Singapore was the focus of intensive capital expenditure by the British Empire prior to independence, and managed to maintain a stable market economy after independence which made it an attractive target for even more foreign investment.

A homogenous population. A lot of the violence and corruption in Africa (and the middle East) is a result of conflict between large tribes that hate each other and yet were placed in the same country by colonialists. This was done deliberately in many cases, to keep the colonies weak and easy to control, but continues to cause problems even after decades of "independence". I believe Singapore was spared of this due to their unique geography.

Singapore has a famously heterogeneous population. Historically, it has had a population of ethnic Chinese, ethnic Malays, ethnic Indians, and ethnic Europeans. Furthermore, there have been tensions between the various ethnic communities since Chinese, Indians, and Europeans began displacing the native Malays. There were terrible race riots in the 60s in Singapore. Singapore is blessed by geography, but it is not blessed by ethnic homogeneity.

You're right. Apologies for the misinformation.

Singapore - a homogenous population? Is this a joke, or are you outright lying to cover for your other arguments.

To say honestly whenever people compare nation states like Singapore , Denmark or even provinces like Hong Kong to large swathes like Africa or countries like India and compare their development it seems cringe worthy.

As long as National security is not the biggest concern , a homogeneous population or at least a shared of common values in the country controlled by a single party with a goal for the greater good can achieve economic development unlike anything else. It also helps being an outlier in the given region and attracting industries that other neighboring countries can't.

Except for Chinese provinces (which is a magic in itself due to the ruthlessness of a single party system) no other developing areas of the world have developed faster. Most of them share similar problems which have although reduced a lot over the past couple of decades. Even these places want a better future for themselves, the spread of information has made many individuals in all these areas aware of the world around them and they aspire for a better standard of living.

I fucked up. Apologies.

Its a City State, the dynamics of a Nation State and City State are different. Singapore is smaller than Houston both in size and population. Singapore exploited the local inefficiencies, they were the capitalist oasis in a region of Leftist/autocratic regimes esp. during their growth period. There are many factors including leadership, but their adherence to open trade gave them a leg up in the region.