Singapore Democratic Party’s (SDP) Chee Soon Juan has made a questionable choice nominating Ariffin Sha, the 27-year-old founder of Wake Up, Singapore (WUSG), to contest Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC.

The decision is not a minor oversight—it points to a lapse in judgment that may cast doubts on Chee’s fitness for ministerial office.

While the People’s Action Party (PAP) has faced its own scandals involving individuals who were later convicted (Eg. Iswaran), these typically emerge after elections, not before.

Background

In August 2024, Ariffin was fined S$8,000 after pleading guilty to criminal defamation for publishing a fabricated story about KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, falsely claiming a woman suffered a miscarriage due to negligence.

Chee’s response to Ariffin's red flag is has been evasive.

At a press conference on April 13, 2025, he urged voters to focus on SDP’s policies, not Ariffin’s past, and compared the case to former PAP Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin’s resignation over an extramarital affair. The comparison misses the mark: Tan’s personal lapse, while serious, did not involve lawbreaking or public harm.

Chee’s deflection sidesteps the core issue of vetting a candidate with a known conviction.

Leadership requires sound judgement

The PAP is not immune to scrutiny.

Cases like former Transport Minister S. Iswaran’s corruption charges in January 2024 and former Tampines GRC MP Cheng Li Hui’s affair with Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan Jin reveal vetting gaps.

However, these issues emerged after elections. The PAP acted decisively, removing Iswaran from his post and asked both Tan Chuan Jin and Cheng Li Hui to resign.

No system guarantees flawless candidates, but knowingly selecting a convict pre-election reflects a clearer lapse in judgment.

Zero tolerance on misinformation

Ariffin’s case strikes at Singapore’s zero-tolerance stance on misinformation.

In 2024, POFMA was invoked 15 times to correct falsehoods, underscoring the harm of unchecked narratives. Ariffin’s defamation directly contravened this ethos, making his nomination a liability in a constituency where community cohesion is vital.

Residents value reliability in governance. Chee’s oversight suggests a disconnect, potentially eroding confidence in SDP’s ability to address bread-and-butter issues like job security and affordability.

Ariffin’s supporters may cite his work with Wake Up, Singapore, which amplifies marginalized voices, or argue his youth mitigates his error. These arguments carry limited weight.

Public office demands high standards, especially in Singapore, where trust underpins stability.

Ariffin’s conviction reflects a lapse in responsibility, and Chee’s endorsement suggests inadequate scrutiny.

The manifestos of the People’s Action Party (PAP), Workers’ Party (WP), Progress Singapore Party (PSP), and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) for the 2025 Singapore General Election reveal a spectrum of priorities, as summarized in the following table:

This table highlights the diversity in approach, with PAP focusing on continuity, WP on balanced reform, PSP on transformative change, and SDP on social justice and democratic overhaul.

Critical Insights

1. Addressing Public Concerns:

   • PAP: Targeted subsidies (e.g., Assurance Package) provide immediate relief but may not address root causes like rising costs, appealing to those prioritizing stability.
   • WP: GST exemptions and a $1,600 minimum wage offer practical relief, balancing affordability with feasibility, suitable for middle-class voters.
   • PSP: Reducing GST to 7% and deferring HDB land costs are bold, voter-friendly moves, but fiscal risks may concern cautious voters.
   • SDP: Abolishing GST on essentials and taxing the top 1% directly tackle inequality, appealing to lower-income groups, but lack of cost estimates raises feasibility questions.

2. Housing:

   • PAP: Over 50,000 new flats increase supply, with VERS addressing lease decay, maintaining market stability.
   • WP: 70-year leases and buy-back schemes focus on affordability, offering a middle-ground solution.
   • PSP: AHS excludes land costs for affordability, with Millennial Apartments addressing youth needs, but market disruption is a risk.
   • SDP: The $270,000 NOM Scheme cap is innovative but lacks specifics on flat types or fiscal impact. Building more flats is vague without a supply target, unlike PAP’s 50,000 or PSP’s 20,000/year.

