right sizing at the same time

My wife and I bought our first Housing Board flat, a three-room resale unit, in 2000 while we were in our 20s.

It was an uncommon choice compared with the four-room or bigger units my peers more commonly preferred. But we selected a smaller, more affordable unit, given my plan to pursue education overseas.

My two children were born while we lived in the three-room flat. Space was sparse but sufficient for toddlers. They still have fond memories of living there and playing hopscotch in the common corridor.

We upgraded to a five-room flat in 2009, when my income improved, and the children got older and benefited from having their own rooms.

Shifting political social compact of housing

In Singapore, the provision of affordable and accessible public housing is the holy grail in the political social compact between the state and electorate.

With four in five Singaporeans living in one, and the vast majority being home owners, public housing is a social leveller and a key policy instrument giving every citizen, regardless of race or creed, a stake in the city-state. 

In many ways, the role of public housing mirrors the critical junctures in Singapore’s progression from Third World to First. In the nascent years of national development, HDB flats provided no more than a functional set of home installations and access to basic neighbourhood amenities such as a market, transportation network and polyclinic.

But what started as a mission to build affordable shelter for the masses evolved over the years to complement other national imperatives as societal expectations shift and new considerations emerge. 

What has endured is how much this journey to buying the first HDB flat remains viewed as a rite of passage. A signpost of adulthood, first-time home owners shoulder new responsibilities. For some, the purchase of a Build-To-Order flat is also synonymous with a marriage proposal.

Right-sizing versus capital appreciation

With Singapore’s rapidly ageing population and high cost of living, public housing today has gone beyond providing a basic roof over Singaporeans. The narrative has evolved to one of a retirement nest egg, a strategic means to future-planning and inflation-proofing, with home owners encouraged to monetise their HDB assets by moving to a smaller, more affordable flat.

This “right-sizing” narrative is supported by government-sponsored programmes such as the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) and Silver Housing Bonus (SHB). More than 9,700 households have sold part of their remaining leases under LBS.

While this right-sizing strategy offers a sound and balanced action plan to achieving fiscal prudence and sustainability, government communications on this message have been an asymmetrical narrative, targeted primarily at retirees. 

More On This Topic

Some HDB resale flats shouldn’t cost $1m

BTO flat prices too high? No, it’s runaway resale flat prices we have to watch out for

At the other end of the age spectrum, young families, and newly-wed couples – the majority professionals, managers and executives – prefer living in at least an HDB four-room flat, and for some, in prime or highly sought-after locations.

According to PropertyGuru’s Singapore Consumer Sentiment Study in the second half of 2022, 44 per cent of HDB resale home buyers picked the largest jumbo flats as their preferred choice. Singaporeans aged 22 to 29 (54 per cent) are more likely to cite the lack of personal space as a reason for buying a home, than those aged 30 to 39 (48 per cent) and older. 

The younger segment of home buyers seems less inclined to consider smaller, more affordable HDB three-room flats in non-mature estates, and is incentivised to look at larger flats. 

Young families, and newly-wed couples prefer living in at least an HDB four-room flat, and for some, in prime or highly sought-after locations. ST PHOTO: LIM YAOHUI

Market forces or cognitive biases to blame?

Instead of practising a stepped approach to capital appreciation, to gradually relocate to larger units or more attractive districts as their careers take off, Singaporeans’ expectations on housing may have become increasingly unrealistic. 

Anecdotally, younger house hunters aspire to buy their dream flats earlier rather than later in life. For some, this means stretching mortgage limits to own a prime property of their choice. The robust resale market and headline news on $1 million resale flats may have unproductively fuelled anxieties of losing out on a slice of the pie in the rat race.

On the surface, seeking out the largest, most valuable home for maximum gain seems sensible, given the broad, sustained rise in resale prices over time. For many young Singaporeans who desire living in the same home for decades, this plan seems logical. Larger HDB grants for first-timers buying resale flats announced last week in Budget 2023 should come as welcome relief.

But this narrative hides the true cost young Singaporeans incur in buying the perfect home – not least, the pressure to find the ideal flat and keep up with monthly loan repayments, and above all, giving zero allowance for financial fluctuations in mortgage repayment. Retrenchment, illnesses and other life changes can be disruptive.

Such a strategy also assumes housing resale prices will appreciate indefinitely – what psychologists would call having an overconfidence bias, where we tend to believe conditions leading to our desired outcome will always remain favourable.

The sense of optimism and focus on moving into the perfect home in the quickest time reflects the mood in today’s generation, where consumerism is depicted as a seamless experience, much like online shopping, and success is narrowly defined as living in spacious designer homes worthy of an Instagram post.

But for the sake of emotional well-being, financial health and work-life sustainability, we should consider a smaller, more affordable first home as an intermediary step to building up housing assets, and then right-size in the later part of one’s career.  

More On This Topic

Public housing a public good, but long-term concerns need review

Shorter leases, tax on profits among ideas mooted by MPs to lower HDB flat prices

Reining in runaway expectations 

Although much has been framed as a temporary issue posed by a construction labour crunch during the Covid-19 pandemic, we have experienced past instances of demand driving up housing prices. Indeed, the buoyant market today feels like deja vu for older Singaporeans who have witnessed the cyclical fluctuations in the mid-1990s and 2010s.  

More can be done to nudge young couples to exercise financial prudence in their first choice of home. And with government oversight on all public policy schemes, a differentiated strategy according to housing types can provide clear signposts on availability and affordability, and tweak benefits to incentivise people to choose a home of the right size. 

For instance, HDB service and conservancy charges can be purposefully waived for three-room and smaller housing types.

Residents in non-mature estates and less popular heartland neighbourhoods such as Woodlands and Jurong can receive more incentives in the form of utility rebates compared with those in prime locations with a concentration of high-valuation and resale flats, such as in Queenstown, Bishan and Toa Payoh.

Similarly, home buyers of one- to three-room HDB flats, sensitive to financial incentives, can be nudged to upgrade or “right-size” to more spacious HDB flats after a minimum occupation period in their first home to free up the supply of smaller flats for the next generation of entry-level home buyers.

This approach can incentivise first-time home buyers to consider a broader range of homes and guide them to making fiscally sensible decisions, even as we recalibrate the housing social compact for a more sustainable future. 

More On This Topic

Property stamp duties and subsidies are becoming a means to redistribute

Sin duty hikes and new wealth tax: Singapore house-cleans its tax system

Last, while nudging younger home buyers with financial incentives is one approach, what is crucial is the signal from the Government that “right-sizing” can be a normative housing aspiration.

Right-sizing property expectations can help Singapore households ride through periods of economic uncertainty, and is a key message in housing policies aimed at retirees to unlock the value of their homes and meet their needs in their golden years.

Singapore is a capital-owning society, and HDB policy is a key enabler aiding the accumulation of wealth for most Singaporeans. There is no reason to believe our quality of life is inferior to that of the pioneer generation of Singaporeans, who bought their HDB flats at a fraction of today’s prices, if our economy continues to grow.

But on our own, Singaporeans can still achieve their dream residential asset, albeit taking intermediary steps, and right-size when the time is right.  

Take it from me. Young parents worried that a small flat cannot support their family needs when they have young children can rest assured that toddlers need your time more than the space. And when that time comes, not being bogged down by concerns over mortgage repayments can be a good place to start from.

Dr Leong Chan-Hoong is head of policy development, evaluation and data analytics at Kantar Public, a global policy advisory firm. He is Singapore’s national representative at the World Association for Public Opinion Research.

retirement plan 4 ways with no kids

Regrets, I’ve come to realise, are built on best-case scenarios, a world where everything works out perfectly.

So if I had, say, two children in this perfect world, they’d be in their late 20s or early 30s by now. They’d be healthy, kind and smart, and in stable careers and happy relationships.

They’d be close to my husband and me, checking in on us regularly, not because they have to, but because they like our company.

But reality is seldom so rosy. 

I don’t regret being childless – or childfree, the more politically correct term used for people who choose not to have kids as opposed to those who wish to but can’t.

But in the back of my brain, “what-if” and “if-only” thoughts nag at me. This usually happens when I’m being a particularly filial daughter to my mother (which isn’t all that often).

After a long day of running errands for her, or when I go out of my way to do something nice like take her on holiday, I wonder: Without offspring, who’s going to be doing all this for me when I’m at her age?

The idea of having children occupied a chunk of my young adulthood, though in a vague, romanticised and superficial way. I saw parenthood in terms of sweet-smelling babies, playthings almost, like adopting another puppy.

The hard parts – PSLE, financial strain, lifelong worry – I didn’t dwell on since children weren’t going to happen as I wasn’t married.

For a while, being around my sister’s daughter and son fed my broody instincts. Then they entered their teens and had their own lives, which had no space for an aunt. 

By the time I finally got married at 46, I had become a different person. The yearning for children had long faded. After spending most of my life as a single, adjusting to a husband was already a challenge; adding children to the mix would have been unthinkable.

In any case, there were no expectations for me to have babies at that age and the idea of a last-minute dash to fertility treatments – I still had a teeny window left – didn’t even cross my mind.

Life without children has had its benefits, quite a few in fact.

Financially, I’ve probably saved at least $350,000 for each child I didn’t have.

More On This Topic

Stranger scolds me for neglecting my non-existent children for work

Married without kids? It’s becoming a lot more common in Singapore these days

Child-rearing is expensive, though the Government provides generous grants, subsidies and financial support throughout a child’s life. Depending on birth order, the education they pursue and household income, a Singaporean child can receive over $225,000 in subsidies from childbirth to the completion of secondary school, says the Ministry of Finance.

