Why leaders should not personalise conflict, according to Ramon Magsaysay 2026 awardee Tommy Koh

That diplomatic life was shaped early on by an unexpected mentorship. Arriving in New York as a young and self-described inexperienced representative, Koh was taken under the wing of Philippine statesman General Carlos P Romulo, the former President of the UN General Assembly.

“[He] taught me many valuable lessons about how the UN works and how diplomacy should be practised,” Koh recalls with evident warmth. “So I will always be grateful to [him].”

From Romulo, he absorbed a vital truth that would define his own international career: for a small nation to survive amidst titan powers, its diplomats must master the art of building bridges through personal integrity, intellectual rigour, and genuine empathy.

This human-centred approach to statecraft was severely tested during the prolonged negotiations surrounding UNCLOS. In 1978, Tommy Koh assumed the chairmanship of a crucial negotiating committee tasked with bridging a deep divide over seabed mining between industrialised nations and developing states. By 1982, serving as president of the entire 3rd United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, he successfully guided nations toward adopting a comprehensive legal framework for the world’s oceans.

For maritime nations like the Philippines, UNCLOS provided the first international legal recognition of their archipelagic status. “Many Filipinos don’t know that your claim to an archipelagic state found international validation for the first time in UNCLOS,” Koh points out. “Without UNCLOS, your claim to be an archipelago was not recognised by the world... It is fundamental to your own identity.”

Read more: The dangers of deep-sea mining explained in the documentary ‘Deep Rising’

Throughout his diplomatic career, Koh maintained that effective negotiation requires a clear distinction between core interests and flexible tactics.

“Negotiation is always a process of give and take,” he explains. “Rule number one: protect your core interest. Rule number two: when your opposite number makes a request, and it doesn’t damage your core interest, concede to the partner. Because at the end of the day, the outcome of the negotiation must be fair and balanced.”

Crucially, he insists that geopolitical disputes must never destroy human relationships. Reflecting on the campaign by ASEAN to free Cambodia from occupation by Vietnam—a period when India aligned with Vietnam—he remembers refusing to demonise India’s formidable UN ambassador, Brajesh Mishra, despite sharp pushback from his own colleagues.

“My ASEAN colleagues hated him because he was very eloquent and formidable, so they didn’t understand why I always refer to Brajesh as my older brother and my guru,” Koh recalls. “My delegation scolded me and said, ‘He’s our enemy.’ I said he had been good to me in the past, and I will always be grateful to him. We may disagree today, but don’t personalise the disagreement. The disagreement is between India and Singapore, not between Brajesh and me... So the lesson learned is, don’t personalise disputes between countries. Always keep that human connection to your friends.”

This steadfast refusal to reduce international relations to raw power dynamics led Koh to champion the agency of smaller states. In 1992, he took the initiative to establish the Forum of Small States at the United Nations, a coalition that now comprises 108 member-nations. In a global system that historically favours the big and the mighty, Koh demonstrated that small countries can exercise immense moral sway when they act in unison and hold great powers to account under international law.

Whether condemning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Vietnamese intervention in Cambodia, or the United States invasion of Grenada, he consistently prioritised legal principle over strategic convenience. “The test of a country’s adherence to principle is when it is inconvenient to do so,” he once observed.

Yet, for Koh, statecraft has never been divorced from the domestic cultural fabric. Beyond the halls of international tribunals, he has served as one of Singapore’s most dedicated champions of arts, heritage, and civic discourse.

As the founding chairman of the National Arts Council from 1991 to 1996 and later as chairman of the National Heritage Board, he recognised that a nation’s identity cannot be built on economic indicators alone. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious society made up of diverse immigrant communities, physical monuments, historical markers, and cultural institutions serve as vital anchors of shared belonging.

During his tenure overseeing Singapore’s museums and monuments, Koh initiated a project to honour historic global figures who had visited the island during their lifetimes. After dedicating a marker to novelist Joseph Conrad, his second initiative was to erect a memorial plaque honouring Filipino hero José Rizal by the Singapore River, next to the Asian Civilisations Museum.

“José Rizal was a Filipino nationalist, but he never took up arms,” Koh observes. “The only thing he did was to write... He advocated freedom without using force. I therefore wanted Singaporeans to know his story and to respect him.”

This deep commitment to human dignity and freedom of thought has also made Koh a courageous voice within Singapore’s domestic public sphere. As the director of the Institute of Policy Studies and founding rector of NUS Tembusu College, he has mentored generations of scholars, public servants and young advocates, consistently encouraging critical inquiry over blind conformity. He publicly advocated for the repeal of Section 377A of Singapore’s Penal Code—a colonial-era law that criminalised same-sex relations between men—and has long defended the essential role of constructive dissent in a healthy society.

“Singapore does not need sycophants; it needs loving critics,” he said before in his speech at the Singapore Bicentennial Conference on October 1, 2019. “In a situation like Singapore, we don’t need more yes men and yes women. We have too many of them, but we need men and women of courage who say, ‘I don’t agree with it. Maybe there’s another way,” he clarifies during the media conference of RMAF.

In conferring the 2026 Ramon Magsaysay Award upon Tommy Koh, the Board of Trustees cited his “exemplary leadership in international diplomacy and in the formation of a new generation of advocates devoted to the advancement of justice and human dignity the world over.” Joining the illustrious company of Singaporean founding fathers Dr Goh Keng Swee and Lim Kim San, who received the award in earlier decades, and Tony Tay, who received the award in 2017, Koh accepts the honour with characteristic humility, framing his life’s work as a simple message of hope to a troubled world.

“Poverty, inequality, backwardness are not inevitable,” Tommy Koh reflects, looking back on Singapore’s journey from post-colonial poverty to stability, and reminding young leaders across Asia that principled governance, zero tolerance for corruption, and meritocracy can overcome seemingly impossible odds. “No matter how formidable the odds are, we can overcome them if we have the will, the discipline and the gumption to do it.”

In an era increasingly dominated by unilateral force and cynical geopolitics, Koh’s legacy stands as a reassuring testament to the enduring power of reason, fairness and moral courage. His life reminds us that true statecraft is not the art of dominating others, but the art of bringing humanity together at the negotiating table.

NOW READ

In Conversation: Maria Ressa and Karen Davila on journalism in the age of AI and the cost of silence

Who will shape the future? 25 Filipino trailblazers to watch

A decade of leadership: inside Tatler Philippines’ Gen.T 10th anniversary celebration