NS-Singapore for Lesser Mortals

Irresistible Defense: Out of Tekong into the tragicomedy of Singapore

2011-07-15T00:57:00.000-07:00

Irresistible Defense: Out of Tekong into the tragicomedy of Singapore

Posted on July 14, 2011 by Molly Meek
http://mollymeek.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/irresistible-defense-out-of-tekong-into-the-tragicomedy-of-singapore/

The report that an SAF recruit had tried to swim out of Pulau Tekong has stirred some interest and much amusement even though there is something decidedly macabre about the whole episode and something truly disturbing in the way few people are disturbed by the state’s power in conscript which too many Singaporeans have come to respect as natural, normal and thoroughly acceptable.

If we were to simply look at the situation a little more closely and see what the main concerns the authorities have, we would see that the key individual, the human person involved, is sidelined in place of the power of the system. The absolute power of the state is what matters to the authorities (and for all likelihood, most people under the control of the authorities). It has been said that the young person (perhaps we should refrain from calling him a recruit—surely there’s more to him than an empty identity foisted upon him by the repressive state apparatus of conscription) may have problems coping. Perhaps he was not adjusting well to dehumanization renamed as regimentation and military discipline. Perhaps he was simply not able to cope with the physical demands. But he does not matter.

All matters to the state is that its power must not be compromised even in the symbolic terms of a soldier attempting to run away (or, more literally, swim away). In the article, “Recruit tried to swim out of Tekong camp,” The Straits Times (July 13 2011) reports that “Colonel Tan [the Mindef spokesperson] would only say that the recruit has been ‘disciplinarily dealt with’.” We must be aware of at least two problems.

The first problem that comes to mind is how the immediate concern of Mindef (and I dare say it is the sole concern, in the short- or long-term) is discipline. Not only is Mindef concerned about punishing the soldier, discipline is the only issue Mindef is willing to address in public. It is presumptuous in telling the public that disciplinary action has been taken. It is shaping the mindset of the public by imposing discipline as a concern they should have when it could well have addressed the public by saying that measures have been taken to help the soldier adjust (especially given that he is a very new recruit).

The next significant problem is the media. The de facto state newspaper cum PAP newsletter appears to be consciously aligning its report to downplaying of maladjusted soldiers. From the article, one realizes that the attempt to swim out of Tekong took place in December 2010. It is not July 2011. It is unclear how such a matter goes unreported for more than half a year and why it is suddenly reported. But the length of time is significant to us—clearly, Mindef and Colonel Tan could have said more about the issue after seven months—for the sake of accountability if nothing else. But the paper is not interested in pursuing this. If it did pose Colonel Tan questions about how Mindef treats enlistees who cannot take the ridiculous oppression of enlistment which he declined to answer, these are not mentioned in its report.

Are Singaporeans not disturbed by the possibility that a forcibly conscripted soldier (I find the tautology here necessary in order to emphasize the point to a Singaporean readership) who takes the rather drastic measure of swimming out of Tekong because he is unable to cope? Are Singaporeans, instead, disturbed by how military discipline and control could possibly be compromised? Have we gotten our priorities totally wrong or is the state-controlled media deliberately portraying and shaping our focus in a way that would facilitate the forgetting of the fact that we are dealing with a human being, only eighteen years old, who has no choice but to be enlisted? (Of course I may be holding certain flawed assumptions. Perhaps he holds a foreign citizenship and enlisted so that he can be a Singapore citizen. But the same concerns about conscription should remain.)

What The Straits Times would rather do, though, is to end on an odious note, quoting former military psychologist, Stanley Chua. First, it reports that Chua “said he hoped this incident would not spark talk that today’s enlistees are softer or that national service (NS) is easier than before.” I am inclined to agree with this simply because I do not believe anyone should expect eighteen-year-old teenagers to be “tough” (whatever it might mean) simply because there is NS for them. Neither do I think that anyone should say that NS is easier simply because that is not the issue anyone should raise when a recruit tries to escape. (It is totally illogical to go, “A recruit can’t take anymore and swims out of Tekong! NS must be so much easier now!”) However the final paragraph is to me tantamount to manslaughter:

He [Stanley]added that it is not the Singapore Armed Forces’ job to prepare young men for NS: ‘The BMT commanders and buddies will only know the recruit for a few weeks… The onus is on parents, who have brought up their sons and should know better how they cope with difficulties or stress.’

No, Stanley (or ST?). If I have a son and I know how he copes with stress, what can I possibly do if I know that he is unable to cope with the sort of stress that NS comes with? You may say that it is not the SAF’s job to prepare young men for NS and help the organization disavow any responsibility or obligation. But, from another perspective, why should it be anyone’s responsibility to prepare their children or themselves for NS? It is as good as telling people, “I’m going to throw shit on your face. You had better prepared to lick the shit. It’s not my job to do anything to prepare you. And no, you are not allowed to run away.” The problem? No one should be throwing shit on anyone’s face. And it is perfectly understandable if the victim does not accept shit being dumped on his face; to “prepare” for the terrible act is to accept it indirectly. Should a person not have the right to resist when someone wants to treat him as a toilet bowl?

Of course, the analogy above would be shitty to most Singaporeans, always charmed by the seductive rhetoric of defense as a masculinity-endowing necessity, who will definitely say that NS is not shit and how it is important and necessary.

Is basic human freedom not equally or more important and necessary?

We want defense to protect a nation. And nations are made of human beings. If in the process of national defense, human beings are dehumanized, is defense itself not anti-human and anti-defense? But we would rather indulge in self-defeating militarism, turning defending subjects into objects of defense.

True inescapability is when people no longer recognize their entrapment. This is the epitome of the debilitating Singaporean condition that goes beyond NS to the heart of post-independence Singaporean milieu.

Rope in women, new citizens for health-care 'NS'

2011-06-13T22:20:00.000-07:00

Equal misery for all sexes or Nation Building? Or further exploitation of 'cheap' NS labor under the guise of 'Nation' building?

http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_679599.html

Jun 14, 2011

Rope in women, new citizens for health-care 'NS'

IT IS heartening to learn that the Ministry of Health is looking into the manpower needs of the health-care industry ('Industry weighs in on nursing home review'; yesterday).

Given that health care and long-term care of our elderly are two important issues our country is facing, perhaps we should accord them the same importance as our nation's defence.

We could consider introducing national service in the public health sector for our women and for new citizens who are beyond the age of military service. They could then take on auxiliary nursing and health-care roles.

We could have a health-care sector modelled after our military, with regulars who are full-time professionals providing the expertise and leadership, and the rest making up the bulk of the 'caring' force.

This will provide a long-term solution to the industry's manpower needs, reduce our reliance on foreign labour, potentially lead to lower costs, and allow women to contribute to the nation's Total Defence.

Lim Pei Qin

National Service being insulted

2011-04-18T19:42:00.000-07:00

National Service being insulted

http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/2011/04/national-service-being-insulted.html

In a brief few days, the national institution of NS has been insulted over and over again by people who are pleasantly disposed to FTs and new citizens. And this hurts, it hurts very badly to all NS men and ex NS men. The years of sacrifice that they gave to the country now seems meaningless. In just a few days, NS is no longer as important as it was. The rite of passage for all young Singaporeans is being brushed aside as something lesser, as little as any economic activity.

For a start, a doctor claimed that his role as a doctor to treat his patients is as good as doing national service. This has infuriated many Singaporeans, especially the doctors that served as MOs. They must be wondering why are they so stupid when by the nature of their job, they are now doing national service. So what the heck, to don on the uniform for 2 to 3 years, and with reservist liabilities for another 20 plus years, when they don’t really need to? And for new citizens who have not don on the uniform, they can be found to be more deserving to be political masters of the country. Is that insulting?

Now another one is saying that all kinds of activities in the country that benefits the country is as good as doing NS. Foreigners/PRs/new citizens who are contributing to the economy of the country, never mind if they did or did not serve NS, also can. I think he got a point. Our forefathers were immigrants and did not do NS also. So new talents, do or no do NS, same as our forefathers, immigrants. Immigrants have privileges too. Citizens?

As an ex NS man, I am pissed off by the degrading of National Service as something as common as any economic activity. The amount of trouble and inconveniences to the NS men and their families, and their careers, are now being pooh pooh as just another mundane economic activity.

Reform Party’s Guest spot: National Service

2011-04-12T17:11:00.000-07:00

Reform Party’s Guest spot: National Service

April 13th, 2011 | Author: Reform Party

http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/13/reform-partys-guest-spot-national-service/

Recently someone sent me a link to a funny video on politics entitled, ” Sex Appeal and Jokes …..So this is our humble attempt at getting the first time voters to be actively involved in the local political scene.