In 2018, economists from the National University of Singapore calculated that raising a child in Singapore would cost between about $280,000 and $560,000, depending on household income. Some estimates online are even higher, and these don’t include expenses such as helping your children with their wedding or housing expenses, which Singapore parents like to do, if they can afford it.

I’ve had the freedom to spend my money without worrying about setting aside funds for children’s holidays, enrichment classes or university fees.

Time-wise, I’ve had total control. As someone who finds fulfilment in her job, I could work as late into the night as I wanted without juggling school runs, childcare arrangements or bedtime routines. Holidays and eating out have not been constrained by kid-friendly options.

The emotional and mental peace of being childfree can’t be underestimated, especially for a worrier like me.

I’ve never had to deal with a child’s development issues, school bullying or acne problem. I’ve never known parental guilt, felt the pressure to be a “perfect” parent”, or to excel in both parenthood and career.

I don’t fear the pain of conflict, estrangement or disappointment that can happen in a parent-child relationship. 

And yet. 

As I age, I wonder if the choice to not have children will come back to bite me.

Family bonds

Children fill a home with life, bringing joy and chaos in equal measure.

There’s laughter, but also slammed doors and eye-rolls. Still, even their angsty energy can make a house feel more alive than the desolate calm of a childfree household where the most thrilling part of a Sunday is settling down to watch a drama on Netflix.

Children cement the idea of family. I wonder if my husband and I might have shared a deeper bond had we had a child together. There’s a closeness parents seem to have, which you see when they exchange a glance – of pride, amusement, bewilderment – over something their child has said or done.

I wonder, too, what kind of person I might have evolved into had I experienced motherhood and known what it is like to love a child. Wiser? Braver? Less self-centred? More patient?

More On This Topic

What’s wrong with being a childless married woman?

Gen Z Mumz: Forgoing careers to raise kids before 30, these young mums buck a nationwide trend

In a perfect world, children are nurtured and loved, and when they grow up, they become confidants, companions and caregivers to their ageing parents. Love and support flowing both ways.

In reality, parents can’t always count on their children. Proximity, personality and life circumstances play a role. But I’d think that on average, if you were a good parent, the chances of begetting a filial child are reasonably high. 

In Singapore’s ageing landscape, having children can offer seniors several advantages, particularly in practical and emotional support, says Mr Joe Tan, head of integrated case management at Care Corner Seniors Services.

Adult children often accompany parents to medical appointments, manage their digital devices and chip in to pay household and medical bills. More importantly, children offer company and emotional support, helping their parents feel less alone.

However, not all parent-child relationships are positive. “Some seniors may even face neglect or exploitation by their children,” Mr Tan notes. Others may hesitate to ask for help, fearing they’ll be a burden.

The quality of support often hinges on early family bonds. “Early bonding and family interactions set the tone for future support,” he says.

Family values matter. “Families that prioritise kinship and cultivate shared responsibilities fare better in caregiving,” he adds. Open communication also helps manage expectations and avoid conflict when caregiving roles evolve as parents age.

As to whether culture plays a role in filial piety, he says it is less pronounced than often assumed. The Malay community tends to adopt a more communal approach, with extended families playing a larger caregiving role. But overall, “family dynamics and values shape filial behaviour more than cultural norms alone”, he says.

The support system that children provide doesn’t exist for me, so who will look out for me when I’m old?

There are at least four areas I need to plan for as I navigate my childfree future: Finances, housing, estate planning and social support.

Finances

Ms Lorna Tan, head of financial planning literacy at DBS Bank, says that those who are childfree must ensure complete self-sufficiency in retirement. But some put off retirement planning, choosing instead to “reward themselves more with massages, fine dining, lavish trips and grooming services for their pets”.

“Not having to spend on kids’ enrichment classes may lull them into a false sense of financial security and adopt the mistaken belief that they have time to plan for their golden years later,” she says.

Those without children need to plan more carefully for healthcare and long-term care in retirement, she says. Since they won’t have children to rely on, they should consider the costs of assisted living or nursing homes.

More On This Topic

Social network key to happiness of seniors with no kids: S'pore study

The parenthood paradox: Does having children make you happier?

I recently did some financial housekeeping, weeding out bad decisions and setting myself on a path of more prudent spending, savings and investments. Hopefully, this will provide for me till I die.

Insurance is a part of a person’s safety net but other than hospitalisation and basic long-time care insurance, I had not considered others, which is a matter of regret now.

There is, for example, critical illness insurance that can provide a lump sum cash payout if you are diagnosed with specified illnesses such as cancer, heart attack and stroke. This will help to cover immediate out-of-pocket medical bills, replacement of income and lifestyle adjustments.

Ms Tan says that premiums for critical illness insurance will be significantly higher for those over 60. Some insurers set age 60 as the last entry age.

“While the premiums are higher for older people, the coverage can still be worthwhile depending on your health, lifestyle, financial situation and family health history,” she says. But at 60, one may not need as much income replacement, especially if you’re close to or already in retirement, and you may want to reduce the coverage amount.

She adds that cancer-only insurance can be a more affordable option. There is also disability insurance for long-term care, and retirement income insurance. 

Housing

My hope is to age in the property I’m living in, but I have to be mentally prepared that I might one day need to “right-size” to a smaller space that is easier and cheaper to maintain.

And what if I need care and facilities that a home helper can’t provide? Will I need to move into a care facility or a nursing home? It’s a topic I have avoided thinking about.

What I do know is that private nursing homes can cost upward of $7,000 a month, and premium facilities with private rooms can cost $10,000 or more – and that’s without additional care costs such as medical supplies and physiotherapy.

Estate planning

Estate planning is about deciding what happens to your assets when you die, and your care preferences when you are mentally incapacitated.  

Lawyer Tan Hui Qing, a family and divorce partner at Harry Elias Partnership, says those who are childless should start thinking about drawing up a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA), an Advanced Medical Directive (AMD), and a will to distribute their assets after death.

“That’s not to say that people with children should not deal with these issues. They should, because they are important to everyone. But if you have children, you still have a fallback, assuming you did not make those arrangements,” she says.

An LPA is a legal document that allows you to appoint someone to make decisions on your behalf when you lose mental capacity. This would cover areas such as your finances, property and day-to-day care arrangements.

There are two types of LPA, she says. The first is a general standard form which you can obtain from the website of the Office of the Public Guardian. You could also choose to draw up a more detailed LPA with a lawyer, with specific directions on how you want decisions to be made. “At the very least you should do the general one,” she says.

If you don’t have an LPA and lose mental capacity, a family member or friend would have to apply to the Family Court to be appointed your deputy, a longer and costlier process.

An AMD, on the other hand, is a legal document that will let doctors know whether you wish to refuse certain life-sustaining treatments when terminally ill.

There is also Advance Care Planning, a voluntary process for Singaporeans to document their preferences for medical treatment in advance. They can also designate someone to decide on medical care for them should they become mentally incapacitated. They can approach public hospitals and polyclinics, as well as certain social care providers, to make such a plan, which is not legally binding.

On wills, Ms Tan notes that intestate laws will apply if you don’t have one. Under these laws, there is a prescribed manner of distribution of your assets to surviving family members.

“A lot of childless couples think about giving to charity, and if you have not made those provisions in a will, then only your family members will stand to benefit under the law,” she says.

More On This Topic

Sumiko At 61: ‘You’re not a head-turner but a page-turner’ – love and marriage after 60

Podcast: Having babies - life’s next step or thank you, next?

Social and care support

Care Corner’s Mr Tan says that while everyone’s situation is different, his team has noticed that childfree singles and couples may have fewer social connections, which can lead to loneliness and take a toll on mental well-being.

“Over time, they may normalise this isolation, losing interest in social activities and becoming disengaged from their communities,” he says.

It’s a good idea for childless seniors to turn to extended family and widen their circle of friends and potential helpers – people and groups who can keep an eye on them when needed. “Meaningful relationships extend beyond the immediate family,” he says.

He recommends joining community exercise groups or visiting Active Ageing Centres, which offer a range of recreational activities. Volunteering is another good way to feel more connected and lift your spirits.

Mr Tan notes that seniors with robust social networks often show greater resilience and independence, whether or not they have children.

As for me, I’ve only recently begun to understand how vital a social circle is to one’s well-being. It’s a lesson that came late, but I’m working on it.

And when it comes to children, well, I’ve long made my bed and I’ll have to lie in it.

The best I can do now is to make sure the rest of the house is in order as I age.

Sumiko Tan is Chief Columnist & Senior Editor, Publications, at The Straits Times

right sizing

One evening, shortly after moving into her 33rd-storey flat in Toa Payoh and dealing with the stress of renovations, retiree C.C. Hsu stood by her bedroom window and looked out.

“The sky, the scenery, it was so peaceful,” she recalls. “I could see far into the distance. I thought to myself, ‘The world is beautiful. Life is beautiful.’ I was filled with hope. I felt that what I’d done was worth it.”

She snapped photos on her phone and sent them to friends, who asked her: Which hotel are you staying at, with such a wonderful view?

Her reply: Not a hotel. It was her new HDB flat.

In May 2025, she right-sized to a four-room HDB resale flat in Toa Payoh after selling her 1,600 sq ft freehold condominium in Upper Thomson.

