Reject identity politics, says PM Wong as he calls on political parties to make clear their position
Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, speaking at a press conference, said that this is a matter of national importance. ST PHOTO: CHONG JUN LIANG
Reject identity politics, says PM Wong as he calls on political parties to make clear their position
Follow our live coverage here.
SINGAPORE – Singapore should firmly reject identity politics, and keep race and religion out of the political space, said Prime Minister Lawrence Wong.
A week before the nation heads to the polls on May 3, he called on all political parties to make clear their position on the matter.
He explained that identity politics refers to candidates appealing for support on the basis of race and religion, and championing the interests of particular groups over everything else.
Speaking at a press conference on April 26, he said: 'This is not a partisan or party matter. This is a matter of national importance.'
He called on the leaders of all political parties to clarify their stance on two fundamental principles: that identity politics has no place in Singapore, and that religion and politics should not mix.
He said: 'My call to all political parties is as I said: let's do our best not to push the boundaries and push the frontiers of race and religion, and bring in race and religion into politics.'
He added that if all parties agree and exercise their campaign with an element of restraint, Singapore will be better off as a whole.
He said: 'In the end, Singaporeans can choose whichever party they wish to support for their constituency and for their government, but we will not allow this to become an issue that divides us especially in the middle of an election campaign.'
PM Wong was speaking a day after the government moved to block access to Facebook posts by two Malaysian politicians and an ex-ISA detainee for attempting to interfere in the ongoing election.
The posts belong to Mr Iskandar Abdul Samad, the national treasurer of Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS), and the Islamist party's Selangor Youth chief Mohamed Sukri Omar. A third person, Facebook user 'Zai Nal', identified as Zulfikar Mohamad Shariff – an Australian citizen who renounced his Singapore citizenship in 2020 – was also named.
They, along with a Singaporean religious teacher based in Malaysia known as Mr Noor Deros, had spotlighted several opposition politicians in social media posts, including incumbent Aljunied MP Faisal Manap, who is contesting Tampines GRC this year under the WP banner.
Earlier that day, party chief Pritam Singh had said in response to the recent developments that the WP cannot be a successful political party 'if we play the race and religion card'.
Asked to comment on the statements by the WP and other opposition parties, PM Wong said he had seen across the board a clear consensus to reject foreign interference in the election.
PM Wong, who is Secretary-General of the PAP, added: 'I think that's good. I welcome that.'
He added that while one cannot control what foreign actors say – be it support or endorsements – he called on parties to 'categorically reject these endorsements'.
The fundamental principle is that foreigners should not decide the outcome of Singapore's elections, he said.
He said: 'This is our country, our elections. Singaporeans alone decide the outcome of our elections.'
He added that on issues that have the potential to undermine national interest, such as foreign policy, there should be a 'sense of unity in presenting to the world.'
Adopting identity politics will result in more division, and Singaporeans will all pay the price, PM Wong said.
He added: 'That's dangerous, because when one group jostles aggressively to assert its identity, others will organise and start to jostle back.
'You can see how this plays out in countries everywhere. You end up fueling our worst tendencies, hostilities and vengefulness across the side.'
No one wins when this happens, PM Wong said.
He said: 'The minority groups will fail to get what they want, because the majority group will push back strongly, and the minorities will find their space constricted.
'At the same time, the majority group will also live in the most unhappy society, where every issue comes down to race and religion. So no one is happy.'
Social media posts 'crossed the line'
The social media accounts that were blocked had targeted Singaporeans, and their posts were widely shared within the Singaporean community.
This crossed the line, said PM Wong.
He said: 'Singaporeans may have different views about issues, but we cannot allow external actors to exploit whatever differences we may have, to weaken us, or to advance their own interests.'
Foreign influence is one side of the coin, but there are also other posts circulating online attempting to bring race and religion into politics, he said.
He cited those by Singaporean activists proposing that Muslims should vote for candidates that are willing to advance a religious agenda.
He said: 'These messages may be by Singaporeans, but we should also reject them, and were it a Christian, a Hindu or Buddhist group making the same demand, our response would be the same.'
Mixing politics with religion is unacceptable in Singapore, he said, adding that the Government has always taken a firm stance against this.
Doing so fractures the common space Singaporeans share, he warned.
If elections become contests of faith, all communities will end up worse off, he added.
Also, external powers will seek to explore these fault lines to advance their own agendas, he said.
When asked if he was worried that the actions by authorities will cause backlash in terms of vote swings for GE2025, PM Wong said that the Government was not acting out of concern about the electoral outcome, but instead, focusing on the impact on Singapore's social harmony.
This was the reason why authorities intervened during the campaign period and why he called for the press conference on April 26, said PM Wong, stressing how the matter went beyond politics.
'I'm not here to talk about my concerns about the party. I'm here to talk about my concern for Singapore, and our country,' said PM Wong.