The link is here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCia_wS_F7E

Whilst very funny it also contained a VOX POP segment interviewing real youth on the streets who identified several concerns, including National Service. National Service is an area where we should not be afraid to debate the issues openly and hear everyone’s opinions. RP Policy on National service says that we aim to reduce NS to 18 months initially followed by a further reduction to one year. This is covered under Point 13 of our election manifesto which can be found here. (http://www.thereformparty.net/voting-rp/election-manifesto/)

I was sent this set of proposals Written by a Gordon Lee, an undergraduate at The University of Warwick currently studying Economics, Politics and International Studies. I don’t know the author and he is not an RP member but guest spot is all about turning the blog over to guest authors and opening up a space for debate. So here goes!

Proposal for the Reform of National Service Facts (according to CIA world factbook, amongst others):

The Singapore Armed Forces is a conscript-based military that has an active size of 60,500 which is supported by 312,500 reserves. Military spending is 4.9% of GDP, and ranked according to spending as part of GDP, Singapore ranks 20th in the world. Singapore also has one of the longest military service periods in the world at 24 months, with a reserve obligation to age 40 or 50, depending on rank.

“The government’s stand since independence is that conscription is necessary for Singapore’s national defence because the country is unable to afford a fully professional force. Over the years, it has also marketed National Service as being an opportune time to “bond” male Singaporeans together, regardless of their respective backgrounds.

Problems
Conscription takes away two years of a citizen’s freedom in the name of “national interests”. Unfortunately, in the case of Singapore, where tensions are cool, these “national” or “security” interests do not outweigh two years of the lives of every male citizen. Even though the government often compares Singapore with Israel, South Korea and Taiwan as being small vulnerable states, the fact is, they live in much tenser situations and have fought wars with their neighbours in their recent history. It is also to be noted that Taiwan intends to end conscription by decreasing the number of conscripts by 10% each year from 2011, and replacing them with professional soldiers.

In addition, conscription is also systemically biased against males, as females do not need to serve in the military (or to contribute in any department of the government). This creates a situation where males are disadvantaged as compared to their female peers, by two years.

The government’s pro-foreigner policy (under which many foreigners have entered Singapore such that the citizen population is just 63.6% of the total population) also causes citizens who serve NS to be penalised not just in the job markets because they lack two years of experience, but also by employers because of the NS reservist liability which includes yearly call-ups and in-camp trainings. There have been cases of employers openly discriminating against Singaporeans through their advertisements of job vacancies.

Whilst the lack of affordability of a fully professional force may have been a problem in the early days, it is hard to imagine that the same problem still exists today. Even when corrected for inflation, the IMF estimates Singapore GDP to be 25,117 million dollars in 1980, and some 235,632 million dollars in 2008. That is a ten-fold increase from 1980, and the affordability problem was mentioned during 1967, when the NS (Amendment) Act was passed. Imagine how much more Singapore is able to afford a professional force now, compared to then! If anything, a conscript army based on the problem of affordability is a serious anachronism that does not stand true today.

Whilst there is certain “bonding” that takes place during NS, my experience fails to show me, contrary to what is claimed, that NS improves feelings of loyalty to the country, nor that the “bonding” that takes place during NS cannot be achieved outside of NS. If anything, Singaporeans are just further trained to blindly obey instructions from their superiors – which would probably also be to the benefit of the government. This culture is detrimental to society as a whole, and seems to affect creativity in the society, which is important for the spirit of free enterprise and global corporations. Surely two years of a person’s life is more important than this “bonding” that presumably takes place?

The active size of Singapore’s military of 60,500 compares with Australia’s 55,000, the Netherlands’ 53,000, Cuba’s 46,000, Austria’s 35,000, Lao’s 29,000, New Zealand’s 9,000 and Brunei’s 7,000. Singapore’s total military force (active, reserve and para-military) of 470,000 compares with Philippines’ 403,000, Japan’s 297,000, Malaysia’s 172,000, Canada’s 112,000 and Australia’s 81,000. The size of Singapore’s military is clearly too large, but we should not allow ourselves to be deceived by the government’s rhetoric that it is either this number or nothing at all. My proposal will be set out later on.

Only a fixed number of personnel is needed to defend Singapore effectively, regardless of GDP or the population, since military strategy largely revolves around covering land – the area of which is a constant. As one of the wealthiest states in the region, having this professional force will be easily affordable. On the contrary, having a conscript army instead increases the costs of running the army because the larger the population (which grows over time), the more conscripts there are, and the more money has to be spent on their allowance, on training facilities, training equipment, and many other miscellaneous expenses – not to forget the hidden economic costs of not having them otherwise contributing to the economy.

27,000 males enlist annually, making that a total of 54,000 males serving their two years of NS annually. Assuming that they all get a recruit’s allowance of $420 per month, that works out to $272 million a year. Not only does the government spend that amount, but by the government’s own statistic of $53,192 as being GDP per capita, these 54,000 males could have otherwise contributed some $2.8 billion per year. That puts the total economic cost of the labour required for the conscript system at over $3 billion per year, even before considering all other expenses that concerns the training and administration of these 54,000 males. Government revenue (mainly through taxes) is currently just above 10% of GDP, in other words, the almost $3 billion increase in GDP from having these people in the workforce can also increase government revenue by almost $300 million. This money can then be better spent on healthcare, education or supporting the needy.

Yes, the size of Singapore’s military is artificially huge because of the number of conscripts on which it is overly reliant. Singaporeans just need to ask around for anecdotal evidence on training standards, training alongside foreign troops and the incidence of malingering to get an idea of the true quality of the troops disguised behind a number.

Proposal

I propose that conscription be gradually phased out over a period of a few years, and the $272 million of allowances, and hundreds of millions more from training and administration costs be used instead of increase the salary of regular personnel (whose wages are depressed by the influx of conscripts), and with this higher salary, the SAF can afford to hire more and better regular soldiers than it currently has. From the savings from allowances alone, the SAF can afford to hire an additional 5,500 regular soldiers at an average monthly wage of $4,000.

With better salary, and also with training and equipment funds used on a smaller pool of soldiers, the SAF can be more selective on recruitment for the force, and will also be able to provide the force with better equipment and better training. Leftover funds from training facilities, administration and equipment can also be channelled to hire more soldiers, or to purchase more strategic weapons like long-ranged missiles, which do not generally cost more than $100,000 each, and serve an equally strong, if not stronger, deterrent. These equipment are much quicker to mobilise and attack, making this deterrent even more effective, and less labour-intensive.

In addition to having a larger professional force, the SAF should also have a military reserve force not from conscription, but as part of a contract – just like the United States and the United Kingdom. This military reserve force will also be leaner than our current 300,000 (which is clearly excessive), but also better trained as they are contracted. This works by offering potential recruits a generous pay package for a period of military training (just like the current National Service term), after which they can go on to fulfil their civilian role and take on a job, whilst still going for monthly military trainings on weekends during their bond period.

This dual system of bulking up the professional force in numbers and quality, whilst reducing the number of reserves (but improving their training) will go a long way in addressing the problems and injustice identified with the current system, and also make the military more effective and efficient – spending money wisely and having a larger workforce contributing to the economy.

I recognise that citizens who have served National Service might have certain reservations over this proposal either out of nostalgia or injustice (that they were forced to serve, but future generations need not). I put it to them that the conscript system is a seriously flawed system especially in the modern Singapore context, and that this degenerate system should not be allowed to perpetuate and continue to harm future generations, the economy and our society. I hope that even after decades of spewing propaganda about the absolute necessity of National Service, the government will have the political courage to recognise that it is no longer relevant, and take actions to correct this harmful policy.

I welcome any corrections on figures, and for information on figures which I do not currently have.”

Gordon Lee

The writer is a student of University of Warwick currently studying Economics, Politics and International Studies

The article below first appeared at sonofadud.com

On Fertility and Defence

2011-04-11T10:17:00.000-07:00

On Fertility and Defence

http://newasiarepublic.com/?p=27117

– April 11, 2011

Kelvin Teo

Photo courtesy of An Honorable German, Flickr

The figures for Singapore’s fertility rate is at a low of 1.23, far below the population cut-off of 2.1 that is required population renewal. This would have obvious implications and one of them would be manpower for our national defense. Singapore is currently among the countries with compulsory military conscription together with Turkey, Switzerland, Taiwan, Israel and others.

The duration of service in the Singapore Armed Forces used to be dependent on rank – corporals and above used to serve 2 years and 6 months before 2004, whilst Lance-corporals and below served 2 years. After 2004, everyone regardless of rank are required to serve for two years.

Now, with our population renewal below the desired level, maintaining defense manpower at current levels will be difficult in the near future, assuming Singapore sticks with compulsory conscription. Questions regarding the decreasing numbers of renewal by future cohorts and its implications will be raised: 1) Will the length of national service be increased from the current duration of two years to make up for reduced numbers of renewal? 2) Will the length of reservist term, frequency of reservist call-ups and duration of reservist service during call-up increase?