Her husband had died about six years earlier and her three daughters have homes of their own. She realised it was time to move into a more manageable space.

“The condo was too big to maintain and I was paying $500 a month to the sinking fund and for maintenance, even though I wasn’t using the facilities,” says Madam Hsu, 72, a retired Chinese-language teacher and grandmother of seven.

After her husband’s passing, her daughters had offered to live with her or have her move in with them. But she preferred to live independently. “The young ones have their own lives to lead,” she says. “I don’t want to burden them.”

Working with property agents from ERA, she narrowed her search to Toa Payoh and Serangoon, where two of her daughters live. Toa Payoh ticked all the boxes: it was close to family, had a slower, more peaceful pace of life than Serangoon, her block was fairly new and near an MRT station, an important consideration for the day she stops driving.

It’s also near a church she’s familiar with and there are plenty of food, supermarket and clinic options. “There’s even a community centre for me to join and stay healthy,” she adds.

With the help of an interior designer, she renovated her 15-year-old HDB flat in a minimalist Japanese style with her twilight years in mind. “We imagined the day I might need a wheelchair,” she says.

Though Madam Hsu didn’t right-size for financial reasons, the surplus from selling her condominium has made her retirement even more comfortable.

She admits to feeling pangs of nostalgia when she thinks of her old home in Upper Thomson.

“I have many good memories there, when my husband was alive, when the grandchildren were small and crawling around, and I had good neighbours,” she says. “The house was very spacious and during festivities, we could seat 17 people around the table.”

But she has no regrets about moving to a smaller place.

“Sometimes, you need to start a new life. Don’t always live in sad memories.”

Should property be used to fund retirement?

While the terms “right-sizing” and “downsizing” are often used interchangeably to describe moving to a smaller home, there is a subtle difference, explains Mr Marcus Chu, chief executive of ERA Singapore.

Downsizing often happens as a response to financial pressures, whereas right-sizing is a deliberate choice to find a more suitable property. “For instance, an elderly couple whose children have moved out might choose to right-size due to their desire for a more manageable home, rather than being forced by financial circumstances,” he says.

Right-sizing purely to fund retirement isn’t all that common, says Ms Angeline Tan, director, financial services at Great Eastern Financial Advisers. In her 30-plus years as a financial planner, only between 5 per cent and 10 per cent of her clients have explored this option.

More On This Topic

Sumiko at 61: No children, no problem? 4 areas to plan for as I won’t have kids to count on

Young Singaporeans should ‘right-size’ housing aspirations at each life stage

She explains that many older home owners in Singapore bought their property to live in for the long term, not as investments. With homes being more affordable in the past, many were able to grow savings through other assets such as insurance, CPF and investments, and use them in retirement.

Those with extra funds may have bought an investment property, which can be sold or rented out to support retirement without needing to sell their primary home.

However, attitudes have shifted, notes Ms Tan. Housing has become increasingly viewed as a form of wealth accumulation given Singapore’s stable and appreciating property market.

The additional buyer’s stamp duty (ABSD) on property – introduced in 2011 and with rates steadily increasing since – has also influenced buying behaviour. Couples and singles now aim to buy and live in the largest property they can afford, so they own only one property and avoid the ABSD. Later in life, they may right-size to unlock that value for retirement.

Another group that may right-size are first-time home owners who bought a Build-To-Order (BTO) flat from the Housing Board. When they are close to retirement, they may apply for a second BTO flat near their children or siblings. If successful, they sell their existing flat on the resale market and use the proceeds to support retirement.

While right-sizing can support retirement, relying on this as the primary source of funds carries risks.

“The reality is that property wealth is not always easy to unlock,” says Ms Koh Hui-Jian, chief executive of Manulife Investments Singapore. Property is illiquid and may take time to sell, posing a problem if a retiree needs immediate cash for unexpected expenses.

Property is also tied to market cycles. Great Eastern’s Ms Tan says: “Your retirement years are fixed and do not adjust to these cycles.” Retiring during a market downturn could mean your property’s value is lower than expected, forcing you to sell for less.

Ms Koh points out that property comes with costs, whether in maintaining or financing it. “Most importantly,” she adds, “property alone may not generate the steady income streams that retirees increasingly value.”

She advises retirees to diversify their assets – which could include equities, bonds and other investments – to build financial resilience that can last 20 to 30 years beyond their working life.

More On This Topic

Sumiko at 61: 8 tips from a regretful investor on what not to do

More seniors monetising their HDB flats to supplement retirement income

How to right-size properly

Mr Chu says that in 2021, about 28 per cent of transactions in ERA involving private home owners aged 60 and above were right-sizing moves. These were from condominiums to HDB flats, or from landed homes to condominiums.

In the first eight months of 2025, this figure dipped to around 22 per cent, likely due to the rising cost of replacement homes eating into sale proceeds and the challenge of finding a suitable next property. HDB-to-HDB right-sizing also occurs, though such cases are harder to track.

Still, Mr Chu says the trend is growing as Singapore’s population ages and multi-generational households become less common. For some, the loss of a spouse can prompt the move to a smaller space.

Before right-sizing to meet retirement needs, property experts suggest thinking through these factors: 

1. Will the proceeds be enough?

It may seem obvious, but the proceeds from selling your home must be sufficient to sustain your retirement. Ms Michelle Yap, senior associate division director at PropNex Realty, stresses that the amount should be “good enough” to meet long-term needs.

Ms Tan from Great Eastern says that often-overlooked costs include the housing agent’s commission, early repayment penalties on the original housing loan, and renovation and furnishing expenses for the new home.

ERA’s Mr Chu cautions that while cashing out may seem attractive, it carries risks if funds are not managed carefully. “Without a clear plan, some may overspend, fall prey to scams, or in the worst case jeopardise both their new home and the capital they hoped to preserve,” he says.

2. Timing the move right

Even if you want to sell your property, there might be no takers.

Ms Jaye Yeo, senior associate director at PropNex Realty, notes that landed homes, especially, may take longer to find the right pool of buyers due to their higher price. Coordinating the sale of your current home with the purchase of your next one is also key to avoiding costly delays or temporary housing issues.

Ms Tan says that financially, it can be best to wait until a property appreciates, such as when the area undergoes a major transformation. She gives the example of her mother, who lived in a landed property where a new MRT line was announced in 2012.

Then in her early 70s, right-sizing was an option her mother had considered. But she decided to wait, and in 2021, an MRT station near her house opened. She moved into an apartment and sold her house in 2022, benefiting from the increased value. She also saved on renovation costs to maintain her landed property as she already knew she would be right-sizing when the time was right.

More On This Topic

Private lift, meals, housekeeping from $8.9k a month at S’pore’s first private assisted living project

If Singapore’s first private luxury senior housing takes off, will more developers enter this space?

3. Pick a location you’ll be proud of

If you’re moving to a smaller space, make sure the new area is one you genuinely like, whether for its environment, amenities or even for sentimental reasons.

“Find a location you can see yourself living in so it doesn’t feel like you are downgrading,” says Ms Yeo. She recalls a couple who right-sized from a terrace house in Paya Lebar to an HDB unit at Pinnacle@Duxton. “The husband had grown up in Duxton, loved the area and knew exactly that this was where he wanted to live in his old age.”

4. Be ready for social perceptions

Moving to a smaller home can sometimes be seen by others as a drop in social status, even if it brings more financial freedom and a simpler lifestyle. Being mentally prepared for such perceptions can make the transition easer.

5. Prepare for the emotional impact

Moving is more than a financial decision. It can be emotionally taxing. “More often than not, right-sizers underestimate the emotional impact of moving to a smaller or different home even when the financial surplus is compelling,” says Mr Chu.

6. Consider other options

If right-sizing is not for you, eligible HDB flat owners aged 65 and above can explore the Government’s Lease Buyback Scheme. Essentially, you sell part of your flat’s lease to HDB and get a cash bonus. Proceeds will be used to top up your CPF Retirement Account, boosting the monthly income from CPF Life.

For private property owners, Ms Tan says some banks offer reverse mortgage products but they come with risks such as high fees and accumulating interest. There is also the option of renting out a room in the house.

Emotional draw of home

For older adults, a home is more than just a physical space, says Ms Mavis Seow, senior principal clinical psychologist at the Institute of Mental Health. It holds years of memories, family moments and personal history, providing stability at a stage in life marked by retirement, health changes or the loss of loved ones.

Familiar surroundings also support cognitive function and independence. Knowing where things are reduces stress and cognitive load, and helps seniors feel independent and empowered.

Leaving a long-term home – whether to downsize or move into a care facility – often triggers a genuine grieving process, she says. Psychologists call this “place attachment grief”, which is the emotional pain, sadness and sense of loss when deep bonds with a home are disrupted.

“People often experience stages like bereavement and denial about the need to move, anger at circumstances that forced the change, bargaining to find ways to stay, depression about the loss and eventual acceptance,” Ms Seow notes. “This grief is real and valid as the home represents far more than bricks and mortar.”

Moving can also shake one’s identity. For many, their home is part of who they are, and leaving it can feel like losing a part of themselves. Losing connections with neighbours and the community can make things even harder.

If the move isn’t by choice, seniors may feel a loss of control, which can lead to anxiety, depression or resistance. These challenges can feel more intense with age as seniors have more memories tied to their homes and fewer years to build new attachments. Physical or cognitive limitations can make adapting to a new environment harder.