3. Governance and Democracy:

   • PAP: Prioritizes stability and anti-corruption, avoiding structural reforms.
   • WP: Proposes an Ombudsman and GRC abolition for accountability, balancing reform with pragmatism.
   • PSP: Freedom of Information Act and GRC abolition push transparency, appealing to reformists.
   • SDP: POFMA reform, constitutional changes, and GLC divestment are radical, aligning with its democratic ethos, but may face resistance in Singapore’s conservative political culture.

4. Economic Growth:

   • PAP: Balances local and global needs, supporting PMETs and businesses.
   • WP: Enhances local talent via SkillsFuture, maintaining economic competitiveness.
   • PSP: A $2,250 minimum wage risks business costs but benefits workers.
   • SDP: Minimum wage and foreign labor reduction prioritize locals but lack specific figures, potentially disrupting Singapore’s globalized economy.

5. Social Safety Net:

   • PAP: Strengthens ComCare and Silver Support, building on proven systems.
   • WP: Simplifies assistance, focusing on healthcare and retirees.
   • PSP: Introduces caregiver allowances and MediSave expansion, resembling a basic income model.
   • SDP: NHIF and free maternal/pediatric care are ambitious but lack costings, while the Malay community plan and gender equality initiatives address inclusivity without specific actions.

Overall Assessment

• PAP: Appeals to voters valuing economic stability, strong governance, and proven leadership, attracting conservative voters, older generations, and middle to upper-income brackets. Its continuity is robust but may seem out-of-touch with reformists.

• WP: Offers a credible, pragmatic alternative, appealing to middle-class families, younger voters concerned about housing and education, and those desiring a stronger check on PAP. Its balanced approach is feasible but may lack transformative vision.

• PSP: Presents a bold platform for change, drawing support from younger demographics, lower-income workers, and reformists willing to risk significant change. Its ambition is appealing but faces feasibility challenges.

• SDP: Champions social justice and democratic reform, appealing to lower-income groups, youth, and reformists frustrated with inequality and governance restrictions. Its radical proposals (e.g., abolish PSLE, scrap CPF Minimum Sum) resonate with those seeking systemic change but risk alienating moderates due to limited electoral track record and vague costings.

The election outcome on May 3, 2025, will hinge on voter priorities—stability versus change—and how each party builds trust amid economic and social challenges.

The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) released its manifesto for Singapore's 2025 General Election, titled “Progress for All,” outlining over 60 policy proposals to address key national issues.

The manifesto focuses on building a fair society, ensuring dignified living standards, providing diverse educational pathways, and strengthening democratic institutions.

Below is a detailed, reorganized summary of the manifesto’s key points, structured for clarity and coherence, based on the provided document.

1. Cost of Living

The PSP addresses Singapore’s escalating cost of living, driven by a 18% rise in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from July 2020 to February 2025, with specific increases in hawker food (20%), public transport (20%), and water prices (18%). The GST hike from 7% to 9% in 2024 and soaring HDB resale prices (50% increase from Q2 2020 to Q4 2024) exacerbate the burden, while median wages have only risen 21% from $4,534 to $5,500.

• GST Reduction and Exemptions:
  • Reduce GST to 7%, arguing it’s regressive and Singapore’s $1.2 trillion reserves (12 years of government expenditure) allow fiscal flexibility.
  • Exempt basic essentials (e.g., water, rice, eggs, cooking oil, formula milk) from GST, with price thresholds (e.g., rice under $2/kg) to target lower-income households.
• Land Cost Reforms:
  • Defer land cost for HDB Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, recording it at sale and recovering it with interest upon resale, treating public housing as essential infrastructure like schools.
  • Treat land sales proceeds as revenue over the lease period (e.g., 99 years), allowing 5% annual draw for budget use, providing a cumulative revenue stream without depleting reserves.
• Commercial Rent Control:
  • Have the Fair Tenancy Industry Committee (FTIC) issue guidelines on annual rent increases for commercial properties, aligning with economic growth to moderate business costs.
• Hawker Centre Reforms:
  • Set hawker stall rents at $500/month or 3% of gross turnover (whichever is higher), replacing the tender system to lower costs (current median: $1,625/month).
  • Phase out Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs) and centralize management under a new agency, “Hawker Singapore,” to reduce costs and promote hawker culture.
• Food Affordability:
  • Provide government-funded food discounts for Pioneer Generation, Merdeka Generation, and CHAS cardholders at hawker centres, funded by respective funds.
  • Increase CDC Vouchers for lower-income households to offset food costs, relieving hawkers from funding budget meals.
• Healthcare Affordability:
  • Nationalize MediShield Life and CareShield Life, with government-funded premiums for all Singaporeans, costing $2-3 billion annually to ease premium burdens.
  • Centralize drug procurement for public and private healthcare facilities to reduce costs through bulk bargaining.
  • Offer a $3,000 “HealthierMother” cash gift per child to defray confinement costs post-childbirth.