Increasing the term of national service, prolonging reservist term, increasing frequency and duration of reservist call-ups are mere treatment to the symptoms of decline in renewing manpower. There is another popular measure, something which some male counterparts have always raised in the spirit of ‘gender equality’ – requiring females to serve in the military. Female conscription is practised in Israel for instance. Females do not necessarily have to play a combat role; they can play a supportive role. That being said. all the aforementioned measures go against popular sentiments, and supporting plus implementing them will lead to mass disapproval and unhappiness. It is also disruptive to firms to have their employees reporting for reservist call-ups at greater frequencies and for longer durations. It will be even more disruptive to have both male and female employees reporting for their reservist cycles.

Thus, what other alternatives are there? One popular alternative is to modernise our defense force in a way that our military capability is projected with a smaller manpower base. Coincidentally, our ASEAN neighbours also embarked on a goal to modernise their defense forces as far back as the past decade under the perception of a common threat from China and apprehension of its intentions, according to a document from RAND corporation, a global policy think-tank on defense issues.

It goes without saying that the modernisation of our defense forces will require an increased defense expenditure, which means we may possibly have to maintain our defense budget at current levels or even expand on it if we were to modernise our defense forces.

Besides the alternative of modernising our defense forces, there is another option we can pursue – a military alliance with our ASEAN neighbours. The advantage of a military alliance is the achievement of economies of scale in the provision of defense, i.e. lower defense expenditure per capita is required to achieve the same level of protection. The prospects of an ASEAN military alliance materialising becomes a possibility when just recently, Indonesia called for increased synergy of ASEAN defense forces chiefs in order to respond to various challenges and threats to regional stability. The issue of synergy was one of the topics of focus at the 8th ASEAN Chief of Defense Forces Informal Meeting from March 30 to April 1 2011 in Indonesia.

“Defense forces chiefs must be more synergic and productive to be able to respond to various challenges and threats that could endanger regional security.”

“Based on monitoring security in the South China Sea is now escalating following a shift of issue to the region.”

- Indonesia’s defense forces commander Admiral Agus Suhartono in a meeting with defense attaches of ASEAN countries

Although scholars maintain that Singapore plans its defense strategies on the basis that Malaysia and Indonesia are its primary sources of threat, the recent developments in the South China Sea with respect to China may be the stimulus for the formation of an ASEAN military alliance. The source of conflict with China lie in the multiple overlapping claims to the South China Sea. China, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Taiwan have asserted claims to some of the islands in the sea. The 3.5 square kilometres body of water is resource-rich with minerals, oil and natural gas reserves, especially the Spratly and Paracel chains of Islands. Besides being a potential source of oil and natural gas, the islands are a source of valuable fishing grounds and straddle shipping lanes.

How possible is an ASEAN military alliance and what would be its consequence? According to the aforementioned RAND document, there have been increased mutual use of military training facilities and joint military exercises among ASEAN nations with a focus on air and naval operations in maritime scenarios, even going back as far beyond the past decade. Excerpts of examples of military cooperation between ASEAN nations are appended below:

The Thai and Singapore air forces train together in the Philippines, and Singapore has also had access to excellent training facilities in Brunei.

Malaysia and the Philippines have a bilateral defense cooperation agreement that provides for regular joint military exercises, military information exchanges, and the possible use of each other’s military facilities for maintenance and repair.

Singapore cultivated defense ties with Indonesia and reached agreements that allow Singapore to conduct naval exercises in Indonesian waters and to use air combat ranges in Sumatra.

- The Role of Southeast Asia in U.S. Strategy Toward China, RAND

The consequences of an ASEAN military alliance is a belligerent response from China. As far back as March 2010, Beijing declared the South China Sea a “core national interest” which in diplomatic parlance is tantamount to the use of military means to defend it. It has already established a base in Hainan Island that will place its fleet closer to the South China Sea. It is also currently developing a new missile, the Dong Feng 21D, designed to hit an aircraft carrier from a distance of 1500 kilometres.

That being said, a belligerent response can be mitigated with diplomatic overtures or confidence-building measures with Beijing. Such a point is not lost on Beijing as it has used economic enhancements to improve ties with ASEAN especially in its proposal of the China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and its subsequent materialisation, making the former ASEAN’s largest trading partner. Under the auspices of the FTA, tariffs for imported goods from various product categories will be reduced to zero, in effect, it means a reduction in tariffs of ASEAN goods sold in China and that of Chinese goods sole in ASEAN.

Thus, in conclusion, the issue facing Singapore’s below expected rate of population renewal would have implications on the manpower of its future defense forces. Extending the duration of full-time national service, increasing frequency of reservist call-ups and duration of reservist training or even enforcing mandatory female conscription are temporary measures to make up for the lack of manpower but such will not go down well with populist sentiments among locals. Therefore, one alternative will be to modernise our armed forces to the extent that the same military capability can be projected with a smaller manpower. However, modernising our armed forces will mean a possible increase in our defense budget. The other option we can pursue is the possibility of a military alliance with our ASEAN neighbours, that allows us to achieve the same defense capability with lower expenditure, with the benefits of preserving regional security. Such a move may not be perceived in a positive light by our Chinese counterparts, but can be circumvented with ASEAN-Chinese diplomatic overtures for instance, in facilitating greater economic cooperation. After all, trade is the most rational preference over conflict where parties involved stand to gain economically.

The Modern NS Experience.

2011-03-29T05:00:00.000-07:00

The Modern NS Experience.

http://www.insanepoly.com/blog/?p=1123

The last couple of days, the big hooha making the facebook rounds is the picture of the NSF making his maid carry his fullpack for him.

As usual, there’s a big fuss on facebook and stomp carrying on and on about the end of civilization as we know it.

Everyone just need to calm the fuck down.

Look, its nothing to be proud of that’s for sure. But then again, I don’t think most NS men wear that uniform with pride anyway. Most people would just prefer not to do NS at all and if they had to do it, most would prefer to do the whole SAF thing which is “Serve.And.Fuckoff”.

And you can’t really blame the prevalent attitude these days because NS seems nothing more than an unfortunate burden reserved for the luckless males of singapore. Its NS for citizens, jobs for FTs. The SAF itself already don’t treat the average NS man with much respect, so it is not surprising that the NS man will not wear the uniform with much pride and self respect. Mess boy, carpark attendant, usher, I’ve done it all. And that is as a red beret wearing- supposedly elite soldier. Fuck, if a so-called member of a supposedly elite branch of the army can be treated in such a shameful manner, than I don’t see how wearing this uniform means much or if anything at all for the average grunt. For the soldier to treat the uniform with respect, he first have to be treated with respect. You treat the soldier like shit, the soldier will treat the uniform like shit.

Hell, just look at Janil Puthucheary- parachuted by PAP to represent singaporeans enjoying all the rights and privileges without ever serving a day of NS. If Janil is dead serious about serving singapore, why not donate the generous MP allowance to charity and collect the monthly paycheck of a chow recruit- that is if he ever gets elected.

Anyway, I digress.

For people who thinks this is embarrassing, for a soldier, how is this any more embarrassing than any one of the majors or colonels that makes their runner carry their shit for them whenever they go on exercise. If a an NS man carry a major’s fullpack, than a maid carry an NS man’s fullpack. If anything, a maid may make more money as a maid than what a private will make as a grunt in the infantry. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander I’d say.

Fact is, I have personally witness a major strutting around the jungle like a king with his runner carrying his field chair behind him. And whenever the major stopped, the runner had to unfold the field chair so that major can rest his precious golden backside without ever touching the muddy jungle floor. Picture this in your mind if you will- how is this anymore embarrassing than the picture above.

New Male Citizens Can Aspire to Political Office Without NS

2011-03-22T19:47:00.000-07:00

New Male Citizens Can Aspire to Political Office Without NS

http://military-life.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-male-citizens-can-aspire-to.html

The first official batch of PAP candidates to be unveiled included Dr. Janil Puthucheary which became a citizen in 2008. According to media reports, he settled in Singapore in 2001, presumably got his PR sometime between 2001 and 2008 before being sworn in as a newly minted Singapore citizen.

This is not new, the Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan is also a ex-Malaysian who became a Singapore citizen and is now in the cabinet.

It is interesting to note that in Singapore, it appears not to be a liability to standing for political office if you have not served your country in the Singapore Armed Forces, the Singapore Police Force or the Singapore Civil Defence Force as many of us born and bred Singaporean male citizens have.

In the US, previous President George W Bush was in the National Guard. President John F Kennedy served in a patrol boat in Vietnam and Senator McCain who was the Republican nominee for the US Presidential elections in 2008. US politicians who have served their countries military typically have in their campaign publicity materials trumpeting this fact as evidence of their record in serving the country.

We currently have many ex-SAF generals/admirals in the likes of Foreign Minster George Yeo, DPM Teo Chee Hean etc.