More On This Topic

The case for growing old at home in super-ageing Singapore

From family care to future care: Do we have what it takes to look after older S’poreans?

Still, Ms Seow points out that “home” isn’t limited to a physical structure. Its essence – safety, comfort and sense of belonging – can be recreated in a new place, and this will lessen the anxiety of moving.

To make transitions easier, she suggests preparing mentally in advance, and to acknowledge feelings of sadness or anxiety as normal rather than irrational. Reframing the move as an opportunity rather than a loss can help retirees focus on the plus points, such as better amenities.

Involving seniors in decisions, such as choosing the location of the new home, gives them control. Creating “continuity bridges”, such as displaying cherished photographs in a familiar way, can preserve a sense of home. And once settled, it’s important to build new friendships and activities to stay connected, she says.

Mrs Florence Goh’s experience illustrates how thoughtful planning and support can make right-sizing a success.

After her husband died, she and her son continued to live in the family’s 1,600 sq ft ground floor condominium unit in Loyang. She decided to right-size about two years ago when her son had to move abroad. With help from PropNex agents, she found a three-room resale HDB flat in Strathmore Avenue in Queenstown. One of her two daughters lives in the same block.

Her flat is easier to manage and near amenities such as active ageing centres – she is a member of two centres – and MRT stations. Her only concern was living on the 25th floor as she was not used to high-rise living. Her children urged her to try using the lift herself. “After trying, I felt, no lah, it’s okay,” says Mrs Goh, 75.

She is thrilled by how low her utility bills are now, thanks to government rebates. She also loves the view. “I can see Marina Bay Sands and during the National Day period, I saw fireworks every week for a whole month.” The only downside has been that she misses her old neighbours, but they are still in touch.

Former teacher Madam Hsu shares two pieces of advice for those considering right-sizing. One, find a reliable property agent. She appreciates how her agents were patient and guided her on grants she was eligible for.

Two, right-size while you still have control of your situation and can decide on the timing, the sort of home you want to move to, and how the move is done.

“Do it while you still can,” Madam Hsu says, “when you still have a clear mind and the energy to pack, unpack, and handle renovations.”

Waiting too long could mean having to move under less desirable circumstances one day. “If you are too old, in the end you may just have to move to an old-age home.”

Sumiko Tan is Chief Columnist & Senior Editor, Publications at The Straits Times. 

right wingers unite

If it was ever in doubt that the slain American conservative activist Charlie Kirk is now one of, if not the most, powerful galvanising symbols for President Donald Trump’s fractious Republican Party, last weekend’s memorial service put paid to it.

Mr Trump himself said the moment marked a “revival” for the conservative movement.

Coupled with his tete-a-tete with frenemy billionaire Elon Musk and a discernible quieting of other internal tensions – including rancour over the Jeffrey Epstein investigation – the assassination has coalesced the party in a way nothing had since the start of Trump 2.0.

One attendee, Ms Cindy Warford, a 62-year-old grandmother of two ardent teenage Kirk fans, told Reuters the moment was “this generation’s Martin Luther King or JFK, or even 9/11”. These sentiments, seen across reporting on the memorial in Mr Kirk’s adopted home state of Arizona, cannot be written off as hyperbole; they surely reflect the mood across America’s conservative spectrum.

For those of us looking in from outside, the more striking development is not the domestic martyrisation of Mr Kirk, but the speed with which his death became a cross-border rallying cry for kindred movements.

The resonance was clear across continents, with eulogies from high-profile right-wing leaders flowing in from South Africa to Latin America, and here, in this region, from South Korea and Japan.

To use the words of Hong Kong-based scholar Alejandro Reyes in a Sept 17 commentary in the Foreign Policy magazine, Mr Kirk’s “canonisation after death revealed the consolidation of a right-wing international”, recalling the Communist International or Comintern led by the Soviet Union in the early 20th century.

Mr Reyes suggested Mr Kirk – young, telegenic and digitally fluent – united otherwise disparate right-wing actors by championing common opposition to pluralism, gender equality and secular cosmopolitanism.

His death “made him into a martyr around whom illiberal forces could rally, regardless of creed or colour”. Indeed, the globalisation of Mr Kirk’s message is no happenstance.

In his visits to Japan and South Korea, days before his assassination, he indicated his desire to help defeat a “globalist menace”. The outpouring of solidarity from both countries – each with formidable conservative forces – was Asia’s loudest.

Mr Sohei Kamiya, leader of Japan’s Sanseito party that made major gains in the recent Upper House election with an anti-immigration, “Japan first” platform, wrote on X that Mr Kirk was a “comrade committed to building the future with us” and “though his life was taken, no one can take his convictions or silence the message he carried”.

Around the world, conservative leaders of various stripes, who might never have found common cause otherwise, struck similar notes, using the moment to skewer their ideological opponents.

The Belgian far-right activist Dries Van Langenhove declared: “Charlie Kirk was shot for having far more moderate opinions on almost every issue than all of us here. If they will kill him, they want to kill us too, and they will – if we let this continue.”

A force for good?

If this movement is taking shape – not just having a “moment” that will fizzle out – the natural question must be: What does it mean to have this congealing of a global right? And what does it mean that Mr Kirk’s messages unite such disparate groups?

To answer this requires going beyond the reams of commentary celebrating Mr Kirk’s status as a poster boy for civil disagreement.

Indeed he was – even his ideological opponents conceded they wished they had his communication skill and charisma to connect with young people, especially young men, who make up the majority driving the right’s resurgence.

But given the rawness of his killing, there has been little discussion of Mr Kirk’s actual ideas, little examination of whether the globalisation of his views – of him as the millennial Pied Piper of right-wingism – is a force for good.

Even disregarding the arguments of his most dogmatic left-wing opponents, one arrives at their conclusion: that however decent his engagement methods, there is dark insidiousness in two pillars of his thought now going global – extreme anti-immigration fervour that “others” non-natives of any country, and a world view, coloured by Mr Kirk’s strand of evangelism, that positions Islam as a nefarious faith of conquest rather than peace.

On both counts, assessed from a place like Singapore, where multiculturalism and openness to immigration are existential, the only conclusion is a hope that the tide he has posthumously unleashed never entrenches itself on our shores.

Mr Kirk’s arguments are beguiling and dangerous.

More On This Topic

Charlie Kirk shooting highlights need for law and order in democratic discourse: Shanmugam

Charlie Kirk lauded at Arizona memorial as galvanising force for conservatism

Consider his common cause with Sanseito in vilifying non-native residents.

At a Tokyo event with members of the party, he claimed foreigners and immigrants were “secretly funnelling themselves into Japanese life”. He declared: “They want to erase, replace and eradicate Japan by bringing in Indonesians, by bringing in Arabs, by bringing in Muslims.”

This, bear in mind, about a society with one of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s lowest foreign-born populations – standing at just 3 per cent.

On the Islamophobic strand Mr Kirk represented, his own words are equally damning. In April, he declared: “Islam has conquest values. They seek to take over land and territory, and Europe is now a conquered continent.”

This thinking has found resonance elsewhere, and in how some of the most extreme figures in world politics see opportunity in Mr Kirk’s martyrdom to advance their own agendas.

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, notorious for his strident opposition to a future Palestinian state, posted on X: “The collusion between the global left and radical Islam is the greatest danger to humanity today. Charlie Kirk saw the danger and warned about it.”

Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders went further, declaring: “I repeat (Kirk’s) true words that are valid for Europe as well: ‘Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of Europe.’”

By any reasonable measure, an individual who inspires such divisive thinking would be persona non grata in a multicultural society. What response, then, but alarm when his martyrdom now galvanises a global movement built on these very foundations?

More On This Topic

Charlie Kirk’s death ignites free speech fire storm among Trump supporters

Charlie Kirk killing revives questions about radicalisation and gaming culture

Defence against the dark arts

What are the inoculations to keep the tide out – or at least at bay?

It may seem trite, having been repeated across the world’s democracies since Mr Trump’s first election win in 2016, but it bears re-articulating.

First, the counterforces aiming to neutralise the ascendant right wing – not just the left, but the majority whose political views are middle-of-the-road, including those on the right – must meet young men gravitating towards extreme positions where they are: on podcasts, in online spaces, not just on formal political stages or only during election campaigns.

Equally important is addressing the core issues driving young men rightward. The consensus points to three factors: economic displacement, a crisis of belonging and precipitous loss of trust in institutions.

Speaking about Singapore’s post-election political landscape in Parliament this week, Coordinating Minister for Social Policies Ong Ye Kung touched on these core issues, noting that “populism does not appear out of nowhere”.

It arises from genuine, understandable concerns – over inequality, or excessive competition for jobs and space from foreigners. It is a challenge that political moderates must meet.

A final consideration for the rest of the world: In the US, even Mr Kirk’s arch-critics like Washington Post columnist Shadi Hamid argue that Mr Kirk “had bad ideas, but the right to have and promote bad ideas without fear of punishment or persecution is core to the American project – and core to any democracy that hopes to survive.”

With greatest respect to the American project, the rest of the world – mindful of the vicious messages this rising right-wing international carries, however civilly packaged – need not accept that premise.

Mr Kirk’s assassination is abhorrent, and political violence must be condemned in the strongest terms. Yet sympathy for a victim of violence need not mean embracing the world view he championed.

In our interest, we can and should openly declare that toxic ideas seeking to divide are unwelcome in our societies.

