Singapore's Precarious Surveillance State The Envy Of US Intelligence Agencies

from the total-information-awareness-test-market dept

If you want to build a surveillance state with a minimum of backlash, you'll need a very controllable environment. Shane Harris at Foreign Policy has a detailed report on Singapore's relatively peaceful coexistence with Big Brother that includes the United States' involvement in its creation, as well as the many reasons pervasive surveillance and an out-sized government presence have been accepted, rather than rebelled against.

The genesis of Singapore's surveillance net dates back to 2002, and traces all the way back to former US National Security Advisor, John Poindexter. Peter Ho, Singapore's Secretary of Defense, met with Poindexter and was introduced to the Dept. of Defense's Total Information Awareness (TIA) aspirations.

It would gather up all manner of electronic records -- emails, phone logs, Internet searches, airline reservations, hotel bookings, credit card transactions, medical reports -- and then, based on predetermined scenarios of possible terrorist plots, look for the digital "signatures" or footprints that would-be attackers might have left in the data space. The idea was to spot the bad guys in the planning stages and to alert law enforcement and intelligence officials to intervene.
Though initially presented as an anti-terrorism tool (something Singapore was looking for after several recent terrorist attacks), it first found usefulness as a way to track and predict the spread of communicable diseases.
Ho returned home inspired that Singapore could put a TIA-like system to good use. Four months later he got his chance, when an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) swept through the country, killing 33, dramatically slowing the economy, and shaking the tiny island nation to its core. Using Poindexter's design, the government soon established the Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning program (RAHS, pronounced "roz") inside a Defense Ministry agency responsible for preventing terrorist attacks and "nonconventional" strikes, such as those using chemical or biological weapons -- an effort to see how Singapore could avoid or better manage "future shocks."
Singapore politicians sold "big data" to citizens by playing up the role it would play in public safety. Meanwhile, back in the US, the program began to fall apart as privacy advocates and legislators expressed concerns about the amount of information being gathered. In Singapore, this was just the beginning of its surveillance state. In the US, it became an expansion of post-9/11 intelligence gathering. Rather than end the program, it was simply parted-out to the NSA and other agencies under new names by sympathetic lawmakers.

Singapore's TIA program soon swelled to include nearly anything the government felt it could get away with gathering. The government used the data to do far more than track potential terrorists. It used the massive amount of data to examine -- and plan for -- nearly every aspect of Singaporean existence.
Across Singapore's national ministries and departments today, armies of civil servants use scenario-based planning and big-data analysis from RAHS for a host of applications beyond fending off bombs and bugs. They use it to plan procurement cycles and budgets, make economic forecasts, inform immigration policy, study housing markets, and develop education plans for Singaporean schoolchildren -- and they are looking to analyze Facebook posts, Twitter messages, and other social media in an attempt to "gauge the nation's mood" about everything from government social programs to the potential for civil unrest.
Making this data collection even easier is the Singaporean government's demand that internet service can only be issued to citizens with government-issued IDs. SIM cards for phones can only be purchased with a valid passport. Thousands of cameras are installed and government law enforcement agencies actively prowl social media services to track (and punish) offensive material.

But this is accepted by Singapore citizens, for the most part. The mix of Indians, Chinese and Malays makes the government especially sensitive to racially-charged speech. The country's dependence on everyone around it makes everyday life a bit more unpredictable than that enjoyed by its much larger neighbors. In exchange for its tightly-honed national security aims (along with housing and education), Singaporeans have given up their freedom to live an unsurveilled life. And for the doubters, the government has this familiar rationale to offer.
"In Singapore, people generally feel that if you're not a criminal or an opponent of the government, you don't have anything to worry about," one senior government official told me.
What goes unmentioned is just how easy it is to become an "opponent" of the Singaporean state. It can take nothing more than appearing less than grateful for the many government programs offered in "exchange" for diminished civil liberties. While the government goes above and beyond to take care of its citizens' needs, it acts swiftly to punish or publicly shame those who are seen to spurn its advances, so to speak. Not for nothing did sci-fi writer William Gibson calls this Singapore "Disneyland with the Death Penalty."