Only in Singapore do we have aspiring politicians who gun for public office not worrying too much that they have never served their country under its mandatory conscription policy. In US, many who volunteer to serve in the US military do so in order to obtain citizenship. Over here, you can aspire for political office under the auspices of the PAP even if your citizenship tenure is shorter than the average 10 years served in reservist plus 2 to 2.5 years in full-time national service by most Singaporean male citizens.

Majullah Singapura.

ICT make-up pay: Part-time workers shortchanged?

2011-03-17T18:54:00.001-07:00

ICT make-up pay: Part-time workers shortchanged?

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/03/no-ict-make-up-pay-for-part-time-workers/
Leong Sze Hian

Source: Cyberpioneer

Full-time workers who are called up for In-camp training get their full make-up pay, including the employer’s CPF contribution of 15.5 per cent.

However, I have seen part-time workers who do not get the employer’s CPF contribution, in their make-up pay.

Discrimination against part-time workers?

Why is there a difference for full-time and part-time workers?

Why are part-time workers short-changed, when they do their In-camp training?

According to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) labour reports, the definition of a part-time worker, is one who works for less than 35 hours in a week.

Some workers who are working part-time may be doing so not by choice, but because they can’t get a full-time job.

Also, of the 176,700 part-time workers, according to the latest MOM data, many may be
lower-income workers, as their median wage is only $700.

No CPF make-up pay – how to pay mortgage?

By depriving them of their employer’s CPF contribution of 15.5 per cent, the outcome may be more financial stress as they may direly need their CPF to pay for their monthly home mortgage repayments.

I would like to suggest that the Ministry of Defence and MOM look into this discrimination against part-time workers, when they serve the nation as National Servicemen.

Support TOC! Buy Leong Sze Hian’s book here!

Be part of the community! Join our Facebook Page!

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others

2011-03-04T00:24:00.000-08:00

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others

I read the news report on the Straits Times that the Second Minister for Defence says that there's, "no operational needs to justify drafting women for National Service".

The Minister was further reported by the Straits Times, "Dr Ng also said national service is based on the three fundamental principles: National security and survival, universality and equity. And to impose conscription unnecessarily on a large segment of the population would dilute its purpose."

I am amazed at how the Minister can claim mandatory conscription as being equal and universal when it only applies to male citizens and second generation male permanent residents (PR)? Female citizens and permanent residents as well as first generation male permanent residents are not subject to national service. Can we say something is equal when it is not applied universally regardless of sex and to some extent, nationality or residency status?

Mind you, national service is MANDATORY for male citizens and 2nd generation male PRs. There is no such thing as conscientious objection and serving in another capacity. If you do that you will be charged under the Enlistment Act and jailed for three years using Jehovah Witnesses' detainees in Kranji Detention Barracks as the "market" for the penalties for not complying with the Enlistment Act.

What universality are we talking about in a system that forcibly conscripts 18 to 20 year olds male citizens (and 2nd generation male PRs) into service into the Singapore Armed Forces, the Singapore Civil Defence Force and the Singapore Police Force?

What equality are we talking about when male citizens have to go through 2 years (previously up to 2.5 years) of full-time national service followed by 10 year (previous 13 years) reservist obligations that requires one to:

Take and pass annual individual physical proficiency tests (or be subject to remedial training regime) and also risk dying from running the 2.4 km (a soldier from my reservist unit died during in-camp IPPT).
Be away from work or business ranging from 2 days to 3 weeks for annual in-camp training which does not help your career or business when competing against foreigners who compete with you for your job.
Join the workforce or go for further studies in the university two years later than your female peers and foreign peers.
Report to Mindef Notification Centre every time you leave Singapore for more than 24 hours.
Subject to annual operations manning and have half to three-quarters of a weekend burned to report for mobilisation exercises.
Waste 2-2.5 years in national service doing fatigue (i.e. odd jobs) in the camp such as area cleaning, weeding, cleaning drains, manholes, washing staircases, cleaning the cookhouse in between training exercises and actual soldiering.

Let's call a spade a spade. Conscription is forced upon male citizens and 2nd generation male PRs. It sucks but many of us male citizens have fulfilled our obligations to duty, honour and country. I personally have served my full 2.5 years in operational combat units plus 10 years in a reservist battalion that did two tours of operational duties. I never deferred any of my annual ICT training (even when they changed the dates giving us less than the required 3-6 months notice) and cleared all my IPPT obligations.

There is no EQUALITY and UNIVERSALITY to speak of in NS. It only applies to some extent within those of us who are male citizens and 2nd generation PRs. And this group is closer to 25-30% of the population given that only 60+% are citizens and half are male. Effectively, only 1 in 3 serve for protect the rest of Singapore.

That is why many NSmen are asking the fundamental question that has been festering in our minds since our first reservist ICT to the last before we were transferred to Mindef Reserve.

What are we fighting for?

What equality does the Minister speak of in a system where the rights and responsibilities are skewed AGAINST the male citizen. We bear the brunt of national service obligations and duty but are not granted any really significant privileges. The recent election budget only doles out an additional $100 for the Growth Dividends. Do you think it is worth risking your life for the system that doles out that little $100 extra (during election years)? When the reality in the workplace is that 1st generation PR or foreigner on employment pass is competing in your face without any of the obligations of national service to take him away from the job for 2 days-3 weeks? (Update: I note that the Government will give $9,000 to NSFs and NSmen depending on their NS cycle but this only applies to those who have not finished their operationally-ready national service cycle. Those of us "old" NSmen who are in Mindef Reserve or demobilised are not entitled to this CPF top-up of $9,000).

Let's ask the families of those NSFs/NSmen who died in their service to duty, honour and country. Would they think NS in its current form is based on equality and universality?

Majullah Singapura.

----------
Source: The Straits Times (3 March 2011)

NS for women? No need, says minister

By Chong Zi Liang

Second Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen said there were no operational needs to justify drafting women for National Service.

THE Singapore Armed Forces will not draft women for national service because there are no operational needs to justify doing so, said Second Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen yesterday.

Dr Ng also said national service is based on the three fundamental principles: National security and survival, universality and equity. And to impose conscription unnecessarily on a large segment of the population would dilute its purpose.

'From time to time, there have been calls to extend NS beyond this remit, to fulfil social objectives or otherwise. While these objectives are laudable, we must not dilute the restriction of NS only to critical needs of national security and survival, and base it on the three fundamental principles.

'At present, there are no operational needs that justify imposing upon women to serve NS,' he said.

Dr Ng was responding to Nominated MP Viswa Sadasivan's call to let women volunteer for NS. Mr Viswa described such a move as a 'meaningful gesture' that would 'send a potent signal'.

'The numbers may not be large, but I am confident we have a critical mass of Singaporeans who will step forward,' he said during the debate on the budget of the Defence Ministry.

Indefensible costs of military one-upmanship

2011-03-01T05:21:00.000-08:00

Indefensible costs of military one-upmanship

http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/03/01/indefensible-costs-of-military-one-upmanship/

March 1st, 2011 | Author: Online Press

I was recently surprised to learn that Singapore has 72,500 troops on active duty and plans to double the number of “combat-ready aircraft” to more than 200. It also plans to have 10 more submarines to add to the four it has today. Or so the Wall Street
Journal reported (“Asia’s New Arms Race,” Feb. 12-13).

In fact, Singapore has “one of Asia’s most modern armed forces,” according to a U.S. military site proudly announcing the country’s purchase of 12 more F-15 fighter jets for $1 billion (October 2007).

The island nation is smaller than New York City (90 percent in land and 60 percent in population). Yet its annual military expenditure of $9 billion is 3.4 times as large as that of Vietnam (population 18 times as big) and 70 percent larger than that of Indonesia (population 50 times bigger).

All this was a surprise to me, because the proud and prosperous Lion City strikes me as eminently indefensible in any serious military confrontation. I do not have to bring up the Japanese Army overrunning the British Empire’s “impregnable fortress in the Far East” in six days, back in early 1942, with a troop size less than half that of the defenders. Imagine New York City as an independent nation having to defend itself from surrounding enemies.

I do not mean to advance any argument on geopolitics or regional military strategy. It’s simply that when the WSJ article came out, I had just read Andrew Bacevich’s essay, “The Tyranny of Defense Inc.” (The Atlantic, Jan/Feb 2011). I was also thinking about Yukio Mishima’s novel “Silk and Insight” that I translated a dozen years ago.

Bacevich, a retired army colonel who teaches international relations at Boston University, for some years now has been highly critical of U.S. foreign policy, especially in the military field, writing books such as “The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism?” (2008) and “America’s Path to Permanent War?”(2010), to name only the latest two.