Bhavan Jaipragas is deputy Opinion editor and a columnist at The Straits Times.

recognition diplomacy

The chorus of international support for Palestine grows louder, with France, Britain and Canada recently joining more than 140 other countries at the United Nations in officially recognising the state of Palestine. Yet for all the latest efforts to pressure Israel to stop its military offensive in Gaza and to keep alive the hope for a two-state solution, there are limits to what “recognition diplomacy” can achieve.

The harsh reality is, prospects for peaceful resolution are less likely to be advanced by recognition than by the actions of three protagonists in this agonising script: Israel, the US and the Palestinians.

Herein lies the rub: In all three cases, domestic forces have conspired to prevent the reconsideration of strategies, reconfiguration of policies and reassessment of roles necessary to change the realities on the ground in Palestine.

In the case of Israel, diplomatic pressure is having the reverse effect of hardening the resolve of the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In an angry address at the UN General Assembly last week, Mr Netanyahu vowed to block a Palestinian state and to “finish the job against” Hamas for its Oct 7, 2023, attack on Israel. Since then, Israel’s military response has left much of Gaza in ruins and tens of thousands dead.

“Israel will not allow you to shove a terrorist state down our throats,” Mr Netanyahu said, in his pushback at the UN against the recent flurry of diplomatic moves. “We will not commit national suicide because you don’t have the guts to face down the hostile media and anti-Semitic mobs demanding Israel’s blood.”

What’s notable in this show of defiance by Mr Netanyahu is that despite growing global condemnation, he continues to enjoy the support of the Trump administration.

American support is crucial. The US is not only Israel’s main weapons supplier and source of economic aid but also provides diplomatic cover. Critically, while a growing number of countries have declared support for recognition of a Palestinian state, the effect is essentially symbolic. Full UN membership would still need to be approved by the United Nations Security Council. And there the US has a veto.

On the Palestinian side, no doubt Hamas is under severe military and political pressure, yet it remains stubbornly belligerent. Meanwhile, the legitimacy of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah, Hamas’ arch-rival in Palestine, has diminished considerably in Palestinian eyes over the years, raising doubts whether they present a credible option for its future government.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing the UN General Assembly in New York on Sept 26. In the case of Israel, diplomatic pressure is having the reverse effect of hardening the resolve of his government, says the writer. PHOTO: DAVE SANDERS/NYTIMES

Unravelling of the Two-State Solution

Since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, the international community has held out hope that the arc of Middle Eastern history would bend gradually towards a negotiated two-state solution, which would pave the way for the creation of a Palestinian state that can co-exist with Israel in peace and security.

Fast forward 30 years, and we have never been further from that prospect.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, whose first term in office began in 1996, a year after the assassination of Mr Yitzhak Rabin, one of the architects of Oslo, has himself never been a supporter of the two-state solution, even if he had in the past reluctantly expressed that he was willing to countenance it with conditions.

But now at the head of a governing coalition including several far-right parties, Mr Netanyahu has hardened his views. In the face of reservations from his military commanders, he has sanctioned a full-scale invasion and occupation of Gaza.

Meanwhile, plans to annex more territory in the West Bank are in advanced stages. Far-right coalition partners, led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, have been pushing the government to accelerate the expansion of Jewish settlements.

Most controversial is the so-called E1 resettlement plan, which involves the construction of 3,400 homes that will effectively cut off the West Bank from Jerusalem. Dormant for several years, the plan was revived and subsequently approved by the Israeli government in August.

Justifying the move, Mr Smotrich has painted a vivid picture of the fate of Palestine once things are set in motion: “The Palestinian state is being erased from the table, not with slogans but with actions… Every settlement, every neighbourhood, every housing unit is another nail in the coffin of this dangerous idea.”

Israel’s uncompromising approach on Gaza should be understood not only in light of the 2023 attack by Hamas but also the dramatic changes in the regional geopolitical landscape since then.

Two years on, Israel has re-established deterrence after the shock of the Hamas assault. Not only that, it has used its military superiority to change geopolitical facts on the ground in its neighbourhood: Aside from severely weakening Hamas, Israel has also crippled Hezbollah in Lebanon, degraded Iranian nuclear facilities, struck pre-emptively into Syria, attacked Houthi targets in Yemen, and bombed Qatar in its hunt for Hamas leaders.

More On This Topic

Weakening of UN would be dire for small states like Singapore, says Vivian Balakrishnan

S’pore will reconsider position on Palestine if situation deteriorates: Vivian

This is not to say that there is national consensus in Israel on the policies of the Netanyahu administration. Quite the contrary. Heated domestic debate continues over issues such as the rescue of remaining hostages, the conduct of the war in Gaza, annexation plans in the West Bank, and the damage that Israel’s military operations have done to its international standing.

Opposition voices have also criticised the outsized influence of far-right politicians in the ruling coalition and denounced the Prime Minister for prolonging the Gaza war for self-interested reasons. In response to Mr Netanyahu’s UN speech, Mr Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats party in Israel and a retired major-general, criticised it for displaying “only victimhood, sanctimoniousness and complete blindness to the suffering of the hostages and the sacrifice of the fighters”.

Notwithstanding these debates, the domestic political situation does not yet appear to have any moderating effect on the current government’s actions in Gaza.

The US role

The intransigence of the Netanyahu government has doubtless been buttressed by support from the Trump administration in Washington.

While there is evidence that the mood on the American ground is starting to shift because of shocking images of the humanitarian tragedy unfolding in Gaza, this trend is unlikely to change under President Donald Trump, who has described the recent wave of Palestinian recognition as “rewarding” the atrocities committed by Hamas.

Even if Mr Trump has given assurances to Arab leaders that he would block Israeli annexation of West Bank territories, as he apparently did on the sidelines of last week’s UN meetings, given the many abrupt changes he has made on Ukraine, tariffs and other matters, one would be well advised to take anything he says with a grain of salt.

At any rate, the larger point is this: While the US may well be finding itself isolated internationally for its position on the Israel-Palestine conflict, this is hardly cause for concern for an iconoclastic president.

The search for Palestinian leadership

Following the resounding 42-10 vote (with 12 abstentions) on Palestine at the UN on Sept 12, there is now practically a global consensus that Hamas, which governs Gaza, must have no stake in the future of Palestine.

But Hamas appears not to have got the memo. There is no sign it is going away any time soon or willing to accept the existence of Israel, a necessary condition for the two-state solution.

In an interview with CNN a day before Mr Netanyahu spoke at the UN, Hamas senior official Ghazi Hamad said: “You know what is the benefit of Oct 7 now? If you look to the General Assembly yesterday, when about 194 people opened their eyes and looked to the atrocity, to (the) brutality of Israel, and all of them, they condemned Israel. We waited for this moment for 77 years.”

If not for the utter brutality of Oct 7, Mr Ghazi’s statement seems almost reasonable.

Meanwhile, protests in Gaza against Hamas earlier this year have been met with suppression. Palestinian protester Uday Rabie was reportedly tortured to death in April by the al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, for his criticism of the militants and involvement in such protests.

More On This Topic

Explainer: What would wider recognition of Palestine mean for Palestinians and Israel?

Could Tony Blair run Gaza?

Is there an alternative to Hamas? At present, the only realistic option is Fatah, the centre-left party that currently administers the Palestinian Territories in the West Bank.

The hostility between Fatah and Hamas is well known. In 2006, Hamas defeated Fatah and several other secular parties to dominate the Palestinian National Authority, a presumptive legislature for Palestine, after which it promptly proceeded to execute or imprison scores of Fatah leaders in Gaza.

One of the reasons accounting for the rise of Hamas – it managed to even win Palestinian Christian votes in 2006 – was the abysmal unpopularity of Fatah.

By most accounts, Fatah’s legitimacy deficit has only worsened since. As a political entity and governing authority, Fatah remains wracked by factionalism, corruption and incompetence.

The party remains dominated by ageing veterans and hence has struggled to capture the imagination of a new generation of Palestinians.

All this is to say that while the latest round of “recognition diplomacy” at the UN has dominated headlines and caused ripples, the reality is that this sound and fury will signify little because the primary parties in the Israel-Palestine conflict – the parties whose actions matter more than most on this issue – remain locked in old patterns of action and cycles of retaliation.

When it comes to Israel and Palestine, optimism has always been a rare and precious commodity. Sadly, the state of affairs today renders it a near impossibility.

Professor Joseph Chinyong Liow is chairman of the Middle East Institute, National University of Singapore, and Tan Kah Kee chair in comparative and international politics and former dean of the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences at Nanyang Technological University.

sg china story

Decades before Singapore and China formally established ties in 1990, Ms Dorothy Seet’s family was already doing business there.

Her father-in-law, a migrant from Fujian province, had built a fortune in the 1950s as the sole agent for Chinese suiting fabrics in South-east Asia at a time when China’s centrally planned economy barred factories from exporting goods directly.

In 1985, spurred by the reform and opening-up drive ushered in by the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, the Singapore family set up a garment factory on Beijing’s outskirts.

Their Shunmei suits tapped into pent-up demand after the Cultural Revolution, when most Chinese had been confined to boxy blue and grey uniforms. Over the next decade, their suits sold like hot cakes.

For young men arriving in Beijing to start their careers, a Shunmei suit was a marker of respectability, worn during life’s biggest moments – from weddings to trips abroad. Many sought salary advances to afford one suit, desperate not to be dismissed as country bumpkins.

