National Service under the microscope
That’s half the battle won
Back in the days when I did my 2 years 4 months of National Service, it never crossed my mind whether the system was fair or unfair to us guys with regard to the opposite sex or to foreigners.
That is not to say that I enjoyed NS. In fact, like many others, I think of it as the biggest waste of time in my life. I hated it, from all the regimental restrictions to the stupid wayangs to an unmeritocratic system where a veteran warrant officer has to address a commissioned officer fresh out of OCS as “Sir”. The last bit is one I could never come to terms with. To me, there must be something inherently wrong with a system where one is forever consigned to an inferior rank from the career path chosen at the outset that no amount of performance or further education could fix.
I can still remember the day I walked out of camp on my ORD. I’ve never felt so exhilarated and relieved. This must be how it feels to get out of jail, I thought to myself, while conscious of the fact that I would be back in a few years’ time for in-camp training. Since then, I have done a handful of ICTs and they only served to reinforce my opinion of NS being extremely unproductive. There were days when I spent entire afternoons hanging out in a specialist mess because the supervisors had nothing for us to do.
That is why it baffles me when people say our defence will be compromised if NS is cut even shorter from the current two years. Have they seen how unproductively time is spent and all the silly wayang shows we waste time on when a VIP visits?
Despite my misgivings, I just took it as something I had to do and didn’t think much of it. It’s like, okay, I wasted 2 plus years of my life but it’s the same with every guy. People in other countries could spend many more years rebuilding their lives after a war, after all. I’m not saying that Singapore is safe because we have NS — truth is nobody will know how effective it is until something bad happens — but that it’s really pointless to compare.
I have a former colleague of my age who is a Malaysian-turned-Singaporean holding a cushy job in our civil service and living in a HDB flat. When he told me he never did NS, my reaction was more of “you lucky bastard!” than to curse at him for taking advantage of our system, as some unhappy Singaporeans may accuse him of. I do not fault him partly because, as we know, the problem is with the system and partly because I don’t feel I’m entitled to anything different for having served NS. In fact, such a notion of entitlement or being more deserving of whatever it is had never occurred to me until recent years when this issue became a hot topic.
Indeed, the narrative on NS has changed considerably these few years and views on Singaporean men being disadvantaged against foreigners and even Singaporean women have become mainstream and are now freely aired. It is good that there is less taboo now to speak up against the system of NS, which was a sacred cow that for so many years couldn’t be questioned — it’s our sovereignty as a nation you’re talking about! At the same time, we should be careful of not letting the idea that one is entitled to certain priorities or benefits from having served NS gain so much traction that it becomes an issue of “Us who served vs Them who didn’t” that casts even our women to the other side of the divide.
An open discussion on the various concerns is welcome. Some helpful suggestions have been thrown up, such as allocating vocations better to match skill sets. This would make time served more fulfilling for people like me who haven’t felt so. On the other hand, certain kinds of arguments have not helped. For example, saying that women serve by bearing children, or by providing spiritual support as wife, sister or mother to our soldiers, does not address the complaint some have that the men are never given any option.
The same goes for issues such as IPPT and RT for NSmen. For those who end up spending a lot of time on remedial training, it’s natural they will feel unhappy about being forced to do so. It’s easy to suggest that it is every NSman’s duty to stay fit, but not every man is born the same. Some people can pass with minimal training, while some just can’t no matter how hard they train. So is it fair to “punish” those who can’t with very time-consuming RT? These are questions that need addressing. In fact, while I haven’t had a problem passing so far, I tend to think that the whole idea of an annual IPPT for NSmen is unsafe because it causes people to over-exert in last minute training or during the tests when their bodies are not properly conditioned for the level of intensity. You should be staying fit all year round, they say, but just saying that won’t make people go out and exercise when they have busy lives to contend with.
Should women serve NS then? A recent Institute of Policy Studies survey revealed that 1 out of 10 women is willing to serve full time NS. I can only wonder how many percent of that will think it’s time well spent after going through it. Personally I am indifferent, but some sort of vocational training over a shorter period may be useful. When Britain was at war, the women not in combat service helped in a variety of ways. This included caring for the injured and young, working in factories and farms, and working as drivers, firefighters and even in the secret service. There is no doubt that in times of war, women will have a very important part to play. If we recognise this fact, why then are we not preparing them for such a contingency?