2. Housing

The PSP critiques the BTO system’s long waiting times and rising resale prices (50% increase from Q2 2020 to Q4 2024), driven by land costs (60% of BTO costs) and lease decay concerns. The government’s subsidies to keep BTO prices affordable increase fiscal burdens, necessitating a rethink of housing policies.

• Affordable Homes Scheme (AHS):
  • Replace BTO with AHS, selling flats at construction cost plus a location-based premium, excluding land cost unless sold on the resale market.
  • Ensure affordability without depleting CPF savings, severing the link between housing and retirement, with minimal impact on resale market due to limited supply (20,000 flats/year).
• Singles Housing Access:
  • Allow singles aged 28+ to buy 2- and 3-room BTO flats and all resale flats in any estate, compared to the current age 35 limit for 2-room Flexi BTOs.
• Increase Flat Supply:
  • Build more flats based on forecasted demand (e.g., marriage and birth rates), using unused state properties (e.g., former schools) to reduce waiting times.
• Millennial Apartments Scheme:
  • Offer affordable, high-quality rental apartments in the CBD and mature estates for young couples/singles on 2-5 year leases, providing flexibility and reducing pressure to buy early.

3. Jobs and Wages

With foreign workers comprising 39% of the workforce, the PSP aims to prioritize Singaporeans while ensuring fair competition and better work-life balance, addressing overwork (90% work beyond official hours) and wage stagnation.

• Minimum Living Wage:
  • Set a $2,250/month minimum wage ($1,800 take-home after CPF), based on 2019 Minimum Income Standard, to ensure dignity and reduce reliance on subsidies.
• Foreign Worker Policies:
  • Strengthen the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) by extending job ad periods, requiring more ads, and proving no suitable Singaporean candidate.
  • Introduce per-company EP quotas, with higher quotas for SMEs, to balance global talent access and local priority.
  • Impose a $1,200/month EP levy to offset employers’ CPF savings on foreign workers.
  • Raise EP minimum qualifying salary to $10,000/month (from $5,600-$10,700).
  • Limit single-nationality work pass holders per company to prevent workplace enclaves.
• Worker Protections:
  • Exempt retrenched employees from non-compete clauses to ease job transitions.
  • Mandate statutory retrenchment benefits (2 weeks’ salary per year of service for 2+ years’ service), exempting small or bankrupt firms.
• Parental Leave:
  • Equalize parental leave at 15 weeks per parent (4 weeks maternity/paternity, 22 weeks shared equally), promoting shared parenting responsibilities.
• Family-Friendly Employers:
  • Offer incentives like higher foreign worker quotas to employers supporting parental leave.

4. Social Safety Net

The PSP seeks to simplify and strengthen social support, reducing reliance on complex schemes and supporting caregivers, seniors, and healthcare needs.