Customers raved about the imported wool: comfortable yet structured, unlike the floppy, scratchy local cloth.

The Asian cutting fit remarkably well, with sleeves ending neatly at the wrists instead of drowning the wearer, as European imports often did. Hidden pockets for pens and train tickets added practicality.

Japanese technicians kept the quality consistent, and Smart Garments, Ms Seet’s company, became the first clothing company in China to adopt the ISO 9001 quality management standard, setting an industry benchmark.

But by the mid-1990s, competition from local brands eroded its lead. By 2019, with e-commerce reshaping the retail landscape, her family sold the business.

“The retail environment had changed tremendously, especially since Jack Ma started the Alibaba e-commerce platform,” Ms Seet told The Straits Times.

An evolving economic partnership: Singapore businesses in China

The story of Smart Garments captures the broader arc of Singapore’s economic engagement with China: an early-mover advantage that later narrowed as Chinese firms moved up the value chain, requiring Singapore firms to rethink their strategy and reposition themselves to capture other opportunities.

The same pattern played out in other sectors, notably property.

During the heyday of Singapore’s property investment in China, two flagship government-to-government projects were launched: the Suzhou Industrial Park in 1994 and Tianjin Eco-City in 2008. Each attracted investments in areas from manufacturing to residential and commercial properties.

Singapore developers such as CapitaLand, Keppel Land and City Developments latched onto opportunities in the wider Chinese economy from the turn of the century, riding a private housing boom after China scrapped its welfare housing system in 1998 and as waves of migrant workers moved into cities.

For local governments hungry for revenue and new infrastructural projects to boost growth, foreign investors were welcome partners in fuelling a construction frenzy.

The boom was dizzying; the bust, just as spectacular.

By the late 2010s, runaway home prices had priced out much of China’s younger generation, stoking fears of social instability and deepening inequality in a country that championed “common prosperity”.

Meanwhile, Chinese property developers binged on debt, hoping that each new launch would cover the last loan.

The Chinese government put its foot down in 2020, imposing “three red lines” to curb developer borrowing and tighten bank credit.

Evergrande’s collapse in 2021 marked the end of China’s debt-fuelled housing boom.

Today, China’s home sales are at their lowest in two decades, and many Singapore developers have scaled back or exited the market.

More On This Topic

DPM Gan hails China’s growth potential as he meets top leaders in Beijing

Singapore, Shenzhen can work together as gateways to S-E Asia and China’s Greater Bay Area: DPM Gan

Doubling down on China

These setbacks raise a pertinent question: With China’s economy slowing and US tariffs looming, with more potentially targeting those with strong economic ties with China, is it still wise to do business in China?

Yes, say analysts.

Mr Chen Long, lead economist of consultancy firm Plenum, told ST: “With the volume of the Chinese market so huge, even slower growth can still bring profits.”

Indeed, new areas of cooperation are opening up.

Both governments have said that renewable energy, digital economy and logistics are among areas of future cooperation.

Singapore firms are finding niches that tap China’s scale while remaining globally competitive.

One example is H2MO, a water purification company co-founded by Mr Ong Tze Guan and Professor Wang Rong, who heads the Singapore Membrane Technology Centre at the Nanyang Technological University.

With a research centre in Jiangsu province and manufacturing on-site, it is able to access China’s vast supply chain, keeping costs low and products competitive across South-east Asia.

“China is still a huge consumer market,” Mr Ong said. “People may be holding back spending now, but if you can find a niche, the opportunities are still far bigger than back home in Singapore or Indonesia.”

A new phase

If the first few decades of Singapore’s economic engagement with China were about seizing opportunities inside China, the next phase may lie in the reverse – helping Chinese firms expand overseas into otherwise unfamiliar territory.

After decades of refining their production lines, Chinese companies are now efficient, low-cost and globally competitive.

Besides, Beijing’s “go out” strategy and Belt and Road Initiative aimed at easing industrial overcapacity are pushing them abroad, amid softening domestic demand, saturating markets and cut-throat domestic competition.

Here, Singapore firms have distinctive strengths.

Firms like Rajah & Tann, South-east Asia’s largest law firm, are positioning themselves as trusted partners for Chinese companies entering the region.

More On This Topic

Singapore-China ties more vital than ever amid global uncertainty, says PM Wong

Chinese brands like Pop Mart, BYD, Joocyee expanding into S’pore as gateway to Asean market

Such partnerships unlock new business opportunities: to provide the legal, accounting, banking and other professional services Chinese firms need.

“The moment they step out of China and into a new market, they need to comply with local laws, such as on investment, labour and personal data. And the more business they do, the more likely they will face disputes. That’s where we come in,” said Mr Loh Yong Hui, who is chief representative of the firm’s Shenzhen office, its second in China after Shanghai.

Partnerships in renewable energy, a booming sector for China, show similar promise.

Shanxi Electric Power Engineering (Sepec), a subsidiary of state-owned Energy China, has worked with Singapore’s Sembcorp over the past six years on projects including the floating solar farm at Tengeh Reservoir, one of the world’s largest; an energy storage system on Jurong Island, South-east Asia’s biggest; and Singapore’s largest solar plant, also on Jurong Island.

“These projects had a huge demonstrative effect,” said Mr Han Ziyuan, Sepec’s Singapore chief representative.

“They not only showed what our company can deliver, but also how well-designed renewable energy policies can be implemented. Other South-east Asian countries watch Singapore closely. When they see good policies here, they often ‘copy and paste’ them at home.”

The Singapore experience has already helped Sepec secure contracts abroad, including for Indonesia’s largest solar farm in Nusantara, the new capital, and a 528MW solar plant in Oman, the largest in the country.

Mr Han is bullish about his company’s prospects in Singapore.

“Singapore is a great fit for us. You have demands for renewable energy and clearly spelt policies in Green Plan 2030; we have the expertise and experience to meet the demands. We are excited about the pipeline of future projects.”

More On This Topic

Singapore and China chart next lap for 30-year-old Suzhou Industrial Park

Singapore companies tap China’s silver economy in Tianjin

Some doors close, new ones open

In the 35 years since ties were established, China’s evolving economy has closed some doors to Singapore firms, but opened others. The challenge for Singapore businesses is to keep adapting and stay alert to fresh opportunities.

For Ms Seet, whose family rode China’s tumultuous shifts, and experienced both the early opportunities from reform and opening up, and the pitfalls and risks from eventually being edged out by e-commerce, the lesson is clear.

“When I look at the global situation today, I would still bet my money on investing in China,” said Ms Seet, the former president of the Singapore Chamber of Commerce and Industry in China.

She said she has no regrets.

“My family’s investment there yielded good returns, despite the many challenges we faced. After all, investing anywhere comes with its own hurdles.”

And that same clear-eyed view – that China remains too big to ignore, even if harder to navigate – continues to shape Singapore’s economic partnership with its largest trading partner, 35 years on.

More On This Topic

Tears, barbs and walkouts at Xiangshan as China and the West spar over history

Pragmatism over resentment: How Singapore makes sense of World War II

Yew Lun Tian is a senior foreign correspondent who covers China for The Straits Times.

pm behind trump

When Mr Stephen Miller took to the podium at the memorial for conservative activist Charlie Kirk in September, he issued a stark warning to the left-wing forces he believes were responsible for the assassination.

“You have no idea the dragon you have awakened,” he said, addressing his ideological enemies. “You have no idea how determined we will be to save this civilisation, to save the West, to save this republic.”

Other eulogies that day also blamed the Trump administration’s political opponents for Mr Kirk’s death. But Mr Miller’s words carry real weight. Perhaps more than anyone else, he has the power to transform conservative rage over the killing into what he calls “a righteous thunder of action”.

The left has good reason to fear his retribution.

Mr Miller is America’s most powerful unelected bureaucrat. As Mr Donald Trump’s deputy chief of staff and adviser on homeland security, he is the architect of the President’s plan to remake America.

“He’s prime minister,” said Mr Steve Bannon, Mr Trump’s chief strategist during his first term. “I don’t think there’s an aspect of domestic policy – outside of some areas of national security and treasury functions and finance and things like that – that he’s not intimately involved in.”

He is also a man long accused by critics of autocratic tendencies. In August, he labelled the Democratic Party a “domestic extremist organisation”. In May, he talked of suspending the writ of habeas corpus – the constitutional right to due process.

Former colleagues are not surprised at his influence. “I always knew that if Trump came back into power, it would be the Stephen Miller show, and that’s exactly what we have today,” said Ms Olivia Troye, a former national security official who interacted with Mr Miller while working in the first Trump White House.

“There’s nobody there to counterbalance him,” she said. “That’s why you’re seeing a lot of the more extreme things happen.”

Mr Miller, the only high-level White House member of staff to stay close to Mr Trump after his first term and then follow him back into the Oval Office in January, has become closely associated with some of the President’s most controversial policies.

The arrests of undocumented immigrants at routine courthouse hearings, the push to abolish birthright citizenship and the decision to deploy armed National Guard troops and US Marines to the streets of Los Angeles all bear his imprimatur.

But his interests extend far beyond immigration and security. Mr Miller has also been linked to Mr Trump’s assault on universities, legal firms, cultural institutions and the media.

“This has all been Stephen, connecting the dots,” said one person familiar with Mr Trump’s thinking. “He’s got his hand in all of that.”

Pushing legal boundaries

Mr Miller has also tended to push boundaries, justifying radical policies with tenuous legal arguments that some judges have condemned as unlawful.

