Commentary: Who is Anji Sinha? Trump’s ambassador pick for Singapore is a mystery, but the timing speaks volumes

SINGAPORE: When United States President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday (Mar 11) that he had nominated a Dr Anji Sinha to be the country’s ambassador to Singapore, many observers went – “who”?

Unlike past nominees, whose credentials were at least partially known, Dr Sinha is a mystery figure.

Mr Trump described Dr Sinha as a “highly respected entrepreneur” and the US-Singapore relationship as “vital”. There’s been some speculation in political circles about Dr Sinha’s identity, but little is known for certain about their career history and credentials.

Nonetheless, it comes as both a welcome announcement and a symbol of Mr Trump’s approach to foreign policy.

What matters more than Dr Sinha’s resume and identity is the timing of the nomination, the mandate of the new ambassador, and their utility as a messenger between Washington and Singapore.

TIMING MATTERS

Unlike Mr Trump’s first term, when Singapore went without a US ambassador, this nomination came early. That Mr Trump nominated an ambassador to Singapore not even two months into his second term is a positive sign for the US-Singapore relationship.

The announcement also came just days after Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan’s introductory phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, where they reaffirmed the “strong and longstanding relationship” between the two countries.

An embassy can carry out most of its interactions with local agencies without the leadership of an ambassador. We saw this in the US Embassy in Singapore, which was run by two consecutive chargé d’affaires ad interim during Mr Trump’s first term.

Yet, there is a significant gap between what a chargé and an ambassador can access and represent. An ambassador is seen as the personal representative of the president, giving them access to national leaders at a level that a chargé is unlikely to enjoy. That the nomination was made this early adds a welcome sense of urgency as well.

Starting the confirmation process early provides more time to address challenges that might emerge.

In 2017, Mr Trump nominated former Deputy National Security Advisor KT McFarland to be the ambassador to Singapore. However, the confirmation process in the Republican-held Senate was stalled due to concerns over her testimony during the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election. Ms McFarland ultimately withdrew her name from consideration in February 2018.

Republicans may once again be the majority in the Senate, but it is advisable to play it safe and get the confirmation process started early.

FINDING A MANDATE

Another consideration is Dr Sinha’s mandate as ambassador. Understanding this requires one to observe the trends behind the appointments of other ambassadors in Southeast Asia at large and Singapore specifically.

From Malaysia to Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand, over 95 per cent of US ambassadors since 2001 have been career diplomats, climbing the ranks in the State Department until they were appointed as the heads of their respective embassies.

In contrast, only one of the five US ambassadors to Singapore from 2001 to 2024, Mr Frank Lavin, had extensive diplomatic experience as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Asia and the Pacific under the George HW Bush administration prior to his appointment.

There are several ways to interpret these trends. One view is that Singapore is a plum posting for businessmen or political operators with diplomatic ambitions. Another is that career diplomats would be reserved for bilateral relationships that have more political sensitivities to navigate. In comparison, Washington may consider the relationship with Singapore to be stable enough for a non-diplomat to manage.

A related view is that ambassadors might be chosen with a specific mandate, such as negotiating a trade agreement or some other aspect of cooperation. For example, Mr Lavin played a key role in negotiating the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement while serving as ambassador from 2001 to 2005. Mr David Adelman, the US ambassador to Singapore from 2010 to 2013, was lauded for promoting US trade and investment across Southeast Asia.

MESSAGES SHOULD GO BOTH WAYS

It remains to be seen if Dr Sinha will have a similar mandate as US Ambassador to Singapore. Given their relatively unknown profile and Mr Trump’s vague post announcing the nomination, the chance of a big mandate is admittedly slim.

Nonetheless, even without specific goals, there are opportunities for Dr Sinha to leave a positive mark on the US-Singapore relationship. To achieve this, we need to understand the dynamics behind Mr Trump’s ambassadorial nominations.

Mr Trump’s list of ambassadorial nominations contains some individuals with diplomatic experience, including Mr Pete Hoekstra, the nominee to Canada, and Mr Ronald Johnson, nominee to Mexico. Both served as ambassadors during Mr Trump’s first term.

Beyond them, however, most of his nominees have little diplomat experience. Some are political figures or donors who supported Mr Trump’s 2024 campaign, while others are members of his extended family. Their common characteristic appears to be their political support for him.

It is not unusual for non-career diplomats to be selected as ambassadors. Data compiled by the American Foreign Service Association indicates that 30 per cent of ambassadors since the 1980s have been political appointees.

Yet the sheer number of such appointees suggests that Mr Trump, first and foremost, wants ambassadors that he can trust to convey his messages. Already, Mr Trump’s ambassador nominees are promising to work on reducing trade deficits with Japan and leaving the option open for military strikes on cartels in Mexico.

What does all of this mean for Singapore? 

Instead of fretting over potential tensions, it would be more beneficial to proactively engage the new ambassador on areas of pragmatic cooperation. From the digital economy to artificial intelligence, both Washington and Singapore would benefit from closer cooperation in emerging technological fields.

In this regard, Dr Sinha could also convey offers of potential benefits to Washington, especially if the ambassador nominee is close to Mr Trump.

At a minimum, such entreaties could convince embassy staff to work with local agencies to lay the groundwork for deeper cooperation. In a best-case scenario, promises of benefits could entice Mr Trump to intervene personally, perhaps even setting the stage for a state visit to Singapore. Given the premium placed on in-person meetings with the new president, that would be a rare honour.

Regardless, Singapore has nothing to lose and all to gain from engaging the new ambassador.

Kevin Chen is an Associate Research Fellow with the US Programme at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.