In the Atlantic article, he revisits President Dwight Eisenhower and his warnings on the military running amok “in the councils of government.” It is of course his famous farewell speech, in which he said, “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”

But Bacevich also discusses Eisenhower’s speech eight years earlier, the one he gave soon after he became president. The speech, before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, shows the military commander’s thinking did not change over the years. It is particularly notable for the concrete examples illustrating the high costs of military
hardware.

“The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities,” Eisenhower said. “It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.”

Direct cost comparisons between six decades ago and today may be difficult to make, but let me try.

Each B-2 “Stealth Bomber” costs $1.01 billion. The “flyaway cost” — the whole cost minus research and development — of each F-35, the product of “the most expensive arms program” of the U.S. ever and for now the source of congressional hubbub, is somewhere between $89 million to $200 million.

The CIA’s World Factbook puts the 2010 U.S. per capita income at $47,400. This means a total of 21,300 people — men, women, children — must work one whole year to produce a single B-2, and that 1,900 to 4,200 people must work just as long to produce a single F-35. Japan, whose per capita income is way below that of Singapore, plans to buy 100 F-35s.

The biggest issue in education in New York City now is Mayor Bloomberg’s threat to “eliminate” 6,000 teaching jobs because of a budget shortfall. These teachers are new hires, so suppose their average salary is $30,000. The elimination of a single F-35 at the higher cost estimate should make the firing of those 6,000 teachers unnecessary.

St. Vincent’s, the most valuable hospital in my neighborhood, shut down last year because of a monthly deficit of $7 million to $10 million, according to the New York Times. To maintain a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan just one year costs “a cool one million dollars,” Bacevich puts it. The U.S. now has 100,000 troops, at the monthly cost
of $8.4 billion.

The main purpose of the U.S. invasion and destruction of Afghanistan is now obscure, but if it is to force its own idea of government on it, it goes against Eisenhower’s observation: “Any nation’s attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.”

As for Yukio Mishima’s 1964 novel “Silk and Insight,” it was based on Japan’s “first human rights strike” at a textile manufacturer 10 years earlier, in 1954. Mishima does not seem to have explained it, but the puzzling title he gave to the novel harked back to the phrase “silk and warships” that dated from the Russo-Japanese War.

For decades before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, silk was Japan’s principal export product, so it was silk that enabled the country to buy and build warships, hence the phrase. But the Yamato, the greatest battleship Japan ever built, and its twin, the Musashi, were both sunk ignominiously before engaging in any worthy battle. Of the two, the Yamato was sunk in the country’s biggest and, yes, “stupidest,” suicide sortie.

What was the cost of building the Yamato? As I have remembered it since my junior high school days, the same amount would have enabled Japan to electrify its entire railway system at the time, in 1940.

Has any of the expensive weapons systems, many of which Japan has been buying from the U.S. since it was coerced into rearmament despite the “no-war clause” of “the MacArthur Constitution,” served any real purpose in defending the country? I don’t know.

I do know that F-86s were used for years to slaughter Steller sea lions. They ate too many fish near the Japanese coast. Partly as a result of that operation perhaps, their number has dropped from 20,000 in the 1960s to 5,000 today.

by Hiroaki Sato

* This article first appeared on The Japan Times: Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011

Singapore's Defence Budget FY 2011/12

2011-02-19T08:34:00.000-08:00

Singapore's Defence Budget FY 2011/12

Saturday, February 19, 2011
http://kementah.blogspot.com/2011/02/singapores-defence-budget-fy-201112.html

The record amount of $12.08 billion (US$9.5 billion, RM 28.8 billion, Rp 84 trillion) earmarked for Singapore's defence this coming financial year provides much food for thought for Singapore watchers.

For military buffs, the proposed FY2011/12 defence budget is likely to trigger spirited debates over the type and number of war machines on the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) shopping list.

For government critics, the largest slice of the planned Budget provides ammunition to attack the spending plans of the ruling People's Action Party (PAP).

Singaporean journalists from the mainstream media are likely to churn out arguments defending MINDEF's war chest. And while some reports may build up a case along the lines of "how much is enough", just wait for the "but" in the story for the usual catch phrases and predictable quotes to kick in. *yawns*

With a General Election looming as early as the April-May 2011 timeframe, such arguments better be good.

To skeptical tax payers, painting a doomsday scenario of an underfunded Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) falling victim to threats unseen, unexpected and unfriendly towards Singapore may not sit well with the voting public. They have heard this tune replayed for the past 45 years and the rehashed public relations (PR) script is looking far too predictable.

What Singaporeans need to hear is how the SAF is earning its keep.

And this, in my opinion, is an area MINDEF's spin masters from the Public Affairs Directorate (PAFF) have to work hard to excel at. Spending more than S$100,000 on expen$ive media offensives to carpet bomb Singaporeans with Total Defence messages and televised sing sings is not the way to win hearts and minds.

As Singaporean parliamentarians gear up for the Committee of Supply (COS) debates in March'11, one would hope PAFF would be more creative in selling the SAF's story.

The cookie cutter approach to churning out MINDEF/SAF-friendly media reports based on a rigid PR stylebook and predictable punchlines may not work as threat-weary Singaporeans and carefree Gen Ys throw caution to the wind. Add left-leaning Singaporean politicians into the mix, plus sweet talking politicians north and south of the Lion City and PAFF's storyline may border on paranoia.

It would be tragic for the Republic's defence and security posture if money assigned to protect its national interests ends up triggering voter discontent. Restive voters and a complacent attitude towards national security could undermine the political system that pencilled in that amount for the FY2011/12 spending in the first place, thus contributing to the freak election result theory.

Explaining what makes up operating expenditure should take Singaporean readers and viewers behind the fencelines of vital installations. This way, the media can help citizens see and understand what Island Defence is all about. Such operations, carried out 24/7, have kept the SAF at a high operational tempo since the 9/11 attacks a decade ago.

The security threats are real. Question is: Are heartlanders convinced?

Operating expenditure also embraces SAF missions overseas. Singaporeans need to know why sons of Singapore put their lives on the line on foreign soil and on the high seas far from Singapore's shores. I bet many do not realise what is at stake.

At the same time, MINDEF/SAF must show citizen soldiers that the defence system uses its soldiers' time and commitment prudently. It must also demonstrate that the system is financially prudent and astutely managed. Damage is done whenever citizen soldiers see, sense or experience wastage in terms of their time (through administrative cock ups) or poorly executed military training. Stir coffee with any operationally ready national servicemen and each would have his own stock of stories about the SAF's infamous hurry up and wait culture.

The development expenditure side of the story could provide a tantalising glimpse into the SAF's 3rd Generation transformation effort. Many defence systems and platforms take years to develop, and then some, before the new acquisition attains Initial Operational Capability.

A lot of work also takes place behind the scenes so that SAF war machines can meet its specific operational requirements. Such vital work accounts for part of defence spending and tax payers ought to know more about what they are paying for.

In doing so, one need not give MINDEF/SAF censors a heart attack by revealing trade secrets. PAFF can cherry pick the list of retired SAF war machines for compelling examples - and there are many - of MINDEF's concept-to-retirement approach in defence development. Along the way, introduce the defence engineers, scientists and SAF warfighters who were involved in everything from Project Almond to Project Archer to Project Zebra to make the story come alive. This way, even the Singaporean layperson can appreciate the amount of effort in Ops Tech integration needed to sharpen and maintain the SAF's defence readiness.

Such stories would probably amaze young Singaporeans, many of whom know more about foreign soccer teams than their own country's armed forces.

The PAP's critics have already got their defence themed counter arguments prepared. Red button topics include the need for and duration of National Service, as well as the amount of money spent on defence... with no enemy in sight. When told by a natural orator in front of a crowd hungry for political entertainment, such defence themed jibes are likely to stir listeners into a frenzy because they touch on issues every Singaporean son can relate to.

Such political entertainment comes at a price and a dip in yardsticks used to measure fuzzy concepts like commitment to defence (C2D) is the least of the problems MINDEF/SAF planners need to worry about.

The real worry comes when vigilance fatigue extracts a price in blood from Singaporeans - whatever their age, skin colour or political persuasion.

The FY 2011/12 budget estimates for MINDEF/SAF are a done deal. This is the reality of a one party system. The green light to spend will not mark the end of the story. The real action starts when various political parties hit the campaign trail to woo voters to their camp.

Record defence spending may be needed to make Singapore more secure. At the same time, the billions of dollars proposed for MINDEF/SAF make the system more vulnerable to barbs from its critics.

Such is the irony of politics.

Safety Certified But Not Satisfied

2011-02-14T21:43:00.000-08:00

Safety Certified But Not Satisfied

http://singaporedesk.blogspot.com/2011/02/safety-certified-but-not-satisfied.html

5 tonnes of crushing steel

When Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence Teo Chee Hean responded to parliament members who questioned the SAF's safety measures after recent incidents involving reversing army vehicles, Teo didn't exactly provide a wealth of details so that future NSmen can learn from the mishaps and know when to duck. As in avoiding the killer machines, not embarrassing questions.

