- Concept of State in context of Singapore under colonial rule (i.e., the period after Japanese Occupation to before joining in the Malaya Federation, 1945-1963) Singapore has always been a state in the physical sense. What makes the difference in its concept of a state is the play of power during its years of transnationalization. When the British took over Singapore after World War II, we see the change in government structure, from being under both a military and municipal government (during the Occupation years) to a Crown Colony under the British rule. This can be viewed as a shift in the Singapore transnationalization process, as the role of the state changes due to the alter in the method of governance. Singapore still remains as a state and not a nation during the years when she was part of the Crown Colony, as there is the lack of the spiritual element that is deemed necessary (as proposed by Renan) in order for a nation to exist. When granted internal self-governance by the British in June 1959(when the People's Action Party (PAP) government took office), we see another change in the structure, as the efforts of PAP can be quite obviously seen in trying to gain more independence (and ultimately total independence) by seeking closer ties with the Federation of Malaya. The reason behind for PAP to do so is that it hopes to gain independence through a merger with the Federation of Malaya, and the transition of Singapore from a state to an independent state becomes more apparent as this is explored in the next part of the report.

Singapore as an Independent State
- Definition of an Independent State
Besides internal legitimacy, the state has to be legitimised externally, meaning that its sovereignty has to be recognized by other states in order to be considered an independent state. As defined in 'The Concept of the State as Power', George H. Sabine The Philosophical Review, Vol. 29, No. 4:
"The state is primarily a power; it possesses legal dominion over the population of a definite territory and its legality is original rather that derived from another power which might dominate it. …it is held that every true state is of sovereign, i.e., possessed of supreme and independent power. …it was born only of the struggle which set the king free from other limiting political powers and so brought the modern state into existence."
Hence the independent state can be said to be one that is completely free from the dominance of another governing body external of its boundaries, in control of its own and its sovereignty is recognized by both its people and the other states.

- Concept of Independent State in context of Singapore from merger to independence (1963-1965)
After Singapore gained internal self-governance in 1959, the next logical step was towards independence. The issue of independence was closely related to the idea of merger, as the PAP had consistently campaigned for 'independence through merger'. On 16 September 1963, Singapore, together with some other countries in the region, became part of the Federation of Malaya. It was hoped that Singapore could remain as an integral member of the Federation, but disputes in the couple of years after the merger expelled Singapore out of the Federation, and forced the state into independence.
The idea of seeking independence through a merger with Malaya is not in accordance with the concept of an independent state as proposed by George H Sabine. To be part of a merger simply means to be still under some form of surveillance by an external power, and thus Singapore cannot be considered to be an independent sovereign state when it was part of the Federation. Singapore can only be considered as an independent state on 9 August 1965 when she broke off from Malaya and was forced into independence. It is then a sovereign, having the power to rule and guide the people into the future (despite the readiness to be independent). Being free from the Malayan Federation, Singapore can then truly declare its independence, as the power lies solely now on the PAP government.

Singapore as a Nation
- Definition of a Nation
According to Renan:
"A nation is a soul, spiritual principle. Two things, which are really only one, go to make up this soul or spiritual principle. One of these things lies in the past, the other in the present. One is the possession in common of a rich heritage of memories; and the other is actual agreement, the desire to live together, and the will to continue to make the most of the joint inheritance."
Essentially, a nation cannot focus just on the race, language or religion, but seek towards the spiritual one-ness among the people, whereby there is a heritage of glory and grief to be shared. A nation is:
"…a community of people who feel that they belong in the double sense that they share deeply significant elements of a common heritage and that they have a common destiny for the future." (Citation from the source which I'll find)

- Concept of Nation in the context of Singapore from independence to present (1965-)
The expulsion from the Federation came so sudden that there was little time and resources for the PAP government to ponder and decide on what is to be done. Immediate action had to be taken and it was only natural to focus primarily on the economy, as believed by the PAP government that one can forget about fulfilling other needs without first filling their stomachs.
Rapid economic growth is not without its problems. Singapore had to go international in terms of trade, shipping and financial transactions in order to make up for the expected loss in trade and other business activities due to the strenuous efforts on the part of Malaysia to develop its own economic facilities. People were drilled into thinking that, "without a strong economy we will not survive". The government was apparently deploying economic power during the period immediately after independence.
We do not see Renan's concept of a nation during this timeframe when Singapore first declared its independence. There was little emphasis, if not none at all, on the building of a nation in the spiritual sense. Material needs were deemed to be more important and had to be satisfied before moulding the state into a nation. Through the hard work of the people, Singapore managed to recover its economy in 1965 and even had a growth of 8 per cent due to the expansion of the manufacturing and construction sectors. Growth was even greater from 1966 to 1973 when the annual average rate of growth at constant prices was 13 per cent. Singapore was doing well economically, and has proved its independence and sovereignty as a state. But Singapore is yet a nation: there is no soul, spiritual principle evident among the people.
The economy had stabilized and was growing at a stable rate around the 1980s. However, people were still obsessed with the pursue of the material well-beings in life, which was drilled into their heads constantly by the government during the first few years of independence.
The construction of a nation requires the use of power, and this is distinguished in three forms: economic, ideological and political. The PAP government deployed all three elements of power throughout its years in office, only that the emphasis has changed with the progression in time. However, conclusion on the success of the deployment of such powers cannot be done yet. The intimate connection between nation building and industrialization is evident in the early years of independence, but as the state progresses, there is a need to steer the focus to ideological power in attempting to achieve the soul principle.
As we approach the last decade of the century, we suddenly have the 5 Singapore values, Singapore 21 Vision (S21 Vision), and the National Day Parade become an annual reminder of our "common past" and our shared "vision for tomorrow". The government tells us that we are "one people, one nation, one Singapore", and talents who went abroad to widen their horizons were reminded that Singapore is a "place that we call our home", "our homeland", because "every Singaporean matters". The interplay of ideology is apparent especially in the early 1990s when the need arises to emphasize on nation-building, and the use of ideologies as a form of hegemony was employed.
In conclusion:
"Singaporeans are in the process of discovering their roots, including collective experience, even as they make their varied contributions to the welfare and progress of their city, island and country. In weaving past memories with present experiences and future hopes, Singaporeans are fashioning a distinct Singaporean identity for themselves which transcends separate ethnic and cultural affiliations."