4 ms·

Aid for the country’s development and not for his personal pockets. It shows a lot about Lee’s character…many Asian, Latin American, and African leaders have s

Aid for the country’s development and not for his personal pockets. It shows a lot about Lee’s character…many Asian, Latin American, and African leaders have sold out their countries for less. Singapore really lucked out having Lee Kuan Yew in charge in its early stages.

meyum33 3y ago
There could be another way to look at it though. Xi and Putin would happily do the same: the countries are theirs.
refurb 3y ago
But it's still a "gift" to keep quiet. It's not as bad as money in his pocket, but it's still money to keep quiet. It's the same as if someone tried to bribe me by giving money to my parents. It doesn't benefit me directly, but it benefits me.
- guilhas 3y ago
  Yes, maybe all US foreign aid is a disguised bribe machine, political influence, natural resource contracts...
- dchftcs 3y ago
  Bribery is bad primarily because it asks for someone to abandon their duties for personal gain. As the head of the state, his is responsible for the state, and not more. Here, he asked US to pay the state instead of himself. Whether or not it would actually turn out to be a net benefit to the state is one matter, but given the information we have, he acted in accordance to his duty. You can't call that bribery. Maybe you think he has a moral obligation to not keep quiet, and he defied that obligation. But no, that's not how it works. A head of state that chooses this as a hill to die on, regardless of trade-offs, is one that fails his people.
- falcor84 3y ago
  Money transferred between the governments of two countries as part of cooperation on other issues is not really a gift in any sense of the word, but rather just diplomatic relations. In your metaphor, it's as if you're working to negotiate a deal on behalf of your parents for the family business.
  - refurb 3y ago
    It's diplomatic relations in isolation. But if someone agrees to it in exchange for staying silent, that's still a bribe.
    - falcor84 3y ago
      I'm not quite following. As I read it, the head of the government had information that enabled him to essentially conjure $3.3M of foreign aid for his country out of thin air, and you're saying that it would have been better for his country if he instead just publicly released that information? Taking this to the extreme, should "the public's right to know" preclude having any non-public diplomatic conversations whatsoever?
- lubujackson 3y ago
  Yes, it is unsavory. Welcome to real world politics. Recognize if you are a tiny govt dealing with the USA you are effectively over the barrel regardless. In other words, he was Andy Dufresne negotiating beers for his fellow inmates.

meyum33 3y ago

There could be another way to look at it though. Xi and Putin would happily do the same: the countries are theirs.

refurb 3y ago

But it's still a "gift" to keep quiet. It's not as bad as money in his pocket, but it's still money to keep quiet. It's the same as if someone tried to bribe me by giving money to my parents. It doesn't benefit me directly, but it benefits me.

guilhas 3y ago
Yes, maybe all US foreign aid is a disguised bribe machine, political influence, natural resource contracts...
dchftcs 3y ago
Bribery is bad primarily because it asks for someone to abandon their duties for personal gain. As the head of the state, his is responsible for the state, and not more. Here, he asked US to pay the state instead of himself. Whether or not it would actually turn out to be a net benefit to the state is one matter, but given the information we have, he acted in accordance to his duty. You can't call that bribery. Maybe you think he has a moral obligation to not keep quiet, and he defied that obligation. But no, that's not how it works. A head of state that chooses this as a hill to die on, regardless of trade-offs, is one that fails his people.
falcor84 3y ago
Money transferred between the governments of two countries as part of cooperation on other issues is not really a gift in any sense of the word, but rather just diplomatic relations. In your metaphor, it's as if you're working to negotiate a deal on behalf of your parents for the family business.
- refurb 3y ago
  It's diplomatic relations in isolation. But if someone agrees to it in exchange for staying silent, that's still a bribe.
  - falcor84 3y ago
    I'm not quite following. As I read it, the head of the government had information that enabled him to essentially conjure $3.3M of foreign aid for his country out of thin air, and you're saying that it would have been better for his country if he instead just publicly released that information? Taking this to the extreme, should "the public's right to know" preclude having any non-public diplomatic conversations whatsoever?
lubujackson 3y ago
Yes, it is unsavory. Welcome to real world politics. Recognize if you are a tiny govt dealing with the USA you are effectively over the barrel regardless. In other words, he was Andy Dufresne negotiating beers for his fellow inmates.