• Redundancy Insurance:
  • Introduce a scheme paying 75% of the last-drawn salary for 6 months (capped at $3,750/month), funded by 0.5% monthly contributions from employers/employees.
• Caregiver Support:
  • Provide a $1,250/month allowance (including CPF) for full-time caregivers of children under 7, costing up to $2.5 billion annually, replacing childcare subsidies.
• Silver Support Scheme:
  • Double payouts to $430-$2,160/quarter ($144-$720/month), based on flat type and income, for seniors with low retirement savings.
• Pioneer and Merdeka Funds:
  • Publish projected investment income and ensure full utilization of funds ($5.52 billion for PG, $5.55 billion for MG as of March 2024).
• CPF Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS):
  • Implement LRIS, allowing investment in low-fee, diversified funds (6-10% annual returns over 5 years, per US 401(k) data), boosting retirement savings.
• MediSave Expansion:
  • Increase MediSave500/700 withdrawal limits ($500/$700 annually for outpatient care) and cover preventive dental treatments, maternity fees, and egg freezing.
• Fertility Support:
  • Offer 75% co-funding for unlimited ART cycles for women under 40 (until 2 children), and 3 fresh/3 frozen cycles for ages 40-45.
• Mental Health:
  • Increase MediSave withdrawal limits for mental health treatments (e.g., schizophrenia, depression), regulate counsellors, and reduce public hospital waiting times (47 days for psychiatrists, 36 for psychologists in 2023).

5. Education

Despite Singapore’s top PISA 2022 rankings, the PSP critiques over-reliance on tuition ($104.80/month household expenditure in 2023) and high-stakes exams, which foster fear of failure (2018 PISA). The system should offer diverse pathways and equal opportunities.

• Through-Train Programme:
  • Pilot a 10-year programme (Primary 1 to Secondary 4) with optional PSLE, emphasizing holistic curricula (arts, humanities, sports) and flexible assessments.
• School Size Diversity:
  • Maintain a range of school sizes, avoiding mergers to preserve heritage and support diverse needs (e.g., neurodivergent students).
• Assessment Reform:
  • Reduce reliance on summative exams, using portfolios and projects to foster critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity.
• Smaller Class Sizes:
  • Lower class sizes (from 33.6 primary, 32.6 secondary in 2023) by re-employing older teachers as Flexi-Adjuncts and using technology to reduce administrative burdens.
• Mental Health Support:
  • Conduct annual mental health assessments for students, increase school counsellors to 2 per school (from 1 in two-thirds of schools), and monitor teacher burnout.
• International Students:
  • Limit scholarships/tuition grants for international students (10% of AU undergrads, $238 million in 2019), prioritizing full-fee payers to subsidize locals.
• University Access:
  • Review AU places for Singaporeans, especially in Medicine, and expand vocational pathways (e.g., WSQ qualifications) for university admission.

6. Governance

The PSP addresses concerns over the PAP’s parliamentary dominance, lack of checks and balances, and recent policy missteps (e.g., Covid-19 dormitory outbreaks, SimplyGo reversal). It seeks to enhance transparency and accountability.

• Ministerial Salaries:
  • Benchmark salaries to median Singaporean income (not top 1,000 earners) to reflect public service ethos.
• Asset Declarations:
  • Require MPs to publicly declare assets post-election in a Register of Interests, following Commonwealth practices (e.g., UK, Australia).
• Sovereign Wealth Funds:
  • Hold closed-door parliamentary hearings for Temasek and GIC, publish senior management salary ranges, and compare performance to global benchmarks.
• Freedom of Information:
  • Enact a Freedom of Information Act, requiring government disclosure unless exemptions (e.g., national security) are justified in court.
  • Automatically declassify documents after 25 years, unless restricted for security.
• Media Reform:
  • Liberalize the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, removing ministerial approval for management shares, and reduce online news content provider bonds ($50,000 to $20,000).
  • Establish an independent press standards committee to handle complaints and enforce journalistic integrity, funded by Parliament.
  • Fund local digital media start-ups to foster diversity, redirecting $900 million SPH Media Trust and $310 million MediaCorp grants.
• POFMA Reform:
  • Vest POFMA powers in the judiciary, limiting use to deliberate falsehood campaigns to reduce chilling effects on free speech.
• Electoral Reforms:
  • Abolish GRCs, replacing with minority NCMP schemes or a hybrid FPTP/proportional representation system with multi-racial candidate mandates.
  • Reform electoral boundary reviews with transparent processes, fixed voter counts (30,000 ±10%), and bipartisan approval for major boundary changes.
• People’s Association (PA):
  • Depoliticize PA by appointing neutral public servants as Grassroots Advisors, excluding MPs and political figures.
• Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs):
  • Mandate public EIAs for major developments, with 2-month feedback periods, evaluating biodiversity, ecosystems, and emissions.
• Voting Age:
  • Lower voting age to 18, aligning with global norms and National Service obligations.
• Parliamentary Support:
  • Create a Parliament Research Service (PRS) with seconded experts to support MPs’ policy research.
  • Form bipartisan standing committees to scrutinize legislation over 2 months, with powers to subpoena witnesses and access PRS.