All DPM Teo would enlighten the house was that the army's Safety System was certified in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series (OHSAS). A system that allows for a Motor Transport Officer to be run over by a Land Rover (July 2009) and then a Lance Corporal to be rear ended by a truck (January 2011). In both accidents only two men were present at the stationary vehicles. Dead men do not provide eye-witness testimony.

What the parliamentarians heard was that the army truck reversed into Lance Corporal Eugin Wee Yong Choon, a Signal Operator who was somehow tasked to unload stores from the back of a military transport. And they were satisfied with that minimalist report. The parliamentarians never bothered to quiz Teo what stores were being delivered that necessitated the requisition of a 5-tonne military vehicle. Assuming the item was larger and heavier than a six-pack of Heinekens, why didn't the driver lend a hand to LCP Wee in the manual discharge of the cargo? The tailgate is a hefty piece of heavy metal. If the army's safety procedures were fundamentally sound as Teo claimed, why didn't the driver switch off the engine and engage the manual brakes before allowing Wee to alight for the unloading operation? Since Second Lieutenant (2LT) Chan was also crushed by a standing vehicle that was supposed to be securely parked, one wonders if the OHSAS covers this aspect of safety. Unlike the downing of the Apache helicopter due to a missing instruction in the maintenance manual, the loss of innocent lives in two similar occurrences apparently did not faze Teo sufficiently to warrant a re-write of the Standard Operation Procedures.

The only logical conclusion to make out of Teo's lackadaisical attitude to the human tragedy is that another round of musical chairs will be played out after the elections. Let the next Defence Minister deal with the crap. The safety lesson here seems to be - 官官相护 (guān guān xiāng hù) - bureaucrats shield each other.

NSF dies after SAF truck reverses into him

2011-01-28T02:57:00.000-08:00

NSF dies after SAF truck reverses into him

Fri, Jan 28, 2011
AsiaOne

SINGAPORE - A full-time National Serviceman (NSF) died this morning after he was hit by a truck driven by another serviceman.

The accident took place in Jurong Camp 1 at about 7.00am today.

According to a press statement issued by the Ministry of Defence, Lance Corporal (LCP) Wee Yong Choon Eugin, a Signal Operator, was about to unload stores from the back of a truck when it reversed into him.

A Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) medic attended to LCP Wee immediately. At 7.05am, an ambulance was activated to evacuate LCP Wee to the National University Hospital (NUH). He was sent to the hospital at 7.15am and arrived at NUH at about 7.45am. He was pronounced dead at 7.59am.

The Ministry of Defence is investigating the incident.

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20110128-260879.html

Prime Minister Lee on those who serve NS at 30, 40 and 50

2011-01-24T19:46:00.000-08:00

Prime Minister Lee on those who serve NS at 30, 40 and 50.

http://parkatoon.blogspot.com/2009/10/prime-minister-lee-on-those-who-serve.html

"If we make it a requirement, we would not get the people we wanted. Secondly, if they did serve NS at 30, 40 or 50 years old, I would not like to be their platoon commander." - Prime Minister Lee Hsien Long

Source: They are spice in the S'pore mix (todayonline.com)

Reaction:
- PM Lee “would not like” to be your platoon commander if you’re 30, 40, 50 years old (theonlinecitizen.com)
- Ungrateful Platoon Commander, Insensitive Leeder

If you read the response of the online community, you'll understand exactly why PM Lee would not like to be their platoon commander. Just look at all the negative comments and complaints. In this case, he probably won't want to be their platoon commander regardless of their age.

Anyone who has served NS, especially those reservist units, will know the attitude of older soldiers. They have other commitments in life other than NS so the lack of focus on serving NS is only natural, hence the difficulty being their platoon commander.

New Zealand’s defense model: An example for Singapore?

2011-01-01T18:38:00.000-08:00

New Zealand’s defense model: An example for Singapore?

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/01/new-zealands-defense-model-an-example-for-singapore/

by Ajax Copperwater

In May 2010, I wrote about Costa Rica, a country that has maintained its sovereignty without a military since the beginning of the Cold War. However, Costa Rica is not a model for Singapore. The latter needs a military presence as it is situated beside the world’s most important waterway for world trade and thus, it has a vital duty of protecting the Straits of Malacca and Singapore.

As the population of Singapore is greying and more prone to illness, government health care spending increases as this trend continues. However, not enough public money, with only about 3% of GDP, is poured into the health sector. To increase more of the money for health care, the government can either raise taxes, cut spending from other programmes or both. Since raising taxes can worsen the living standards of the people, especially its bottom 20%, cutting spending is therefore the more sensible approach. Hence, I have always advocated the transition from conscription to an all-volunteer service, as this approach save taxpayers’ money, boosting a leaner and more professional military and provide better health care to especially those who struggle with their bills.

There are many countries in the world that gave up conscription so as to provide more support to its population from their national budget. New Zealand is one good example of such a country that maintained a professional military since 1972 and practises universal health care.

Why did I choose to showcase New Zealand? Before elaborating further in the article, the table below shows the difference between Singapore and New Zealand in terms of population size, land area, GDP and expenditure. This table might give you a preview of what this article is about.

Defence

New Zealand Defence Force has a total headcount of 14,843 as of 1 April 2010, including regulars, reserve and civilians. Its defence expenditure for 2009/2010 was about NZ$2.3 billion whereas Singapore’s defence expenditure for 2010 is estimated to be S$11.46 billion.

Though its military is small, New Zealand has sent troops to Afghanistan, Timor-Leste, Egypt, Middle East, Iraq, Solomon Islands, South Korea and Sudan, totalling 404 personnel as of 13 December 2010. Its troops have been active participants in peacekeeping missions.

New Zealand is part of a free association with Niue and Cook Islands. This means that New Zealand acts on behalf of these states on matters of foreign affairs and defence, only with the advices and consents of the latter. Do note that citizens of Niue and Cook Islands are also citizens of New Zealand, which means having New Zealand citizens’ privilege and usage of its passports , but not vice versa

The New Zealand Army is infantry-heavy, and consists of light armoured vehicles and artilleries. The Royal New Zealand Air Force demobilized its air combat capabilities in 2001. That left the air force with transport planes and patrol helicopters. The Royal New Zealand Navy has two Anzac class frigates, three support vessels, six patrol vessels and a surveillance vessel.

New Zealand bars the entry of nuclear weapons and nuclear-powered warships into its water and airspace. Its laws prohibit the procession, purchase or manufacture of nuclear explosive device by any New Zealand citizen or resident.

Health Care

Health care in New Zealand is largely funded by public money, though services are provided by both private and public providers. Public hospitals provide free treatments, including x-rays and accident & emergency treatments. Under certain conditions, visits to General Practitioners (GPs) and specialists are subsided. So are some prescription items and some medicine. Under public health, maternity care is provided free.

The District Health Boards(DHBs) fund and provide the provision of health and disability services in each geographical regions of New Zealand. One of the objectives of DHB is to promote health improvement and reduce health disparity among all population groups. Each DHB receive public funding based on the demography the population within the region. 7 of 11 DHB board members are elected by the public during local government elections, whilst other members are appointed by the Minister of Health. Board members oversee the financial responsibility and governance of each DHB, but do not have executive roles in the DHB.

The main pillar of New Zealand’s public health care is the Accidental Compensation Corporation (ACC). This agency provides support to New Zealanders suffering from injuries be they from leisure, work, abuse or medical error. It also covers recently-injured residents returning from overseas and visitors who wounded themselves while in New Zealand. If sufferers were unable to work due to injuries, ACC may provide up to 80% of pre-tax weekly income during the sufferers’ recovery period. If a sufferer becomes permanently physically disabled, he or she will receive a lump sum payment.

However, it must be noted that benefactors of ACC are barred from suing anyone for compensatory damages. Beside injuries claims, ACC is involved in injuries prevention by working closely with governmental agencies, businesses and community services.

What can Singapore learn from New Zealand?

I’m not suggesting Singapore should adopt New Zealand’s example completely for New Zealand’s defence needs is different from ours. New Zealand has an ally in its neighbour, Australia, and is not situated in a heavily-militarized region as Singapore does.

Nevertheless, if New Zealand can meet its defence needs with less than 15,000 personnel, surely Singapore can do with less than 100,000? I believe it can do even lesser than this number. Many would disagree with me. They might feel every soldier is critical to an army’s defence. That is true to a certain extent. Having a large army is counter-effective as the North Korea has shown. What good is an impressive army when its people have to shoulder the burden of military expenditure with poverty and poor health?

A huge army might be a good deterrent against an imaginary invasion, but there are more credible threat threatening Singapore: diseases. The less well-off would skip medical attention, believing they can get well on their own, to avoid the cost for treatment. That is a very dangerous act that could lead to death. According to MOH, pneumonia is third leading cause of death, 15.3% of case, in Singapore as of 2009. Early treatment in some cases of pneumonia can prevent death.