'And this goes beyond one election, because once the faultlines deepen, once trust is eroded, it is so hard to recover again.'
PM Wong was asked if there are other entities that are a cause for concern when it comes to foreign influence on GE2025, such as Critical Spectator, the Facebook page and website run by Polish national Michael Petraeus.
Singapore's rules are clear and the outcome of its elections is for its citizens to decide, he stressed.
Foreigners are allowed to write about elections, but they cross the line if they take a position on an issue or a candidate, or push for one over the other. This is especially so when it is about race and religion, he said.
'You start mixing race and religion into politics, that crosses the line. So the agencies and authorities will continue to monitor…but if anything crosses the line we will certainly take action,' he said.
Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


International Business Times
5 hours ago
- International Business Times
FACT CHECK: Did Donald Trump Post on Truth Social That Elon Musk 'Totally' Did a Nazi Salute?
There have been several claims floating on social media amid the escalating feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump. On Friday, a claim surfaced online alleging that President Trump wrote on Truth Social that the tech mogul and ex-White House adviser "totally" did a Nazi salute. The claim went viral in no time. However, the claim is not true and just like many of the rumors have been circulating online, confusing users. Musk and Trump have been engaged in an online feud over the past few days which intensified on Thursday, with both going out of control. Since then several claims have surfaced and much like the others are false. The Weird Claim The claim first appeared on Thursday. According to the claim, Trump posted on social media that Musk "totally" did a Nazi salute. The alleged post read, "That totally was a Nazi salute that Elon did by the way. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it." The message shown in the image referred to an incident during Trump's second Inauguration Day in January, when Musk raised his arm in a way that many felt resembled the stiff-armed salute linked to Nazism. Musk later accused the "legacy media" of wrongly portraying his gesture. The image was shared on multiple social media platforms, including a June 6, 2025 post on X from the @TylerDurden account. The fake post was uploaded without any accompanying caption or explanation. Several social media users have since been trying to verify the authenticity of the post. However, the claim is completely false, with the intention of either cracking a joke or spreading misinformation amid the ongoing feud. No Authenticity of Image An extensive review of Donald Trump's Truth Social account also showed no evidence of a post matching the claim between May 31 and June 6, 2025. Also, a Google search using the "site:" operator to look for the term "Nazi" within returned no results, suggesting that no such post had been recently indexed by Google. Trump's Truth, a site that keeps a record of Trump's posts on Truth Social, also showed no entries containing the phrase "Nazi salute." The claim, thus, is completely false.

Straits Times
11 hours ago
- Straits Times
Hear Me Out: Has the swing against elitism gone too far?
An art installation at the Padang. Vocal naysayers recently accused the Government's SG Culture Pass initiative of being the very thing it counteracted: elitism. PHOTO: ST FILE Hear Me Out: Has the swing against elitism gone too far? SINGAPORE – At a time when most people understand that the personal is political, individual views have become a battleground of virtue – equality, good; hierarchy, bad. Elitism? The worst possible kind of social evil. Yet, take a step back from this instinctive repulsion and there might be benefits to muddying the waters. Elitism, the belief that an elite group, however defined, should be entitled to the reins of power has been the norm throughout much of history. Whether it is the clergy, kings with their divine right, the Confucian scholar or today's fintech bros, there have been groups in each time period that societies tend to value and reward. It was only with increasing democratisation, and a growing disenfranchisement at the chasm between the top and the rest, that elitism has become a byword for undeserved privilege and gross injustice. This brief trip back in time is not to rehabilitate elitism, but to show that the current period against it – or at least one that pays lip service to not believing in an elite class – may be an aberrant one. In the West, this has been taken to extremes, manifesting in a debilitating disregard fo r e xperts and fatal results during the Covid-19 pandemic against the advice of doctors to vaccinate. In Singapore, it is the elite schools that are targeted, in the idealistic slogan that every school is a good school. Though, for perplexing reasons, this scepticism has not yet been extended to the natural reverence the majority of Singaporeans harbour for lawyers and doctors. Their expertise is assumed to be universally applicable – a mentality that has narrowed parents and students' conception of what success looks like. In any case, the ills of elitism have been thoroughly aired, including the type of entitled, discompassionate divas that it ends up producing. The very consensus of who deserves to be elite has also fractured. I wonder, though, if this enmity has led to some unexpected side effects. This is a train of thought sparked by recent reactions to the Government's SG Culture Pass initiative set out during the Budget statement in 2025. Self-sabotage Under the scheme, $100 would be given t o Si ngaporeans aged 18 and above for the consumption of the local arts, redeemable from September. One would expect rejoicing, but there was uproar from a group of vocal naysayers. They accused the credits of being the very thing it counteracted: elitism. Why? Because the money could be better spent on support for groceries. This, I thought, was a case of anti-elitism as self-sabotage. Central to this worldview was that the arts is an elitist activity patronised only by the rich and the