Conclusion

Launched ahead of the May 3, 2025, election, the PSP’s manifesto builds on parliamentary proposals since 2020, reflecting resident feedback and critiques of PAP policies.

The party emphasizes its role in holding the government accountable, citing past PAP responses (e.g., Pioneer Generation Package) to opposition gains.

Implementation challenges include fiscal costs (e.g., GST reduction, caregiver allowances) and political resistance to reforms like GRC abolition.

The PSP’s focus on affordability, housing, and governance aligns with public concerns, but success depends on electing at least 33 opposition MPs to block constitutional amendments.

With HDB resale prices up 50% since 2020 and BTO waiting times stretching to five years, affordability and access are strangling young couples, singles, and retirees alike.

The 99-year lease model, once a cornerstone of stability, now looms as a ticking time bomb for ageing flats.

The PAP, WP, SDP and PSP have rolled out their housing manifestos, each claiming to fix voters' housing concerns.

But do they deliver?

PAP - more flats, same old tune

Flood the market with supply, tweak eligibilit, and tackle lease decay head-on

The PAP, Singapore’s ruling juggernaut, promises to build over 50,000 new HDB flats in three years—enough for an entire Ang Mo Kio town.

They’re doubling down on Shorter Waiting Time flats to cut BTO delays, exploring options for higher-income couples and singles, and pushing the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) to rejuvenate old estates like Kallang-Whampoa.

More flats don’t automatically mean cheaper flats

The Housing Price Index (HPI) ratio—median flat price to median income—hovers around 5-6, far from affordable for a $80,000-a-year household eyeing a $400,000 4-room BTO.

PAP’s reliance on grants, like the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant, is a band-aid, not a cure, when resale prices have soared 50% in five years.

VERS sounds promising but lacks teeth—its voluntary nature and vague compensation details leave residents guessing, unlike the more decisive Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS).

Expanding access for singles and higher-income groups is inclusive but risks diverting resources from lower-income families who can’t even dream of a $500,000 resale flat.

And while 50,000 flats sound impressive, global supply chain crunches and labor shortages could derail delivery, as seen in past construction delays.

Stability, not affordability

PAP’s plan is feasible, backed by HDB’s machine and approximately $1.2 trillion in reserves, but it’s incremental, not transformative.

PAP is betting on stability, not affordability, leaving young Singaporeans stuck in a cycle of grants and grit.

WP - bold on ideas, shaky on substance

The Workers’ Party takes a different tack, zeroing in on affordability with a promise to slash the HPI ratio to 3.0 or below—meaning a 4-room flat for a median-income family would cost no more than $240,000.

They propose 70-year BTO leases at lower prices, with an option to top up to 99 years, and a universal buy-back scheme to rescue retirees from depreciating flats.

To sweeten the deal, WP wants HDB to reacquire coffee shops and cap rents to inflation, easing living costs in estates.

Gutsy policy proposals but no clarity on how to fund it

WP's proposed housing policies speak directly to middle-class families and retirees crushed by prices.

An HPI of 3.0 would be a game-changer, making homeownership a reality, not a pipe dream.

The 70-year lease option is clever, offering flexibility for cash-strapped buyers, while the buy-back scheme tackles lease decay with precision, ensuring grannies in 40-year-old flats aren’t left penniless.