I feel Singapore can implement a system similar to New Zealand’s District Health Boards. Though Singapore is a city-state and does not have land area the size of New Zealand, its population size is larger. Each region of Singapore are different demographically and better needs of its residents can be met if overseen by a health board. A regional health board can provide a transparency in health expenditure and services dispensed. If the health board members are also members of Parliament or members of the public, perhaps the people can have a larger say in decision making and the health services they want.

As the climate changes for the worse, cases of new contagious and virulent diseases will rise. Is Singapore more prepared for something as deadly as SARS? Perhaps, but won’t it be better if Singapore spend more money on health care, more than 3.1% of its GDP, to safeguard better the health of Singaporeans? What’s stopping Singapore from at least providing free health care service to our youngest, our oldest and our most vulnerable? Won’t you rather have granny access to free health care whenever she needs it and whatever her affliction?

Germany to scrap conscription in mid-2011

2010-12-16T18:58:00.000-08:00

Germany to scrap conscription in mid-2011

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/4463711/Germany-to-scrap-conscription-in-mid-2011

In its biggest military reform in over 50 years, Germany plans to end conscription next summer and trim down from 250,000 troops to a volunteer force of 185,000.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's Cabinet agreed Wednesday on the plan to save money and better meet post-Cold War threats. The changes are the most significant since the German army, or Bundeswehr, was founded in 1955, after the country was completely disarmed following its defeat in World War II.

The plan envisions shelving national conscription in July and replacing it by a volunteer term of service. In the case of a national defense emergency, an automatic reactivation of conscription would take place.

Both Germany's Lower House and Upper House of Parliament still need to vote on the new rules, but it is widely expected to pass. No date has yet been set for the vote.

Germany's military was set up after World War II to deal with the massive European land battles that were seen as a very real possibility during the Cold War. But since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the country has been becoming increasingly active in peacekeeping and other missions abroad.

Defense Minister Karl zu Guttenberg has been pressing for the changes, noting that Germany's quarter-million strong military can only support foreign deployments of around 7,000.

The transformation included cuts to the Defense Ministry's bloated bureaucracy and is expected to save Germany euro8.3 billion ($NZ14.8 billion) overall.

The most important change will be that young German men will no longer face obligatory military service, which currently lasts six months. Instead, the military will be made up of a professional core of 170,000 people, with an additional 15,000 able to serve as short-term volunteers for between 12 to 23 months.

Germany now has 6,670 troops abroad - 4,596 serving in Afghanistan and 1,375 in Kosovo. Smaller contingents are deployed in Bosnia, in anti-piracy patrols off the Horn of Africa and as part of UNIFIL, the international peacekeeping force, off the coast of Lebanon and elsewhere.

Under the current system, people could opt out of mandatory military service and instead serve in the country's civil service - that will end under the new plan.

To fill the void at hospitals, kindergartens and nursing homes, the government is hoping that up to 35,000 young men and women will instead sign up annually for a one-year-long volunteer service.

NSF's Death a misadventure

2010-11-30T19:34:00.000-08:00

Another NSman dies while in service.
"The accident remains a mystery as a check conducted found that the seals covering the buttons were intact, indicating that nobody had pressed them by accident."

Ghosts onboard???

NSF's Death a misadventure.

Germany to scrap conscription mid-2011

2010-11-24T02:47:00.000-08:00

Germany to scrap conscription mid-2011

German Chancellor Angela Merkel speaks during a meeting of German insurance companies in Berlin, Germany, Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010. Slogan in the background reads "Security".

Michael Sohn / AP Photo

The Associated Press

BERLIN -- Germany's defense minister announced Monday the nation will end conscription in July 2011 and switch to a slimmed-down volunteer military service of some 185,000 troops focused on missions abroad.

The reforms are aimed at realigning the German army to better reflect the nation's post-Cold War needs, Karl zu Guttenberg told a military conference in Dresden. They are a major step for a country that has been reluctant to send its soldiers overseas, mindful of its role in instigating two world wars.

It is the first time Guttenberg has given a date to end conscription and a concrete number of troops. He said his ministry would be finalizing the details of the raft of cuts and changes that will accompany the restructuring in the coming weeks. Parliament is expected to pass the measures in December.

Despite now having 250,000 troops, only 7,000 are currently deployed at any one time, due mostly to the limited term most conscripts serve. Guttenberg underlined that the reforms were aimed at slimming the nation's military and helping it meet 21st-century needs.

The most important change will be that young German men will no longer be called up for obligatory military service. Instead volunteers will serve between 12 to 23 months volunteer term of service, with soldiers able to deploy abroad after six months of service. Guttenberg hopes that will allow at least 10,000 troops to be deployed abroad in the future.

"The measuring stick must be the missions," Guttenberg said. "That is the heart of the realigned army."

The minister also announced cuts to the Defense Ministry's bloated bureaucracy that will result in changes to the chain of command.

Chancellor Angela Merkel urged military leaders in to take advantage of the changes "to make a military service so attractive" that it would be able to pull in sufficient numbers of young soldiers.

Merkel noted the changes were the most significant facing the military since the nation's reunification in 1990, but underlined that they are necessary.

Germany currently has some 7,070 troops abroad - 4,840 in Afghanistan and 1,470 in Kosovo. Smaller contingents are deployed in Bosnia, in anti-piracy patrols off the Horn of Africa and as part of UNIFIL, the international peacekeeping force, off the coast of Lebanon and elsewhere.

NS - A little Doubt

2010-11-10T19:57:00.001-08:00

http://www.littlespeck.com/content/security/CTrendsSecurity-101106.htm
A little doubt
With uncommitted foreigners making up 36% of the nation, Singaporean servicemen are asking: "Why are we serving to defend them?" By Seah Chiang Nee.
Nov 6, 2010

(Synopsis: More outspoken and articulate youths who are not afraid to speak their minds have begun questioning the way the government is running the nation state.)

A FAST-TRACK strategy to populate mass foreigners, including well-paid professionals who are here just to earn a living, is putting strain on its concept of a citizens’ army.

The sensitive topic has been swirling around for some time but only privately because no one wants to be accused of undermining the country’s defence.

Already, falling birth-rates had long been reducing the number of 18-year-old recruits since national service (NS) was launched in 1967.

Not helpful is the Government’s ambitious population expansion plan, which brought in two million foreigners since 1990, most of whom owe no loyalty to the country.

Today, the presence of 1.8 million foreigners, who make up 36% of the populace, augurs long-term ill for the NS spirit.

“What it means is that a smaller Singaporean army will have to defend a bigger population during conflict, including fighting for foreigners who actually compete with them for jobs,” said a retired officer.

The biggest bugbear is that – unlike an estimated 20,000 locals every year – foreigners and permanent residents (PRs) need not do NS or report back for in-camp training for 10 years. Only children of PRs do.

Enlistment is not only obligatory, but in war Singapore’s reservists are activated to be a frontline army. Locals complain it is giving immigrants a big head-start when they compete for jobs.

Predictably, grumblings are loudest among NS youths, who ask, “Do we have to defend them?”

Last week, the controversy became public during a university dialogue session that Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong held with 1,000 university students.

Aerospace engineering undergraduate Lim Zi Rui, 23, who is still serving NS, spoke of how immigration and other changes were creating uncertainties among the young.

“When I was younger, I was very proud of being a Singaporean,” Lim told the Senior Minister, “but that was about five, ten years ago.

"With all these changes in policies and the influx of foreign talent, I really don’t know what I am defending any more.”

Many of the NS men he served with shared this view, he added.

The Nanyang Technology University (NTU) student asked Goh: “Why must I defend foreigners? I feel that there is a dilution of the Singapore spirit in youth. We don’t really feel comfortable in our country any more.”

Goh replied: “This is one early sign of danger. If this is happening, it is very serious.”

He wanted to know why the final year student felt disconnected.

The youth said he was still serving as an officer “and I definitely would love to defend Singapore. But I can tell you honestly that the sentiment on the ground is a bit different.

“My question (is), how are we going to help the younger generation feel a sense of belonging to Singapore? I don’t think it’s about integrating foreigners.”

(Second Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen quickly dismissed talk of a decline in morale, saying surveys showed 95% servicemen would step forward to defend the country when under threat.)

This latest exchange has revealed a chasm in thoughts and understanding between aging leaders and a segment of young citizens unhappy with the way the country is governed.

Compared with the hard-hitting Lee Kuan Yew past, recent university dialogues with current ministers had been more challenging, less compliant affairs.

Lee’s successors are increasingly facing more outspoken and articulate youths not afraid to speak their minds.

Early this year, Lee was himself on the receiving end. A 15-year-old schoolboy petitioned online to get Lee to apologise to Singaporeans for “disparaging” remarks made about them.

