver its ruling. Lawyer Alan Roberts, for Coolglass Wind Farm, said the opinion would boost his client's argument that Ireland's climate obligations must be taken into account when considering domestic law. Although also not legally binding, the ICJ's opinion has legal weight, provided that national courts accept as a legal benchmark for their deliberations, which U.N. states typically do. The United States, where nearly two-thirds of all climate litigation cases are ongoing, is increasingly likely to be an exception as it has always been ambivalent about the significance of ICJ opinions for domestic courts. Compounding that, under U.S. President Donald Trump, the country has been tearing up all climate regulations. Not all U.S. states are sceptical about climate change, however, and lawyers said they still expected the opinion to be cited in U.S. cases. In Europe, where lawyers say the ICJ opinion is likely to have its greatest impact on upcoming climate cases, recent instances of governments respecting the court's rulings include Britain's decision late last year to reopen negotiations to return the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean to Mauritius. That followed a 2019 ICJ opinion that London should cede control. BONAIRE VERSUS THE NETHERLANDS Turning to environmental cases, in a Dutch civil case due to be heard in October - Bonaire versus The Netherlands - Greenpeace Netherlands and eight people from the Dutch territory of Bonaire, a low-lying island in the Caribbean, will argue that the Netherlands' climate plan is insufficient to protect the island against rising sea levels. The World Court said countries' national climate plans must be "stringent" and aligned to the Paris Agreement aim to limit warming to 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial average. The court also said countries must take responsibility for a country's fair share of historical emissions. In hearings last December at the ICJ that led to last week's opinion, many wealthy countries, including Norway, Saudi Arabia, and The United States argued national climate plans were non-binding. "The court has said (...) that's not correct," said Lucy Maxwell, co-director of the Climate Litigation Network. In the Bonaire case, the Dutch government is arguing that having a climate plan is sufficient. The plaintiffs argue it would not meet the 1.5C threshold and the Netherlands must do its fair share to keep global warming below that, Louise Fournier, legal counsel for Greenpeace International, said. "This is definitely going to help there," Fourniersaid of the ICJ opinion in the Bonaire case. 'URGENT AND EXISTENTIAL THREAT' The ICJ opinion said climate change was an "urgent and existential threat," citing decades of peer-reviewed research, even as scepticism has mounted in some quarters, led by the United States. A document seen by Reuters shows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency may question the research behind mainstream climate science and is poised to revoke its scientific determination that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health. Jonathan Martel of the U.S. law firm Arnold and Porter represents industry clients on environmental issues. He raised the prospect of possible legal challenges to the EPA's regulatory changes given that an international court has treated the science of climate change as unequivocal and settled. "This might create a further obstacle for those who would advocate against regulatory action based on scientific uncertainty regarding the existence of climate change caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases," he said. The U.S. EPA changes would affect the agency's regulations on tailpipe emissions from vehicles that run on fossil fuel. Legal teams are reviewing the impact of the ruling on litigation against the companies that produce fossil fuel, as well as on the governments that regulate them. TheWorld Courtsaid that states could be held liable for the activities of private actors under their control, specifically mentioning the licensing and subsidising of fossil fuel production. Notre Affaire à Tous, a French NGO whose case against TotalEnergies is due to be heard in January 2026, expected the advisory opinion to strengthen its arguments. "This opinion will strongly reinforce our case because it mentions (...) that providing new licences to new oil and gas projects may be a constitutional and international wrongful act," said Paul Mougeolle, senior counsel for Notre Affaire à Tous. TotalEnergies did not respond to a request for comment. (Reporting by Stephanie van den Berg and Alison Withers, additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici from Washington; editing by Barbara Lewis)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store