SINGAPOUR PERSPECTIVE

The Singaporean media perspective, through the Straits Times, adopts a sophisticated historical-intellectual approach that deliberately depoliticizes contemporary trade tensions. By mobilizing Adam Smith and his 250-year legacy, the newspaper transforms the debate on tariffs into an academic reflection on the theoretical foundations of free trade. This narrative strategy makes it possible to avoid taking direct sides in current trade conflicts while implicitly defending the principles of international commerce on which Singapore existentially depends.

The emphasis placed on the "troubling relevance" of Smithian ideas reveals a particularly skillful framing: rather than directly criticizing Trump's protectionist policies or those of other powers, the Singaporean media invokes the moral and intellectual authority of the "father of capitalism" to delegitimize protectionism. This indirect but effective approach avoids direct diplomatic confrontations while firmly defending the liberal trade order of which Singapore is one of the world's principal beneficiaries.

The most revealing silence concerns the concrete impact of trade tensions on Singapore's economy and the regional economy. No mention is made of the specific repercussions on Asian supply chains, investments, or the city-state's exports. This strategic omission makes it possible to maintain an appearance of neutrality while avoiding exposure of Singapore's economic vulnerability to trade wars between major powers.

The deliberately factual and academic tone actually masks a passionate defense of the Singaporean economic model. By presenting Smith as a "progressive" thinker concerned with inequality, the newspaper attempts to reconcile free trade and social justice, thus responding to growing criticisms of neoliberalism. This intellectual synthesis serves the interests of a Singapore that seeks to legitimize its model of state capitalism open to the outside world but socially regulated.

The narrative framing reveals the fundamental structural biases of Singaporean coverage: the unconditional defense of free trade is presented as a universal economic truth rather than as the vital interest of a small warehouse state. By carefully avoiding naming the contemporary protagonists of trade conflicts, the Singaporean media maintains its hedging diplomacy while defending its existential interests through the indirect route of historical intellectual authority.