hyper-educated aesthete, when one type of activity for the elite and one for the others is exactly the sort of segregation and self-limiting mentality that perpetuates divides. There was no sense that this $100 in credits was a way of making the perceived barrier more permeable. To put it in context, the Government also announced $800 in CDC vouchers. This was bread for all, and roses too. Yet another potentially problematic by-product is that the word 'elite' has since been tainted by association. No one dares lay claim to the word 'elite', or acknowledge that someone else may be elite in his or her field. The rare exemption is perhaps in sports, where athletes accept the cut-throat nature of their competition, and where non-athletes are so tangibly outside their league that there is no point in pretending otherwise. This is not in itself a problem – elite is after all just a word – though I find no easy replacement term that can immediately convey excellence to the same degree. But it incidentally comes at a time when there is a general reluctance to impose any kind of objective standard, supplemented by that compassionate but useless invention: the consolation prize. This applies to things: Is no one taste now better than another? As well as people, where so many takes on social media are considered equally valid, measured just by virality. It is the kind of ChatGPT mentality where how often something is repeated or the number of clicks on a website can influence results, with no regard to its truth value. The war against elitism may have come at the expense of standards and good sense. Reclaiming elite This impulse to drag discourse to the same level – usually downwards – has the right intentions, timely given that, for so long, highly selective elitist standards have been imposed as objective metrics. To right the ship so discourse is levelled upwards though, perhaps elite can be thought of as separate from elitism, rehabilitated without the corresponding concentration of resources and power. This should be expanded so that who is elite becomes not just about education but also because of other qualities – role models people can aspire to in different contexts. What constitutes an elite has always been reliant on man-made barometers, negotiated by the community. There should be no shame in aspiring to be elite. Anti-elitism should not mean an absence of the elite, but that all who put their heart and minds to it should have a fair shot at claiming its pedigree, or getting closer to it. It is a lifelong dusting off of mediocrity, and it begins with first recognising what is good. Hear Me Out is a new series where young journalists (over)share on topics ranging from navigating friendships to self-loathing, and the occasional intrusive thought. Check out the Headstart chatbot for answers to your questions on careers and work trends.

Straits Times
12 hours ago
- Straits Times
Thailand and Cambodia reinforcing troops on disputed border after May skirmish, Thai minister says
Royalist activists hold placards as they protest in front of the Royal Embassy of Cambodia in Bangkok on June 6, 2025. PHOTO: REUTERS Thailand and Cambodia reinforcing troops on disputed border after May skirmish, Thai minister says BANGKOK - Thailand has reinforced its military presence along a disputed border with Cambodia, following an increase in troops on the other side, Thailand's defence minister said on June 7, as tensions simmer following a deadly clash. For days, the two South-east Asian governments have exchanged carefully worded statements committing to dialogue after a brief skirmish in an undemarcated border area on May 28 in which a Cambodian soldier was killed. But Mr Phumtham Wechayachai, who also serves as Thailand's deputy prime minister, said that during talks bilateral talks held on June 5, Cambodia had rejected proposals that could have led to a de-escalation. "Furthermore, there has been a reinforcement of military presence, which has exacerbated tensions along the border," Mr Phumtham said in a statement. "Consequently, the Royal Thai Government has deemed it necessary to implement additional measures and to reinforce our military posture accordingly." He did not provide details on the extent of reinforcements by either side. In a separate statement on June 7, the Thai army said Cambodian soldiers and civilians had repeatedly made incursions into Thailand's territory. "These provocations, and the build up of military forces, indicate a clear intent to use force," the Thai army said, adding that it would take control of all Thai checkpoints along the border with Cambodia. A spokesperson for Cambodia's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to questions from Reuters. The military reinforcements come despite efforts by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who is the current chair of the Association of South-east Asian Nations (Asean) bloc, and China to reduce tensions. Thailand and Cambodia have for more than a century contested sovereignty at various undemarcated points along their 817km land border, which was first mapped by France in 1907 when Cambodia was its colony. Tension escalated in 2008 over an 11th-century Hindu temple, leading to skirmishes over several years and at least a dozen deaths, including during a weeklong exchange of artillery in 2011. Current governments in both countries, however, have enjoyed warm ties. Former leaders Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand and Cambodia's Hun Sen have had a close relationship, and Mr Thaksin's daughter and Mr Hun Sen's son are now the incumbent prime ministers of their countries. Still, nationalist sentiment has risen in Thailand and the Thai military said on June 6 that it is ready to launch a "high-level operation" to counter any violation of its sovereignty. Cambodia said this week it would refer disputes over four parts of the border to the International Court of Justice and asked Thailand to cooperate. Mr Phumtham reiterated in his June 7 statement that Thailand does not recognise the jurisdiction of the court and proposed that all boundary-related issues be resolved through bilateral negotiations. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.