But, in truth, this current debate over NS is not so much about who should serve and whether it’s a worthy sacrifice, but a spill-over from the general unhappiness with the number of foreigners in the country and the competition it is creating, which is unfair to some extent and even acknowledged by the government. Ultimately, that is the root problem that is in urgent need of being addressed.
[…] The Void Decker: National Service under the microscope – Singapore Lighthouse: NS in Singapore & Stupid IPS Surveys – Limpeh Is Foreign […]
Why does Singapore need conscription when it already has the most powerful military in the region? Its defense budget easily surpasses the combined military spending of its neighbours. Is there even a credible military threat from a neighbouring country?
Most people, given a choice, will not enlist in the army. Is a bunch of unwilling conscripts the best way to defend the country? How useful is forced conscription in the type of warfare Singapore likely faces?
But the counter question would be: would it be the most powerful if conscription is removed?
Doing away with conscription might be too drastic for the near term. But we could start with cutting down the period of service!
A professional military force supplemented by a conscript force of minimally trained men might suffice. Basic military training of say no more than six months? Thereafter have tri-annual shooting training and practice. More practical to focus on proficiency of weapon skills for army conscripts.
6 months is just nice for them to enter university, ha.
Actually I think one year sounds reasonable. Maybe they should allow NS to be done in instalments as well, say over 5 years.
The question should be what should replace it rather than how it should be tweaked to satisfy the beggar thy other mentality. We should be looking at how defence can be fully professionalized. The Air Force and Navy are already largely professionalised so that leaves the army. We should study what is the right establishment size for the army to defend the country. The current model of press ganging every able body man is silly. It only bloats up the establishment size to justify fanciful ranks. It possibly also feeds the mentality that we must have plentiful warm bodies for things to run smoothly.
“But the counter question would be: would it be the most powerful if conscription is removed?”
Why must it also have the most powerful army when it has the most overwhelming air force? The United States does not have the largest army yet no one questions its military supremacy.
How does a large army help in defending the island? Can anyone justify the importance of a big army in modern warfare, especially in the Singapore context?
The Singapore military understands modern warfare very well. That’s why it has the most advanced weapon systems in the region. I seriously doubt the army is a high priority in their defense planning.
Why continue conscription when there is little justification and when most people would rather not enlist in it? It only serves to remind every male Singaporean that there is a “boss” who has a near absolute control over his life for many years.
Wah lau eh, don’t even get me started on this National Service issue, because I have half a mind to kick this Alvinology fella in the arse…along with the other fellas who keep insisting we don’t need national service.
Then what do we do? Wait for the US and other allies to come rescue us in the event we get attacked? Or maybe the right thing to do is PRETEND we are safe in this part of the world, and hence we don’t need a military.
I happen to be very proud of having served NS, all the way for 15 years right up to my MR. When I worked in the Home Affairs Ministry, I was more than proud to wear my NS medal and GSM on my uniform. And to be very frank, when I look back, I felt my years in a combat vocation were probably the best experiences I’ve ever had– and I’d gladly trade 15 years of my lifespan to re-live those moments I had with my brothers-in-arms.
Ha, good that you really like it! Wish I can say the same.
What I noticed is that those who served in a platoon with the same group of fellow NSFs/NSmen tend to bond better and as a result enjoy the camaraderie and find their NS experience memorable. Those who didn’t are more likely to find the experience less meaningful.
What does definition of a powerful army really means? More spending may not necessarily mean a powerful army.
Besides, the issue on how to cut down the strength of the army in itself is equally difficult to handle? Some guys need to serve, some do not need to serve? How to determine who are the lucky / unlucky few? Cut it down to a few months? Is a few months enough to learn all the soldiering skills and attain the fitness required? Nobody loves conscription but nobody wants to join the army willingly too. So how do we handle the defense of the country? Can we get enough people to join it as a career? I really think the career of a rifleman is not attractive no matter what anyone says. :S
Actually doing reservist is already like doing NS duties in installment. Even that some of us (including me) find it difficult given our busy lifestyle and work load.
Alot of naysayers always say that our enemy will be able to wipe us out with a well-placed megaton bomb. That is true I suppose. But that move is also only just one possibility in the grand scheme of things. Surely you guys would also agree that an organisation like SAF tasked with the defense of the nation need to muster more manpower resource for planning flexibility to cater for multiple confrontation possibilities.