“The extremism and over-reach that we’ve seen, with suggestions that somehow the administration doesn’t have to follow court orders, or that people’s constitutional rights can be weaponised against them – we see a lot of Stephen Miller’s fingerprints on that,” said Ms Skye Perryman, head of Democracy Forward, a group that has challenged hundreds of Mr Trump’s executive actions since he re-entered the White House.

But to his allies, Mr Miller personifies an administration that is exercising the full panoply of presidential powers to implement a set of policies they insist a majority of Americans support.

“Miller has an understanding and control of the policy apparatus, not just in the White House but also the entire executive branch,” said one Trump-connected lobbyist. “And he has shown the administration how you can use every lever of power to achieve a result.”

Critics fear Mr Miller will now use Mr Kirk’s killing as a pretext to crack down on the left and stifle dissent. Speaking on a podcast with US Vice-President J.D. Vance, he said the administration would channel anger over the activist’s death to “uproot and dismantle... terrorist networks”. He did not specify which ones.

More On This Topic

Right-wingers of the world unite to echo Charlie Kirk’s dark message

Charlie Kirk lauded at Arizona memorial as galvanising force for conservatism

Early interest in politics

From an early age, Mr Miller, the son of Jewish Democrats who grew up in a wealthy neighbourhood of Santa Monica, California, had strong views on immigration.

Mr Jason Islas, who was friends with him in middle school, said the two of them shared an interest in space travel, history and Frank Sinatra. Then one day in eighth grade, Mr Miller told him the friendship was over. 

“He gave a list of reasons,” Mr Islas told the Financial Times. “And my Latino heritage was on the list... It was a little sadistic.”

Mr Miller became interested in politics in high school, becoming a fan of right-wing broadcaster Rush Limbaugh and Mr Larry Elder, the black host of a call-in radio show popular with conservatives in Los Angeles.

While still at secondary school, he gained a reputation as a provocateur, berating Latino students for speaking Spanish rather than English. In her 2020 biography of Mr Miller, titled Hatemonger, Ms Jean Guerrero described how he told his fellow students to deliberately drop rubbish for the cleaners to pick up.

“Am I the only one here who is sick and tired of being told to pick up my trash when we have plenty of janitors who are paid to do it for us?” he said in a speech at a school event.

He had his breakthrough moment in the national media while still a student at Duke University, appearing on Fox News to defend the college’s white lacrosse players who had been accused – falsely, it later turned out – of raping a black woman.

In the 2010s, he worked as an aide to Mr Jeff Sessions, the Republican senator from Alabama, devoting his energies to killing a bipartisan effort to reform America’s broken immigration system.

“He was a lone voice in the wilderness,” said Mr Matt Boyle, Washington bureau chief of right-wing news website Breitbart. But Mr Miller’s hardline approach to immigration soon became Republican Party orthodoxy.

“He’s been ahead of the curve on every single major issue of the time,” Mr Boyle added.

In 2016, Mr Miller formally joined Mr Trump’s first presidential campaign as a speechwriter. “Stephen and the President clicked immediately,” said Mr Bannon, who later oversaw Mr Trump’s campaign. “I mean, it was a mind meld.”

Hired as an adviser in the first Trump White House, Mr Miller quickly put his stamp on immigration policy. He was one of the chief authors of the so-called Muslim travel ban, which imposed entry restrictions on the citizens of several Muslim-majority countries, and developed the “zero tolerance” policy that triggered family separations at the US-Mexico border in 2018.

But his initiatives were often blocked by the courts and encountered stiff resistance from within the federal bureaucracy itself.

Mr Miller’s uncle was horrified. Dr David Glosser, a neuropsychologist, called his nephew an “immigration hypocrite”, saying his own family would have “gone up the crematoria chimneys” if the US had pursued the same policies that his nephew was proposing in the early 20th century. 

In a now-notorious incident, Mr Miller was asked in 2017 whether his policies restricting legal immigration contradicted the spirit of the poem “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses...” engraved inside the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. Mr Miller responded the poem was “added later” and the statue actually had nothing to do with immigration.

Officials who interacted with Mr Miller during Mr Trump’s term were struck by his unusual way of working. He would eschew the normal policy process, in which lawyers and stakeholders were drafted in to ensure administration proposals were legally and ethically watertight, said one former official who dealt with him then.

“Stephen is ballsier – he didn’t want to wait for that stuff. He was, like, ‘No, we’re just doing it.’ And that’s still his MO (modus operandi).”

More On This Topic

Foreign journalists face uncertain future under Trump

Trump broadens crackdown on ‘organised’ political violence

Supporters see it differently. “It took him four years to figure out how to... knock out the career bureaucrats whose job is just to sit in meetings and tell you ‘no, no, we can’t do this’ for 10 different reasons,” said one former colleague of Mr Miller’s. “Stephen was, like, tell me how we can get to ‘yes’ on that.”

But his obsession with undocumented immigrants often antagonised people. “Back then, it was ‘Find stories about immigrants who’ve been in a drink-driving incident, whether convicted or not’,” said one former homeland security official. “He said we need to paint this picture that immigrants are dangerous to Americans.” The official refused to comply with the request and left the department soon after.

Mr Miller remained loyal to Mr Trump after he lost the 2020 election, and spent much of the next four years working on policies that could be implemented if he regained the White House.

Despite his lack of legal training, he unearthed obscure laws that could justify his draconian policy proposals. In 2023, he told conservative podcast hosts Clay Travis and Buck Sexton how the 1798 Alien Enemies Act could be used to conduct mass deportations without due process if there was a “predatory incursion” into the US – a ploy that Mr Trump has used since regaining power to send Venezuelan people to El Salvador.

When Mr Trump won the election, Mr Miller was appointed his deputy chief of staff and it quickly became clear that he would enjoy broad powers to override the kind of bureaucratic resistance that he felt had stymied him the first time round.

In an event that underscored his new authority, Mr Miller and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem summoned top immigration enforcement officials to Washington in May for a dressing-down over their supposedly poor performance in arresting undocumented migrants.

The reproachful tone was familiar to people who knew him during the first Trump term. “He berates people, he lectures and rants,” said Ms Troye. “We walked on eggshells around him.”

Mr Miller used the meeting to set a daily arrest quota of 3,000, a fourfold increase over the average during the first few months of Mr Trump’s second term.

In the aftermath, videos went viral showing immigration agents seizing asylum seekers at their courthouse hearings and swooping on Mexican day labourers waiting to pick up work at Home Depot carparks.

As protests grew, Mr Trump deployed the National Guard to quash the unrest. Mr Miller took to social media platform X to justify the move, declaring that Los Angeles had become “occupied territory”. “We’ve been saying for years this is a fight to save civilisation. Anyone with eyes can see that now.”

Critics say Mr Miller is a divisive figure who has spearheaded the Trump administration’s most legally questionable policies. But some former colleagues say many of the things he is pushing – including the crackdown on illegal immigration, the attacks on woke culture and on elite universities – are more popular than his enemies think.

More On This Topic

Suspect in Dallas shooting sought to terrorise ICE agents, officials say

White House readies executive order on political violence as liberal groups sound warning

“He has this uncanny ability to read the tea leaves on certain things and understand how the broader American electorate will respond,” said one former colleague from the first Trump White House. “Things like the assault on elite institutions actually poll very well across party lines.”

Despite that, Mr Miller has had some setbacks. According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, during Mr Trump’s first 100 days in office, federal courts issued 25 nationwide injunctions against the federal government, compared with four under the Biden administration.

“It’s not surprising that the Trump administration is losing in court,” said Ms Perryman. “It appears they are allowing someone to drive their legal strategy who is not a lawyer.”

Watching Mr Miller’s rise to the heights of political power has been an unsettling experience for Mr Islas. He initially saw his former school friend’s extreme views as a kind of adolescent pose, a way of rebelling against the liberal status quo that prevailed in Santa Monica in the late 1990s and early 2000s. But rather than dropping it as he grew older, it has only become more intense.

“We don’t all become a deeper version of our childhood rebellions,” he said. “But that’s what it’s become for him. It’s all-consuming.” FINANCIAL TIMES

any diff in the new PM JP

The race to determine the leader of Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) – and likely Japan’s next prime minister – is under way. Although the outcome won’t be known till Oct 4, Ms Sanae Takaichi and Mr Shinjiro Koizumi are the favourites. 

So far, attention has focused on whether Japan would get its first female prime minister or its youngest, along with the many domestic challenges that await the eventual winner.

Less discussed, but at least as important, are the ramifications of the LDP leadership election for Japan’s foreign policy.

The stakes are high given Japan’s fraught external environment coinciding with an LDP battered at the polls. Will either candidate be able to save a party struggling to provide fresh vision?

From what is known about Ms Takaichi and Mr Koizumi, it appears that they offer Japan different future pathways in a daunting geopolitical landscape.

Dangers without

The threats from Japan’s neighbourhood are rising. China is building up its armed forces with designs on what Tokyo considers to be Japanese territory while apparently preparing for a military conquest of Taiwan. North Korea, which has threatened to use nuclear arms against Japan, controls a growing arsenal of such weapons. Russia, which in Japan’s view already illegally occupies the Northern Territories, is embroiled in a merciless invasion of Ukraine, which deeply alarms Tokyo. It does not help that China and Russia are forging closer ties.

