IDEAS, OPINIONS CROSSING BORDERS
During Singapore’s hustings, authorities said they had identified foreigners attempting to influence the election, and directed Meta to block online advertising by two PAS politicians.
Their Facebook posts, which can no longer be viewed by users in Singapore, expressed support for certain opposition candidates and criticised decisions made by the ruling government.
Two articles were also published in a PAS newsletter, one of which named several Malay opposition candidates running in GE2025, highlighting their educational and career backgrounds. The other criticised Singapore’s housing policies.
At the time, PAS also issued a statement in response, saying the two individuals were expressing their personal views, which “in no way reflect PAS’ official policy or stance”. The party added then that while it respects Singapore’s concerns, it also believes Singapore’s reaction was “somewhat exaggerated and unilateral”.
On Tuesday, Mr Shanmugam noted that PAS was an Islamist political party with a goal to Islamise society in Malaysia.
“Does anyone believe that PAS subscribes to Singapore’s multiracial, multireligious model?” he asked, reiterating that PAS had openly supported a political party in Singapore on racial and religious grounds and in the middle of a General Election.
PAS’ Takiyuddin in his Wednesday statement said Singapore positions itself as a “global, hyperconnected hub where ideas and opinions inevitably cross borders”.
“To classify online remarks unaccompanied by funding, actions, coordination or directives as ‘interference’ overstates the case, diminishes the term’s meaning and paves the way for censoring legitimate public discourse,” he said.
“If digital connectivity is viewed as a channel for interference, then the only logical response would be to disconnect from the world, which is an unsustainable position for an open economy reliant on flows of capital, talent and information.”
Mr Takiyuddin added that it was “disingenuous” to suggest that Singaporean voters were “so easily swayed” by foreign views that they must be “protected” from opinions which they can evaluate critically.
“Blaming outsiders for internal debates is a classic political deflection tactic that conveniently shifts the focus away from difficult domestic issues,” he said.
He said this allows leaders to rally the public against “a fabricated threat”, which is easier than crafting policy, building consensus and addressing the actual concerns of citizens.
“It is a political shortcut that trades long-term problem-solving for short-term unity against a scapegoat,” said Mr Takiyuddin.