So, to make the perfect police/security state, you need a small country and a mixture of government largesse and palpable threats. You need a nation so precariously balanced that it "shouldn't [even] exist," according to one top-ranking government official. You also need a nation not built on civil liberties. Despite this, US intelligence agencies still view Singapore as a prime example of what could have been.
[M]any current and former U.S. officials have come to see Singapore as a model for how they'd build an intelligence apparatus if privacy laws and a long tradition of civil liberties weren't standing in the way. After Poindexter left DARPA in 2003, he became a consultant to RAHS, and many American spooks have traveled to Singapore to study the program firsthand. They are drawn not just to Singapore's embrace of mass surveillance but also to the country's curious mix of democracy and authoritarianism, in which a paternalistic government ensures people's basic needs -- housing, education, security -- in return for almost reverential deference. It is a law-and-order society, and the definition of "order" is all-encompassing.
If this was what the NSA and others were pushing for, there's no hope of achieving it. The Snowden leaks have undermined a lot of these agencies' stealthy nudges in this direction. The US government can never hope to achieve the same level of deference, not even in the best of times. A melting pot that has folded in refugees from authoritarian nations -- along with the country's founding principles -- have made many Americans predisposed against views of the government as an entity worthy of reverence. Widespread abuse of the public's trust has further separated the government from any reverential thought.

This isn't to say the desire to convert US citizens into nothing more than steady streams of data doesn't exist. The NSA's previous director often stated his desire to "collect it all." In the hands of the government, useful things could be done with all of this data (like possibly heading off epidemics, etc.), but the more likely outcome would be collecting for collecting's sake -- which violates the civil liberties the country was built on -- and the use of the information in abusive ways.

It may work for Singapore, an extremely controlled environment. But that doesn't necessarily make it right. And it certainly shouldn't be viewed as some sort of surveillance state utopia.

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 10:37am

    To mitigate abuse...

    All information collected for "public safety" reasons should be viewable by the public, anonymously and at cost, at any time. That would hopefully make collecting non-public data unpalatable when people realized that by designating it as "public safety" related, it was now public.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 10:45am

    There are some things that should never be done, regardless of the possible benefits. This kind of surveillance regime is one of them. No government is that trustworthy.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 10:51am

    I have acquaintances that somehow consider most of the non-US world as being 'eeeebil socialists' and that Singapore is one of the few Bastions of Freedom (TM) left in the world. I have no clue how they reconcile this with an omnipresent police state

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. icon
    John Fenderson (profile), Aug 5th, 2014 @ 11:08am


    Most people I know who rattle on about evil socialists are also authoritarians who are in favor of a pervasive surveillance state. Strange but true.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 11:13am

    I agree with the founding fathers

    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it Thomas Jefferson

    No government, given that amount of power, would not abuse it. Just look at the current administration.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 11:32am

    and the USA and UK for example, want to turn their countries into this? what the hell is going on? it can only mean that those in charge of these two nations have got serious inferiority complexes! surely, after what has gone before, no one in their right mind would even think of doing this sort of thing? we have just remembered the 1st World War, and what it meant, what happened, the death toll and what good came out of it, now we are going down the same path and it will definitely have the exact same consequences, only on a bigger scale!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 5th, 2014 @ 2:29pm

    They are drawn not just to Singapore's embrace of mass surveillance but also to the country's curious mix of democracy and authoritarianism, in which a paternalistic government ensures people's basic needs -- housing, education, security -- in return for almost reverential deference.

    Sounds an awful lot like a zoo.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8. icon
    mdpopescu (profile), Aug 5th, 2014 @ 9:46pm


    Actually it sounds an awful lot like the US to me. I have no idea why Americans believe they are in any way different. Americans worship authority. Civil disobedience is practically non-existent.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 6th, 2014 @ 4:23am

    Re: Re:

    The concept of "American Exceptionalism" is often (ab)used that way.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10. identicon
    Androgynous Cowherd, Aug 6th, 2014 @ 8:05pm

    There's a name for Singapore's system of government

    There's a name for Singapore's system of government, and that name is fascism. Totalitarian and economically centrist, and prone to violently quash any dissent.

    America these days is trending more towards being a plutocracy, which makes it rather similar to the monarchies of old, including the one it rejected in 1776. Plutocracies are far right wing, and authoritarian enough for politicians to have a lot to sell to business, which in turn buys right wing policies for big business, and regulatory red tape barriers to entry for SMEs, but generally not totalitarian (as that shrinks the potential markets for many businesses by corralling or even excluding entirely some categories and messages, as well as puts government in firm control of business rather than the other way around).

    The ideal government, of course, for individual people and for SMEs is mildly to moderately left and not particularly authoritarian at all. Like Canada used to be and most of the Nordic countries still are. Strong civil liberties, moderately regulated business (with strong antitrust), with high taxes for big businesses and wealthy individuals paying for universal education, universal healthcare, and a safety net.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11. identicon
    Annonimus, Aug 7th, 2014 @ 8:55am

    Singapore will brake like glass

    Their "perfect order" is a pressure cooker without the ability to let of steam. With each new generation of powerholders the state will get more and more corrupt and the division between the rich and the poor will grow until a rebellion happens. This is just history repeating itself.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Hide this ad »
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Chat
Techdirt Reading List
Hide this ad »
Recent Stories
Hide this ad »


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.