A very costly proposal

But ambition comes at a cost.

Dropping the HPI to 3.0 means slashing flat prices by 40-50%, requiring massive subsidies or land cost write-offs that could dent fiscal reserves or spike taxes.

The buy-back scheme, while noble, could cost billions if applied universally, and WP’s manifesto is mum on funding.

Worse, there’s no clear plan to boost flat supply, leaving waiting times untouched—a glaring blind spot when young couples are begging for faster BTOs.

WP’s heart is in the right place, but its wallet might not be.

PSP - radical vision, risky bet

The Progress Singapore Party swings for the fences with its Affordable Homes Scheme (AHS), scrapping BTOs to sell flats without land costs—recovered only on resale. This could halve prices, dropping a $400,000 flat to $200,000.

Singles aged 28+ get to buy 2- and 3-room flats anywhere, more flats will be built based on demand, and a Millennial Apartments Scheme offers short-term rentals in prime spots for young folks.

It’s a bold, youth-centric vision, promising to break the affordability curse and free CPF savings for retirement.

Revolutionary if it works, catastrophic if it flops

AHS is a stroke of genius on paper, tackling the root of high prices: land costs, which eat up half a flat’s value.

Letting singles buy at 28 in any estate is a nod to a growing demographic—30% of adults are single—while rental apartments cater to millennials delaying marriage.

But genius comes with glitches.

Deferring land costs guts government revenue ($20 billion yearly from land sales), risking budget shortfalls or reserve dips that Singapore’s fiscal hawks will savage.

Resale markets could tank as cheap new flats flood in, rattling homeowners’ wealth.

AHS demands a complete HDB overhaul, a bureaucratic nightmare to implement.

The Millennial Scheme sounds sexy but faces land scarcity in prime areas, limiting scale.

And PSP’s silence on lease decay is a fatal flaw—retirees with 30 years left on their flats get no lifeline.

It’s a high-stakes gamble: revolutionary if it works, catastrophic if it flops.

SDP - bold but tricky to execute

Slash prices with NOM flats, prioritize families, and secure retirements

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) proposes a transformative Non-Open Market (NOM) Scheme, selling HDB flats at cost—excluding land costs—for as low as S$70,000 (2-room) to S$240,000 (5-room).

NOM flats can’t be resold on the open market, only back to HDB, curbing speculation.

The Young Families Priority Scheme (YFPS) fast-tracks flat access for couples with kids, while singles, single parents, and low-income renters get broader eligibility.

An enhanced Lease Buy-Back Scheme offers seniors inflation-adjusted annuities, and a buffer stock of flats aims to slash waiting times.

A sophisticated Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) balloting system promises efficient allocation.

Affordability and inclusivity with a side of complexity

SDP’s NOM Scheme is a masterstroke for affordability, potentially cutting a 4-room flat from S$400,000 to S$160,000, freeing CPF savings for retirement and family needs.

YFPS directly tackles Singapore’s dismal 0.78 Total Fertility Rate by prioritizing young families, while inclusive policies for singles and single parents resonate with 30% of adults who are single.

The buffer stock and VCG system could shrink waiting times, addressing a key pain point.

The annuity-based Lease Buy-Back is a lifeline for retirees, ensuring dignity without depleting equity.

Bold but tricky to execute

NOM’s cost-recovery model, while appealing, risks government revenue losses similar to PSP’s AHS, though SDP’s resale restrictions may stabilize markets better.

Converting existing flats to NOM could spark legal or financial disputes over compensation.

The VCG system, while innovative, may confuse applicants unused to bidding premiums, and maintaining a buffer stock demands precise demographic forecasting to avoid oversupply.

Funding grants for low-income households (up to S$60,000) and annuities could strain reserves without clear fiscal plans.

SDP’s vision is bold and inclusive but hinges on complex execution and public buy-in.

Verdict

Singapore’s housing crisis—skyrocketing prices, endless waits, and lease decay—demands more than manifesto bravado.

