Commentary: Complacency is the hidden risk in Singapore’s success

Commentary: Complacency is the hidden risk in Singapore’s success It would be hard to blame Singaporeans for becoming complacent after decades of peace and prosperity, but there’s no excuse for failing to guard against it now, says strategic consultancy managing director Nicholas Fang. SINGAPORE: In recent weeks, I have heard the spectre of complacency as a threat to Singapore’s future raised numerous times. Yet, if Singaporeans can come across as complacent, it might be hard to blame us. Singapore might very well be a victim of its own success. Decades of peace and prosperity have accustomed us to a country that functions well, raising expectations that the country will naturally avoid any major disruption afflicting the rest of the world, or that the government will fix any problems that come our way. Defence Minister Chan Chun Sing has highlighted complacency as a major concern in a number of separate forums recently. The latest was at a conference on Aug 3 where Mr Chan, who is also Coordinating Minister for Public Services, warned that complacency could dull Singapore's ability to respond to emerging threats and navigate an increasingly uncertain geopolitical landscape. WHEN SECURITY THREATS FEEL REMOTE The potential consequences of complacency are the most stark in national defence. My parents and their peers in the Pioneer Generation bore witness to turbulent times, including separation from Malaysia and challenging early years of independence as Singapore sought to establish its place in the world. Subsequent generations have enjoyed progressively improved conditions, with nominal gross domestic product per capita – a gauge of national prosperity, economic productivity and general standard of living – surging from US$500 at independence to among the highest in the world, at over US$100,000 currently. Prosperity and peace began to feel familiar. If peace makes the threat of conflict feel remote, the worry is that people may become less willing to bear the costs of preparing for it. Drawing parallels with the Russia-Ukraine war, Mr Chan pointed out that many in Ukraine did not believe that war would happen – or rather, chose not to believe the warning signs that existed before fighting broke out. Many people failed to act on them, a reminder of how quickly assumptions built during relative peace can be overturned. On two earlier occasions, I had heard Mr Chan speak of complacency as a specific threat to the willingness of Singaporeans to contribute and sacrifice to the cause of national defence. The consequences become tangible when it comes to National Service, a key pillar of Singapore’s defence ecosystem, because it is highly dependent on that commitment. When stability is all one has known, it is easy to believe that it will continue. AVOIDING WORST OUTCOMES The same risk exists outside of national defence. Avoiding the worst outcomes of an external shock can make earlier warnings about risks seem overblown in hindsight. This can be seen on the economic front. Singapore has continued to perform relatively well, with the government on Tuesday (Aug 11) raising its 2026 economic growth forecast for the second time this year, on the back of “better-than-expected” performance in the first six months. This is despite disruptions to global trade and energy markets brought on by the Iran war and sweeping US tariffs – such as the most recent 12.5 per cent tariff on Singapore exports to US on the basis of forced labour in the supply chain – that have cast a pall over global economic prospects this year. In his remarks at the forum last week, Mr Chan laid out priorities for Singapore which include working with other countries instead of focusing inwards, maintaining consistency in policy-making and execution, remaining connected to the world and staying a reliable trade partner. The country’s strong economic performance does not tell us how much efforts to diversify and deepen ties with trading partners mitigated the economic risks, nor indeed if any risks were overstated. But Singapore’s experience illustrates why the absence of a crisis does not mean the risk was not there. WHAT CAN BE DONE One difficulty is that such government-driven priorities to manage external risks can feel far removed from the average Singaporean. What then can be done to address the complacency threat at the individual level? There would appear to be two potential options. The shock of a crisis can ward off complacency. Yet, no rational or responsible government would induce or intentionally allow a crisis for the sake of allowing its citizens to have a lived experience of the risks that might somehow awaken them from a complacent state. That makes constant and consistent communications all the more important. The government has to better explain the potential threats, the trade-offs required to overcome them, and what is at stake if we fail to do so – but also in a way that feels relevant to ordinary Singaporeans. This potentially is one of the hardest challenges for governments today. It requires government leaders to be adroit and adept at political communications and civic engagement, and for a high level of trust to be maintained with citizens. Communications have to be clear and transparent, without coming across as fear-mongering or partisan, especially in an increasingly contested political landscape. Nor can engagement simply mean asking citizens to accept every government decision, without room to question trade-offs and alternatives. At the same time, we Singaporeans have a duty to ourselves to be self-aware and vigilant, to stay up-to-date on current affairs and the factors that affect our country and the world as a whole, and to understand the steps Singapore is taking. This will only become more challenging in the years ahead, as the global and domestic environments continue to grow in complexity and complications. But guarding against complacency requires this of Singapore and Singaporeans. Nicholas Fang is a former journalist and Nominated Member of Parliament. He is founder and managing director of strategic consultancy Black Dot and a senior advisor for The Asia Group. He writes a monthly column for CNA.