Numbers superiority coupled with technological augmentation are indisputable factor to victory. A large army is in itself a deterrence and is key to our survivability if you understand Singapore’s defense strategy.
Dude, as for the perceived feud between commissioned officer v.s warranted specialist… this is only a myopic symptom caused by the training system which allows a young NSF to technically hold a higher rank then a senior warrant officer. (BTW, this is the same for US and UK Army too. ) Everybody who is in NS knows that a warrant officer can trump a young captain anytime leh. And everybody respect the commander ( commissioned or not ) who has earned their respect the right way and that’s probably how the “Encik” term came about for junior officers to address the senior spec cadre. The same issue can be seen in the corporate world too. A younger person ( typically a scholar) can just parachute in and become your boss. When you get older, you will become “zen” to these things.
At the end of the day, lets not confuse conscription with the lousy experience that we all had. I think it all lies in the details of the implementation. Conscription do not have to mean national day saikang, lousy pay, time wasted on rushing to wait / waiting to rush and weird draconian rules such as camera phone 4.3″ screen size and below allowed but bigger than 4.3″ not allowed. (seriously wtf. 0??? what can a bigger screen smart hp do that a smaller screen hp can’t? why is one allowed but the other not allowed?)
If the conditions are right (i.e peg to market pay) and proper attention is diverted toward correcting all these misgivings, everybody can look at conscription in a more balanced manner and make an informed decision whether it is required or not.
It’s not exactly the same as the corporate world. A younger person may come in and become the boss, but there’s no rule that says that a more experienced person will always be of an inferior rank no matter how well he performed. I know it’s the same with other countries, but it’s still wrong! I won’t have so much an issue if a specialist who has proven himself can easily switch to a commissioned officer career. From what I know, this is extremely rare.
But I agree with what you said. Most of the misgivings are about the length of service and inefficiencies of the system, exacerbated by the foreigner issue. Most Singaporeans will probably agree that conscription is somewhat necessary, even if they don’t like it, unless it can be proven that we can rely totally on technology and a solely professional armed forces.
R.P.,
If national service is voluntary, most of your so-called brothers-in-arms will likely not be there (unless they are as gung-ho as you.)
You asked “what do we do (without NS)?” Instead, you should really be asking “what do we do with NS?” Does Singapore need a big army in likely warfare scenarios? I doubt the army is ranked high in Singapore defense strategy (hint: follow the money!) I also doubt the (size of) Singapore army will deter any aggressor.
To Xmen; there’s a book called “defending the lion city”. A quick skim through should clear up many doubts you have in mind. Cheers!
To Marston45:
Can anyone write an authoritative book on the USA defense?
With a little googling you will find the following discussion on “defending the lion city” –
http://sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/95237
Technology has advanced rapidly in recent years. For example, drones are taking over the sky and will only get more deadly. You should question if the Singapore army is fighting the last war.
Does Singapore still need conscription?
I am a female so I can’t really comment fairly on whether NS is a waste of time or not. But I have met a fair number of foreigners who hail from countries with similar policies requiring citizens to serve in the army, i.e., Koreans, Taiwanese, Swiss and Israelis. Maybe my social /professional circle is skewed towards “hawks” and those who enjoys army life but there is certainly less negativity about military service from those I’ve met. Perhaps a little lamenting here or there but in general, they just get on with it. The Israelis in particular, understandably, sees it as part of their duty to defend their territory.
I am aware that in many of these countries, there has been pressure to shorten the conscription period so Singapore is not alone. I think we can all reasonably agree that desiring to shorten the period is a desire not unique to Singaporean men. What stood out for me is the seemingly disenchantment of Singapore NS men for having to serve in the army for a country they feel has not always taken good care of its own. I think this should be addressed as a separate issue from the length of service and not amalgamated as one problem.
I feel that the current 2 years NSF is okay, one year to train up the soldier in his respective vocation, another for him to put his training to use via exercises, but maybe can cut back by another 1/2 year, don’t really need to go for so many exercises and do the same shit over and over again.
Problem is the ICT, it can drag more than 10 years and it is very disruptive to the man’s job and as long as you don’t MR, you have to go for IPPT every year, pass or go for RT or apply for IPT early, the killer is the RT, for 3 months you have to leave work early, not every employer is understanding.