• PAP offers stability and supply but ducks affordability, betting voters will trust its track record over flashy fixes. Its plan will keep the system humming but won’t ease the squeeze.

• WP’s price-slashing ambition and retiree focus hit the mark but stumble on funding and supply, risking empty promises. Its heart is right, but its math is shaky.

• PSP’s radical AHS and youth appeal are electrifying but teeter on fiscal recklessness, ignoring older voters’ fears and homeowners who see housing as their nest egg. Its vision is thrilling but could crash the economy.

• SDP balances affordability, inclusivity, and demographic fixes with NOM flats and family-focused policies, but its complex mechanisms and revenue risks need ironclad execution. Its plan is ambitious but navigates a tightrope.

GE2025’s housing debate exposes a truth - no party has a silver bullet. Voters must weigh stability against bold reform, affordability against fiscal prudence, and inclusivity against execution risks.

Comparative Analysis

新加坡能否在动荡的地缘政治格局中保持中立？

前贸易及工业部长、现任教育部长陈振声在新传媒播客中指出，问题不在于选择站队——有时这由不得你——而在于让新加坡变得如此不可或缺，以至于各方都想分一杯羹。

陈部长的洞见凸显了新加坡务实的外交策略，但却掩盖了一个冷峻的事实：在中美之间深厚的经济与战略纠葛面前，中立不过是一场海市蜃楼。

中立承诺公正，但新加坡的现实与之背道而驰

由于与美国和中国的经济、战略及地缘政治联系根深蒂固，新加坡在中美贸易战中无法保持真正中立。

2023年，中国占新加坡出口的14%（830亿美元），进口的13%；美国则占出口的13%（760亿美元），进口的10%。

美国的外国直接投资（2340亿美元）是新加坡经济增长的引擎，而中国的“一带一路”倡议则充分利用新加坡港口的枢纽地位，2024年处理了3700万标准箱（TEU）。

新加坡支持美国主导的印太框架，如2022年启动的“印太经济繁荣框架”（IPEF）。这一由14国（不含中国）组成的联盟，旨在促进贸易与供应链韧性。

被排除在IPEF之外的中国，将其视为美国遏制其地区影响力的棋局。中国外交部长王毅痛斥这是经济“脱钩”与“煽动对抗”的企图。

2024年，中国官媒点名批评新加坡在IPEF中的角色，暗示可能招致贸易报复，至今虽未见实质行动，但信号清晰：当最大贸易伙伴感到被背叛，中立不过是镜花水月。

在东盟走钢丝：平衡大国与区域挑战

在安全领域，新加坡依赖美国，尤其是在动荡地区维持威慑力量，这使其战略天平有所倾斜。

真正的中立要求疏远与美国的防务合作，但面对区域威胁——包括中国在南海对东盟的强硬姿态——这一选项几无可能。

尽管新加坡在南海没有主权声索，但其支持基于规则的国际秩序，暗中配合美国针对中国主张的“航行自由”行动。这一立场在《2024年新加坡外交政策报告》中清晰阐述，引发中国不满，重创其中立形象。

作为东盟核心成员，新加坡致力于区域团结。然而，东盟内部裂痕——柬埔寨与老挝亲近中国，菲律宾与越南倾向美国——使中立成为外交雷区。

新加坡的真正策略：不是中立，而是实力

选择中立意味着在经济与安全上避免与任何一方结盟，但新加坡对中美市场的依赖迫使其采取务实外交。

偏向一方可能疏远另一方，而超然物外则可能使新加坡在全球贸易网络中被边缘化。

因此，新加坡追求“战略自主”——两面下注、多元化伙伴关系、保持最大灵活性。这种策略宛如一辆精密战车，游走于大国博弈之间，而不被任何一方完全吞并。

2023年，新加坡6000亿新元的经济在关税逆风中仍增长1.2%，彰显其非凡韧性。

新加坡的真正优势不在于回避站队，而在于让自己成为不可或缺的枢纽，让大国竞相拉拢。

这不是中立——这是实力。