In the face of these worrying trends, what Japan is getting from its US ally is, at best, tough love. The Trump administration is pressing Tokyo to sharply increase its defence spending and pay more to cover the costs of American bases in Japan. It’s a tall order, not least because of Japan’s high public debt.  

To make matters worse, Washington is also charging a 15 per cent tariff on all imports from Japan, with the threat of a higher rate if Japan does not invest US$550 billion (S$709 billion) in the US before the end of the Trump presidency. The Japanese government accepts these onerous terms because it is still deeply committed to maintaining the Tokyo-Washington alliance, even though Japanese doubts about US reliability are higher than ever.

Weakness within

Japan’s ability to cope with these external challenges starts with political unity at home. In the 70 years since it was founded, the LDP has controlled Japan’s government for all but four years. Its dominance, however, is declining. During Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s less than a year in the job, his party lost seats in both houses of the Diet in separate elections. For the first time since 1955, the LDP does not hold a majority in either the Upper or Lower House. Its coalition partner, Komeito, is also bleeding support.

Rising living costs are a major reason for the changes in party fortunes. The opposition Democratic Party for the People, for instance, is rising in popularity on the strength of its simple message – “Increase your take-home pay”.

At the same time, the Maga-like Sanseito party is drawing away traditional LDP conservative voters. The number of foreigners in Japan has risen rapidly since 2021 because of the need for workers and an increase in tourism. Sanseito calls for stricter immigration policies, greater efforts to identify and deport foreigners who commit crimes and cutting off foreigners from welfare benefits. In the July 2025 Upper House election, Sanseito jumped from holding just one seat to 14.

A diminished LDP can no longer push legislation through the Diet unhindered, including on matters of foreign policy. 

After the LDP, the next largest voting bloc in the Diet is the coalition comprising the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP).

While the LDP wants a balanced approach towards the Middle East, the CDP demands that Japan recognise Palestine as an independent state. Responding to public complaints over crime involving foreigners, the LDP supports tougher screening of immigrants and a crackdown on illegal residents. But the CDP-SDP coalition blocked implementation of these changes, saying they reflect prejudice and are inconsistent with Japan’s human rights commitments.

The CDP and SDP oppose Japan acquiring missiles that could strike enemy territory. They also resist deepening security cooperation with the US. 

As the opposition grows in strength, the LDP cannot count on support from its pacifist coalition partner.

Komeito opposes anything nuclear, whether weapons or energy. Last year it blunted the LDP’s push for restoring Japan’s dependence on nuclear power plants. The LDP had to block Komeito from sending representatives to a UN anti-nuclear weapons conference in New York earlier this year, citing Japan’s reliance on the US nuclear umbrella.

Komeito is also against plans to raise defence spending and has attempted to prevent the government from loosening restrictions on Japan exporting weapons, which the LDP wants to do in order to strengthen its relationship with the US and to assist Ukraine. 

More On This Topic

Will Japan get its first female PM or youngest? 2 nominees hope to break new ground ahead of LDP vote

Streaming scandal hits front runner Koizumi in Japan PM race

The two front-runners

The LDP sees two strategies for improving its fortunes. One is appealing to younger Japanese, whose main demands are lower taxes and relief from high prices. The other is to win back the conservative nationalists who have switched their loyalty to Sanseito. Mr Koizumi represents the first strategy, Ms Takaichi the second.

Both support Japan’s alliance with the US and have positive views of trilateral security cooperation between Japan, the US and South Korea. Ms Takaichi, however, would be more likely to disrupt Japan’s foreign relations if she became prime minister.

Ms Takaichi, 64, is a hardline conservative who favours revising Japan’s pacifist Constitution and has visited the controversial Yasukuni Shrine repeatedly. She advocates strengthening Japan’s defences, increased integration of US and Japanese forces, and deployment of US intermediate-range missiles on Japanese territory to protect Japan from China. She is a strong backer of Taiwan, even suggesting that Japan, India, Europe, Australia and Taiwan should form a collective security alliance.

Ms Takaichi has a revisionist view of Japan’s behaviour during World War II. She has, for example, questioned the 1993 Kono Statement (which admitted Japanese military complicity in the wartime “comfort women” sex slavery operation) and the 1995 Murayama Statement (which apologised for Japanese aggression during the war). 

She believes Japan’s education system should promote patriotism. For Japanese women, the excitement of potentially seeing the country’s first female prime minister is tempered by Ms Takaichi’s conservative family values, which many consider outdated.

Although a defence hawk, Ms Takaichi is a dove on economic policy, advocating tax cuts, cash payments to households, and issuing bonds to finance measures to reduce living costs. 

Nevertheless, her ability to build a domestic political consensus is questionable. Her views would alienate some potential coalition partners. She maintains strong and consistent ideological positions on national security issues that may limit the LDP’s attempts to broaden its electoral appeal.

More On This Topic

Japan’s LDP leadership race kicks off with 5 contenders

Japan deserves far better leadership than this

Agriculture Minister Koizumi, 44, is telegenic and charismatic. He helps counteract the complaint that the LDP is run by out-of-touch old men. Being the son of former Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi boosted his profile at the start of his political career. His popularity has grown since, assisted by his success in reining in rice prices.

Mr Koizumi echoes the mainstream preference for a balanced policy of supporting the US alliance while maintaining a constructive relationship with China. He is not, however, stridently anti-China; indeed, some conservatives accuse him of being soft on China.

Interestingly, Mr Koizumi has said he would try to meet North Korea’s paramount leader Kim Jong Un and improve ties with Pyongyang “without preconditions, without being bound by the approach taken so far” – a reference to the issue of North Korea’s abduction of Japanese citizens during the years 1977 to 1983. 

Pyongyang admitted to a few abductions and said all cases are resolved, while many Japanese believe the North Koreans are covering up a much larger number of other cases. Setting aside this issue, a stumbling block in efforts to improve Japan-North Korea relations, would be extraordinary and controversial.  

Mr Koizumi is known to Americans, having studied at Columbia University in New York and worked for a US think-tank. He was Washington’s preferred candidate in the 2024 party leadership contest, according to Mr Jeffrey Hornung, an analyst with the RAND research institute.

Although Mr Koizumi could improve the LDP’s standing with younger voters, he is relatively inexperienced and his leadership is unproven. Critics say he lacks substance, is vague and evasive when it comes to offering fresh policy ideas, and is getting undeserved opportunities due to his famous name. 

Party elders may prefer Mr Koizumi because they expect he would be easier to control than the older, more experienced and more opinionated Ms Takaichi. The voting for LDP leader, however, will be open to all one million party members.

More On This Topic

Anti-foreigner views grip Japan’s PM race

Lesson from Japan on the peril of taking voters for granted

Japan ‘at a crossroads’ once again?

In selecting its new leader, the party can go harder conservative with Ms Takaichi or demonstrate a break with the old past with Mr Koizumi.

But whoever wins will have the unusually difficult task of unifying the faction-riven party and attracting votes from very different parts of the electorate. Many analysts expect the new prime minister will have a short tenure.

Under LDP rule, Japan’s foreign policy has been moving towards aligning more closely with the US, fielding stronger and less legally constrained armed forces, and taking bolder positions in opposition to Chinese expansionism. Other governments in the region value Japan as one of the strong points in a collection of overlapping security cooperation arrangements that include not only the US-Japan alliance, but also the Quad and Japan’s capacity-building assistance to the Philippines. 

The weakened position of the LDP, however, could result in a slowdown of some of these trends. Disunity at home, particularly a lack of consensus on achieving the 2 per cent defence spending goal, would undermine Japan’s ability to contribute to a combined pushback against Chinese territorial encroachments in the region. The effectiveness of the Quad is already threatened by the US-India spat. 

Most Japanese agree in principle with a defence build-up, but don’t want to pay for it. Moreover, the tax cuts and stimulus payments proposed by Ms Takaichi would reduce the revenue supporting the government budget. Issuing additional bonds would threaten Japan’s medium-term prosperity by increasing the burden of payments on the country’s debt, now the highest in the developed world at 250 per cent of GDP.

The fallout from Yasukuni Shrine visits is a potential problem for both Mr Koizumi (whose father made multiple visits as prime minister) and Ms Takaichi, but Japan’s relations with both China and South Korea would likely deteriorate more under a Takaichi-led government. 

Beijing sees her as a trouble-maker. Along with the Yasukuni visits, official Chinese media criticise her for “playing the Taiwan card” and advocating for stronger Japanese armed forces. 

South Korean media similarly characterise Ms Takaichi as extreme right wing, a “female Abe”, who would be difficult for Seoul to work with. A deterioration in ties with Seoul would impede progress in trilateral security cooperation, which would displease Washington despite Ms Takaichi’s dependability as a China hawk. 

Superficially, Ms Takaichi and Mr Koizumi represent discontinuity because of gender and youth, respectively. Nevertheless, the LDP under new leadership will remain constrained by circumstances. 

Despite considerable effort by Tokyo, there is new uncertainty about the US government’s appreciation for the strategic value of allies such as Japan, as well as about Washington’s commitment to continuing to nurture a region-wide security architecture.

Instead of part of a strong team, Japan could end up isolated. Domestic demand for cost-of-living relief threatens the country’s ability to fulfil its plans for military strengthening. Also, the need to appease nationalistic and anti-foreigner sentiment could derail security cooperation with South Korea. Japan is in danger of becoming a less consequential strategic player at a time when the region needs the opposite.

Denny Roy is senior fellow at the East-West Centre, Honolulu.