MFA does not comment on leaks
SOME 700 leaked diplomatic cables from the United States embassy in Singapore have been published online this week, revealing confidential correspondence on a range of issues dating from 2003 to last year.
The cables cover political, economic and security developments, and are based on newspaper reports and conversations that embassy officials had with other diplomats, public servants, journalists and other sources.
While they are not a comprehensive record of American diplomatic interests, they nevertheless offer an insight into the key concerns of embassy officials.
These include the state of media and other freedoms in Singapore, the future of the opposition, and Singapore's efforts in countering terrorism, as well as Chinese, Iranian and North Korean activities in the region.
The uncensored disclosures by WikiLeaks are a contrast to earlier releases which had information like the identity of sources edited out.
WikiLeaks' decision to publish its full cache of more than 250,000 cables as they were - 'unredacted' - drew criticism from its media partners, who said it was the decision of its founder Julian Assange alone.
'We deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted State Department cables, which may put sources at risk,' said the Guardian, the New York Times, German daily Der Spiegel and Spanish daily El Pais in a joint statement.
The latest cables name government and intelligence officials as well as other sources whose identity US diplomats meant to 'strictly protect'.
Among them are cables marked 'secret/noforn' (for 'no foreign eyes').
These include updates on the periodic releases of Jemaah Islamiah (JI) detainees, which were reported in Singapore media.
These detainees were arrested from 2001 for thwarted plots to attack the US embassy as well as US targets and interests here and in the region.
A cable from February 2009, in reply to a State Department survey on the security environment, noted that the Singapore Government 'has indicated that JI should not be considered fully eradicated within Singapore'.
Earlier cables, including one from March 2005, highlight concerns that Singapore's position as a significant financial and investment centre, its bank secrecy laws and the lack of routine currency reporting requirements, made it an attractive destination for terrorist groups.
Other cables offered snapshots of Muslim MPs before and after the 2006 General Election, as well as of Muslim leaders who were 'credible voices' in the community and in its efforts against extremism.
A number of cables marked 'confidential' reported on political developments over the years.
One from October 2004 on Singapore's opposition said: 'While the PAP has the ineffective opposition it wants, Singapore's sterile political culture has also robbed it of the risk-taking, creativity and entrepreneurship that the PAP recognises Singapore will need if it is to continue to thrive.'
A 'confidential' cable in January 2009 was entitled 'Journalists frustrated by press controls'.
It reported the conversations that its diplomats had with two Straits Times journalists on the newspaper's coverage of domestic politics.
The leaked cable quoted one journalist saying that political leaders here had pressured the paper to ensure its coverage toed the Government's line and that there was a divide between editors and younger journalists over the paper's coverage.
Another cable from February 2009 reported on an opposition forum, which it criticised as lacking in ideas: 'After the proceedings opened on an amateurish musical note, the panellists delivered standard opposition anti-PAP rhetoric, interspersed with a handful of platitudinous proposals.'
Last year, several WikiLeaks cables caused a small storm in Singapore when controversial comments by senior Singapore Foreign Ministry officials in meetings with US embassy officials in 2008 were reported.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said in a statement then: 'These press reports are based on American interpretations of confidential conversations that did not provide the full context and, in some cases, were from third party sources. As a matter of principle, MFA does not comment on leaks.'
SOME 700 leaked diplomatic cables from the United States embassy in Singapore have been published online this week, revealing confidential correspondence on a range of issues dating from 2003 to last year.
The cables cover political, economic and security developments, and are based on newspaper reports and conversations that embassy officials had with other diplomats, public servants, journalists and other sources.
While they are not a comprehensive record of American diplomatic interests, they nevertheless offer an insight into the key concerns of embassy officials.
These include the state of media and other freedoms in Singapore, the future of the opposition, and Singapore's efforts in countering terrorism, as well as Chinese, Iranian and North Korean activities in the region.
The uncensored disclosures by WikiLeaks are a contrast to earlier releases which had information like the identity of sources edited out.
WikiLeaks' decision to publish its full cache of more than 250,000 cables as they were - 'unredacted' - drew criticism from its media partners, who said it was the decision of its founder Julian Assange alone.
'We deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted State Department cables, which may put sources at risk,' said the Guardian, the New York Times, German daily Der Spiegel and Spanish daily El Pais in a joint statement.
The latest cables name government and intelligence officials as well as other sources whose identity US diplomats meant to 'strictly protect'.
Among them are cables marked 'secret/noforn' (for 'no foreign eyes').
These include updates on the periodic releases of Jemaah Islamiah (JI) detainees, which were reported in Singapore media.
These detainees were arrested from 2001 for thwarted plots to attack the US embassy as well as US targets and interests here and in the region.
A cable from February 2009, in reply to a State Department survey on the security environment, noted that the Singapore Government 'has indicated that JI should not be considered fully eradicated within Singapore'.
Earlier cables, including one from March 2005, highlight concerns that Singapore's position as a significant financial and investment centre, its bank secrecy laws and the lack of routine currency reporting requirements, made it an attractive destination for terrorist groups.
Other cables offered snapshots of Muslim MPs before and after the 2006 General Election, as well as of Muslim leaders who were 'credible voices' in the community and in its efforts against extremism.
A number of cables marked 'confidential' reported on political developments over the years.
One from October 2004 on Singapore's opposition said: 'While the PAP has the ineffective opposition it wants, Singapore's sterile political culture has also robbed it of the risk-taking, creativity and entrepreneurship that the PAP recognises Singapore will need if it is to continue to thrive.'
A 'confidential' cable in January 2009 was entitled 'Journalists frustrated by press controls'.
It reported the conversations that its diplomats had with two Straits Times journalists on the newspaper's coverage of domestic politics.
The leaked cable quoted one journalist saying that political leaders here had pressured the paper to ensure its coverage toed the Government's line and that there was a divide between editors and younger journalists over the paper's coverage.
Another cable from February 2009 reported on an opposition forum, which it criticised as lacking in ideas: 'After the proceedings opened on an amateurish musical note, the panellists delivered standard opposition anti-PAP rhetoric, interspersed with a handful of platitudinous proposals.'
Last year, several WikiLeaks cables caused a small storm in Singapore when controversial comments by senior Singapore Foreign Ministry officials in meetings with US embassy officials in 2008 were reported.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said in a statement then: 'These press reports are based on American interpretations of confidential conversations that did not provide the full context and, in some cases, were from third party sources. As a matter of principle, MFA does not comment on leaks.'
