you're reading...

Musings On Conscription And National Service

The bottom-line is this: NS is necessary, and important for the continued prosperity and security of Singapore.

It is tough to be a full-time national serviceman; it is difficult to articulate the frustration one feels having to serve the country while his counterparts progress speedily to further their studies, the strict regimentation imposed over the smallest of details, having to sacrifice personal time for duties over weekends or holidays et cetera.

Naturally, calls for the abolishment of National Service (NS) in Singapore have been forthcoming ever since the latter’s establishment in 1967. Unfortunately, Singaporean men who have gone through – or are going through – the system is caught in a dilemma: on the one hand, he is cognisant of his responsibilities as a citizen and the commitment to deterrence; on the other, he laments the inconveniences and disruptions to his life.

The bottom-line is this: NS is necessary, and important for the continued prosperity and security of Singapore; however, I believe that it is imperative for the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) to adopt more consultative measures with its conscripted soldiers, so as to understand their sentiments, and constructively solicit their assorted feedback.

Will Deterrence Remain Effective? Nobody Knows

Armies and military units around the world continue to play pivotal, symbolic roles in the maintenance of territorial sovereignty and overall security. In Singapore, the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) forms a quintessential part of the national defence core, empowered by the belief that deterrence is an important concept to keep potential aggressors at bay.

Primarily, the sustained faith in deterrence is premised upon our historical experiences, and the convenient proposition that Singapore has not been breached despites its geographical vulnerabilities. Whether the status quo has been entirely dependent on the presence of the military, it is tricky to conclude; at the same time, one would find it far-fetched to believe that diplomacy per se is be sufficient for the maintenance of peace.

One would find it far-fetched to believe that diplomacy per se is be sufficient for the maintenance of peace.

Perhaps it is the fear of unknown that fuels our reliance upon the SAF; after all, why fix something – the military and the deterrence theory – that is not broken? Unless administrators can devise feasible alternatives, or to ensure a steady influx of military personnel voluntarily; conscription will continue to be a permanent fixture in the Singapore fabric because of the demographic challenges faced.

Increasing Mechanisation, Reducing Conscription Years

Amidst the negative perspectives, one must admit that beyond the advantages to the bigger picture, NS does bring about positive benefits to the individual. Personally, the past year or so in my unit after my Basic Military Training (BMT) has made me more cognisant of physical fitness and well-being (besides, I was part of the first eight-week Physical Training Phase). Interactions with people from different walks of life – of different education backgrounds, family experiences, race and religion – has made me more sensitive towards diversity, and humbled in my interactions with others. Assertions of heightened maturity, increased social consciousness and the breaking down of class divisions are certainly not exaggerations.

Nonetheless, with the increased mechanisation of the military – facilitated through improvements in training efficacy and various technological advancements – it makes sense for MINDEF to steadily work towards a reduction of enlistment years for its soldiers (keeping in mind a basic threshold level, and possibly varying it for enlisted men and commanders). As services are made more effective and efficient in a third-generation army, services and departments can be streamlined to reduce bureaucracy, and to heighten operational capabilities even with reduced individual commitment. Less is more.

Towards More Consultative Measures

The most common complaint is that conscripted soldiers often feel like their frustrations are not heard, and there are no tangible channels for them to express their points of view.

Most importantly, the most common complaint is that conscripted soldiers often feel like their frustrations are not heard, and there are no tangible channels for them to express their points of view. There are also individuals who feel that things can change for the better within the system. Higher-ranking officers do walk the ground in attempts to have first-hand interactions with their soldiers; however, these visits are pre-planned, giving persons-in-charge time and liberty to prepare questions, sessions and tours beforehand, thereby compromising the purposes of these meetings.

Consultative measures can be implemented in a number of ways: the conducting of a quantitative survey in representative units – coupled with focus group discussions – to identify areas for improvement, unannounced visits by officials from MINDEF to interact vis-à-vis with soldiers, internal dialogues or forums to collectively identify sentiments et cetera. Greater transparency, accountability and engagement – safe for classified information – are the orders of the day.

This is a new world we live in; while regimentation and reinforced discipline are necessary components in a training environments (meant to simulate real-life war situations), what harm would it do to hear from enlisted soldiers about their plethora of views and comments. After all, they are the ones with the first-hand insights to the developments and ongoing in their units. If little is done to address their concerns, dissatisfaction on-the-ground would continue to bubble, as they construe intentions and proposals adopted by their superiors.

About guanyinmiao

A man of knowledge lives by acting, not by thinking about acting. Carlos Castaneda.


6 thoughts on “Musings On Conscription And National Service

  1. I am the father of a young boy and I certainly dread the day he is being asked to do his National Service. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for the defence of this country, but I am dead against the stone age processes and practices which the army choose to train their people. Whatever I have done in my 2.5 years can be compacted into 1.5 years or less, eg, spending 6 to 8 months preparing for the National Day Parade, or 3 months for an overseas exercise which leads to nothing more than time in the field waiting for instructions. National Service is a terrible waste of time in any young man’s life.

    Posted by This is Anfield | May 30, 2011, 1:48 pm
    • Without going into too much specifics, a lot of the things we do in the army – I feel – are unnecessary and repetitive. The army has a way of justifying things like area cleaning and participation in parades, but I do believe that a lot of our responsibilities are quite redundant. If possible, given how our technologies have progressed, we should move towards reducing the years of commitment for normal enlisted men.

      Jin Yao

      Posted by guanyinmiao | May 30, 2011, 4:19 pm
  2. This is a very interesting and eloquently written article regarding the necessity of maintaining an active military force in Singapore, while simultaneously addressing the immense personal cost to the lives of the individuals coerced to partake in it.

    Many nations that once required mandatory military conscription (Germany, Taiwan, etc.) have eventually abolished the system in recent times. This can partially be attributed to the perceived mitigation of belligerent threats to these nations coupled together with the increasing sophistication of military technology, the latter of which could possibly nullify the need for the large number of troops needed in past warfare. Other nations such as Israel and South Korea have reduced the amount of training time required for its conscripts.

    However, Singapore seems to be adamant about the retention of a possibly obsolete system and not open to making modifications to the system. To me, this seems to be more characteristic of Singaporean political policy in general – uncompromising and unwilling to make changes to its policies to reflect or accommodate shifting views/changes in society. This sort of hardcore, zero negotiation attitude seems to be manifest in other ways, such as the regular implementation of capital punishment and the retention of penal code 377A, an outdated law enacted during a very different era. Are there examples, however, of positive change occurring within the society where the government is updating the laws and mend the regulations to reflect the changing needs of the times? National Service and the way it is conducted and enforced just seems to be one of many areas that reflect Singapore’s obstinate stance and lack of willingness to do things differently – essentially sticking with an old system and refusing to admit changes, while citing reasons of “security” or “prosperity” as adequate justification for disciplinarian and authoritarian governance.

    Posted by JC | March 10, 2019, 12:58 pm


  1. Pingback: Daily SG: 30 May 2011 » The Singapore Daily - May 30, 2011

  2. Pingback: Five Recommendations To Value-Add National Service « guanyinmiao's musings - July 4, 2011

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Follow guanyinmiao's musings on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,400 other followers


%d bloggers like this: