'That is just wrong': Shanmugam accuses WP's Fadli of framing Israel issue through 'race and religion' prism

A sharp exchange unfolded in Parliament on Wednesday (Nov 4) as Senior Minister K Shanmugam and Workers' Party MP Muhammad Fadli bin Mohammed Fawzi clashed over Singapore's engagement with Israeli officials, with the minister describing the MP's position as "absurd" and "novel".

Shanmugam also accused Fadli of trying to portray the Government as "unprincipled and soft on Israel" and encouraging people to view Singapore's international relationships through "the prism of race and religion".

The exchange in Parliament followed Fadli's request to make a personal explanation over a written parliamentary reply by SM Shanmugam concerning Singapore's meeting with an Israeli delegation and whether issues surrounding illegal settlements and settler violence in the West Bank had been raised.

Fadli, who represents Aljunied GRC's Kaki Bukit division, argued that Singapore should raise concerns about issues relevant to its national interests and commitment to international law during bilateral engagements, including when meeting Israeli officials.

He said the principle should apply consistently to all countries and cited Shanmugam's own 2023 speech on the importance of upholding Singapore's principles and interests "consistently, impartially, objectively".

However, SM Shanmugam, who is also Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs, challenged Fadli's position, questioning whether his proposed whole-of-government approach meant every ministry should raise international law issues, even when they were not directly relevant to its engagements.

"Every ministry, therefore, must raise international law issues when meeting a counterpart ministry, even if MFA has set out its position, and even if the issues are not directly relevant to the ministry?" he asked.

Giving the example of Singapore's efforts to secure support for Ambassador Rena Lee's election to the International Court of Justice , SM Shanmugam questioned whether it would make sense for ministers to raise a list of international law concerns with countries whose support they were seeking.

He also accused Fadli of sending "two messages to two different audiences", saying the MP was trying to "present the picture that the government is unprincipled and soft on Israel".

"That's what this question and this subsequent explanation is all about: getting people to view our international relationships through the prism of race and religion. That is just wrong," said Shanmugam.

Fadli pushed back, saying: "I reject the characterisation that this is motivated by race and religion," and reiterated that his position was primarily about Singapore upholding its commitments to international law.

He clarified that he had not suggested raising every bilateral or foreign policy issue at every meeting, saying: "The general principle of whether to raise an issue during a bilateral engagement is if it is relevant, and in our interest to do so."

"In this case, the illegal settlements are indeed relevant," he added.

Fadli subsequently returned to his original parliamentary question, on whether Singapore had requested that the meeting be kept confidential.

In response, SM Shanmugam said meetings between MHA and its foreign counterparts were "almost always kept confidential", except where one of the parties requested that they be made public.

The senior minister also reiterated that if Fadli believed Singapore should, as a matter of principle, raise such issues during engagements with Israeli counterparts, he should table an adjournment motion.

"If member believes that our interactions with Israel at every meeting should raise all these issues that Israel is accused of, and if that is believed in principle, I would say put down an adjournment motion, and we can debate it properly," he said.

helmy.saat@asiaone.com

周三（11 月 4 日），国会爆发了一场激烈的争论，高级部长尚穆根和工人党议员穆罕默德·法德利·本·穆罕默德·法齐就新加坡与以色列官员的接触问题发生冲突，部长称该议员的立场“荒谬”且“新颖”。

尚穆根还指责法德利试图将政府描绘成“对以色列没有原则且软弱”，并鼓励人们“从种族和宗教的角度”看待新加坡的国际关系。

在议会的这次交锋之前，法德利要求就SM Shanmugam就新加坡与以色列代表团会面以及是否提出了有关西岸非法定居点和定居者暴力问题提交的书面议会答复作出个人解释。

代表阿裕尼集选区加基武吉选区的法德利认为，新加坡在双边交往中，包括与以色列官员会面时，应该对与其国家利益和国际法承诺相关的问题提出关切。

他表示，这一原则应始终如一地适用于所有国家，并引用了尚穆根在 2023 年发表的关于“始终如一、公正客观地”维护新加坡原则和利益重要性的演讲。

然而，兼任国家安全统筹部长和内政部长的尚穆根对法德利的立场提出了质疑，他质疑法德利提出的全政府方针是否意味着每个部门都应该提出国际法问题，即使这些问题与其参与的活动没有直接关系。

他问道：“因此，每个部委在与对口部委会面时，都必须提出国际法问题，即使外交部已经表明了自己的立场，即使这些问题与该部委没有直接关系？”

以新加坡为争取支持李丽娜大使当选国际法院法官所做的努力为例，SM Shanmugam质疑，部长们向他们寻求支持的国家提出一系列国际法关切事项是否有意义。

他还指责法德利“向两个不同的受众传递两种信息”，称这位议员试图“展现政府没有原则且对以色列软弱的形象”。

“这个问题以及随后的解释，其目的就在于此：让人们透过种族和宗教的棱镜来看待我们的国际关系。这是完全错误的，”尚穆根说道。

法德利反驳道：“我不接受这种说法，即此事是出于种族和宗教动机。”他重申，他的立场主要是关于新加坡履行其对国际法的承诺。

他澄清说，他并没有建议在每次会晤中提出每一个双边或外交政策问题，他说：“在双边会晤中是否提出某个问题的总体原则是，这个问题是否相关，以及这样做是否符合我们的利益。”

“在这种情况下，非法定居点确实具有相关性，”他补充道。

随后，法德利回到了他最初在议会提出的问题，即新加坡是否要求对会议保密。

对此，SM Shanmugam 表示，内政部与其外国同行之间的会晤“几乎总是保密的”，除非一方要求公开。

这位高级部长还重申，如果法德利认为新加坡应该在与以色列同行接触时，从原则上提出此类问题，那么他应该提出休会动议。

他说：“如果某位成员认为，我们在每次会议上与以色列的互动都应该提出以色列被指控的所有这些问题，并且如果原则上认同这一点，我认为应该提出休会动议，我们可以就此进行适当的辩论。”

helmy.saat@asiaone.com