Ng Eng Hen:
...it's a matter of taste. I can imagine that people from the PLA come here and find this raucous a bit rambunctious. This is the Western liberal mode of many ideas. And from this, you're supposed to gain wisdom and they go back and say it was thoroughly discombobulating. That's entirely understandable
For China it must decide for itself whether the Shangri La Dialogue adds value. There is no coercion for you to attend.
Is it better? To come to an open platform, to subject yourself sometimes to the tyranny of questions and to what might seem a common view from others to explain yourself, or to retreat from that engagement? That is something that China must decide for itself.
Ng Eng Hen was mischievously chiding the PLA Colonel by flooding him with bombastic words which he probably cannot fully grasp especially spontaneously in a fireside chat. In this context, I think he did well to uphold the dignity of Singapore and put the guy in his place.
Having said that, I just want to share a bit of my own experience in such "rambunctious raucous". The western liberal model of having unfettered collision of ideas in an open space in the pursuit of wisdom is one of those BS things the western intellectuals like to use to put down others whom they deem as unfit to engage in a discourse. It's a bit like those super expensive restaurants where they keep emphasizing on dressing, dinning etiquette, wine pairing, knowledge of never heard before exotic vegetables etc. The whole idea is to demonstrate superiority and reject people who are perceived to be of a lower intellectual or social status.
Although I have never attended something as high profile and "strategic" as a Shangri-la dialogue, I have had my fair share of experience in similar settings amongst forums organized for industry leaders in my profession. The drill is pretty standard - leading speakers who are mostly Caucasians or westernized black or yellow skinned people from big MNCs or top notch public institutions take to the podium and start pontificating in an esoteric manner while "smart" audiences fire back with supposedly intellectual questions. Then the whole auditorium of bobbing heads nod in agreement and/or pose like in deep thought. The truth is most of the exchange is honestly senseless banter that answers nothing and provides no solutions for anything. It's really more of a social ritual then intellectual debate.
By this time most of the attendees from smaller companies, local outfits or unknown institutions will either be too awed by the exchange and wrongly conclude their being unable to make any sense of all this talk is due to their own inadequacies while the politically savvy ones will pretend to clap or nod their head in agreement to show others they are part of the elite group. Occasionally someone dense enough will point out the emperor is naked, but this will be brushed off in a patronizing way by the speaker just like Ng Eng Hen did.