Kenneth Lim felt insulted when Lee accused Singaporeans of becoming “less hard-driving and hard-striving” because “the spurs are not stuck into the hide”.

More than 40% of Singaporean voters were born after independence in 1965. Increasingly they hold the key to the future.

In a TV forum in 2006, Minister Mentor Lee was asked some tough questions, something unthinkable from his peer generation.

“What we want is a choice,” said editor Mabel Lee, 28. “What we want is political vibrancy. What we want is a media that can reflect both the views of the opposition as well as of the ruling party fairly.

“What we want is to see that the opposition is being given a level playing field. What we want is fairness in the political sphere.”

Stung, Lee replied: “Let me tell you this. If what you say is a reflection of your generation, then I’m a bit sad.”

People over 55 who had known the hardships his country had overcome would never talk this way, he said, sounding like someone putting a grandchild in her place, a US journalist commented.

Both SM Goh and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Lee’s 58-year-old son – who have to content with the free-spirited Internet – are generally more tolerant of public criticisms.

The Youth Wing of their People’s Action Party (PAP) has worked hard to engage the young, going online, and young MPs even danced the hip-hop in public.

But somehow, things have not really worked.

Hsien Loong announced that a new generation of PAP leaders should emerge in the forthcoming election widely expected within months.

“I am 58, and Singapore should not have a prime minister who is 70 years old or more than 70 years old,” he said.

“You have to be in sync with the new generation of people. You may be in touch but you are not of that generation.”

(This article was published in The Star, Malaysia)

Why are we serving NS?

2010-10-30T06:47:00.000-07:00

NS $9000 handout – is it enough?

2010-09-07T07:27:00.000-07:00

NS $9000 handout – is it enough?

I refer to the article “NS handout: The money is not the point” (ST Sep 1).

I agreed with the writer that there are many other ways to appreciate local citizens who have served their national service (NS) without resorting to giving out monetary incentives.

Of course, the $9,000 payout for those completing their national service will still be well received by many local citizens. It is a small token of appreciation to those who have sweat it out in the army camps for 24 months.

Many local men who served their national service did it out of a sense of pride and loyalty to their nation.

I remembered been sent off at the old CMPB in Tanglin Road as a 18-year-0ld almost 30 years ago when I was conscripted.

No one from my family came to see me off but I was proud to serve my nation as I trembed during the pledge at the flagging off ceremony.

I had a tough time during my BMT and sometimes wished that I had suddenly disappeared during training as I could not cope with the physical demand of the regimental regime.

I ate at the army’s cookhouse daily at my posting camp, more out of necessity than choice due to the pitiance allowance of $180 a month, and cried when it was my last day of service to the nation.

I enjoyed my days serving the nation though there were operational hiccups here and there.

Personally, I find that the compulsory national service period can be further shortened to eighteen months from the current two years. I know that the conscription period was already recently shortened from 2 1/2 years to 2 years for NS men holding the rank of corporal and above.

Many NS men I know merely pass their time in their units during the last six months of their service as they wait for their run-out-date (ROD) to arrive. Moreover, a technologically-advanced army like ours should be able to rely less on manpower and more on technology to function.

In fact, the government should slowly move away from compulsory conscription to an army that is run fully by professionals. Nowadays, wars are usually fought by machines managed by well-trained professionals.

With proper planning and budgetting, I am sure that this can be done in the near future. We are also probably one of the few countries in the world that still has compulsory conscription and a declining birthrate will make this difficult to implement.

A professional army means that people will be able to join the armed forces as salaried personnel and ensure that there will be continuity in the services.

Citizens can still go for army training but it will be more for basic defensive duties than anything else.

Currently, I believe many local citizens will agree with me that they have more issue with their reservist duties than the 2-year national service. It is disruptive to both their career and family to say the least.

More significantly, the current 13-year reservist cycle has deter many employers from employing our local executives. Many local employers will first ask: “Do you still have any reservist liablity?” before considering you for possible employment. Too many choices in the job market has clearly place the reservist-liable local executives at a clear disadvantage.

Inevitably, an employer will rather employ a foreigner using the Employment Pass work permit over our local executive if the pay scale is the same for both. The foreign executive can fully focus on his work without any reservist disruption unlike our local citizens who have to answer to our nation’s call annually.

The foreign executive is free of the inconvenience of having to report for reservist duties sometimes up to twice a year for 20 over days at a stretch. It is certainly disruptive to the work flow and operation if the executive is a key member of that company.

A reservist friend of mine, who is a high-flier in his office, has to keep deferring his reservist call-up as his boss didn’t want to release him. When he quitted and change to another company at the age of 40 years old, he was posted to the civil defence force to serve out his reservist liability.

I remembered having to go abroad to Taiwan thrice, over a 5-year period, for at least 20 days per reservist tour when I was performing my 13-year reservist cycle. It was very disruptive to my work and family though I knew that it was an operational need.

In fact, reservist liability is a major consideration for many small and medium size companies hiring key staff – especially if the headcount is relatively thin. Imagine, having two male executives out serving their reservist duties when the company only has a manpower strength of less than ten! It is thus not surprising to see SMEs hiring more foreigners over our local male executives.

Moreover, foreigners who take up citizenship here are free of any reservist liabilities and employers will have no hesitation hiring them over our locally-bred citizens.

The 13-year reservist liability can also be further reduced to a 7-year cycle with better manpower planning so that there is minimal disruption to the reservist’s work duties.

Let’s hope that over time our government is able to phase out compulsory army conscription so that there is a level playing field for both our locally-bred and converted citizens who are born abroad. If not, local citizens will continue to cry foul even with the current monetary incentive after completing their national service.

Gilbert Goh

PS: This letter mailed to the Straits Times forum on 2 Sep was not published.

Govt could look at rewarding ex-NSmen: SM Goh

2010-09-06T19:51:00.000-07:00

Haha, ex-NSmen are now an after thought. See, complaining works!

Govt could look at rewarding ex-NSmen: SM Goh

Tue, Sep 07, 2010
my paper

By Kenny Chee

THE Government could, in some way, look into recognising the contributions of older Singaporeans who have completed their national-service cycle, said Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong.

As a possibility, he suggested helping those over 55 years old with their medical needs.

SM Goh had been speaking at a post-National Day Rally dialogue last evening with more than 200 grassroots leaders from Marine Parade GRC.

He also added that the Government would take note of suggestions to recognise the sacrifices of those who have completed their national-service cycle.

Last week, the Ministry of Defence announced details of the National Service Recognition Award with payouts of up to $9,000 and $10,500 to NSmen. The award is only for Singapore citizens and does not benefit those who have already completed their national-service cycle.

SM Goh and Marine Parade GRC MPs Lim Biow Chuan and Ong Seh Hong also took queries at the dialogue on concerns such as foreign workers, traffic congestion, carpark woes and public-housing rules.

SM Goh said that the problems Singapore faces today can be resolved, "provided we take a rational approach".

Citizen NSmen to get $9k award

2010-08-30T07:15:00.000-07:00

Sun, Aug 29, 2010
my paper

Citizen NSmen to get $9k award

By Gwendolyn Ng

SINGAPORE citizens who have served their national service will each receive $9,000 through a new award to be given by the Ministry of Defence (Mindef).

The National Service Recognition Award (NSRA) will help to fund the cost of operationally ready national servicemen's (NSmen's) education and also help them buy a home. Commanders will receive a larger sum.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who announced the implementation of the award at the National Day Rally yesterday, said: "It is a significant tangible recognition of the sacrifices, efforts and contributions of our national servicemen. It's for Singapore citizens only."

This will be a token of appreciation for the time and effort citizens give to serve national service, he added.

Mr Lee said: "National service makes a heavy demand on male residents and, I should say, on their spouses and families, too."

He elaborated that male Singapore residents not only have to serve two years of full-time national service and many more years as an NSman, but also try to build their careers and raise their families.

The sum will be paid in tranches at significant milestones of an NSman's service.

It will be deposited into their Post-Secondary Education Accounts and Central Provident Fund accounts.

Mindef will announce details of the award soon.

The award is one of the measures Mr Lee highlighted in a bid to assure Singaporeans that citizens come first.

He added that permanent residents who have completed their national service will receive the award when they take up citizenship.

He was addressing the issue of competition from foreign talent, where he pointed out that it was "not practical to make foreign workers and adult immigrants do national service".

However, Mr Lee pointed out that many PRs and first-generation citizens also do their part by serving national service.

Other ways in which the Government recognises the contributions and sacrifices of NSmen is through providing them with Safra clubhouses, allowances, tax reliefs and top-ups in government bonuses.

The award is good news to 20-year-old NSman Benjamin Huang, who said: "It's good to know that the Government is appreciative of our efforts.

"This will definitely help me pay my school fees when I go to university next year."

nggwen@sph.com.sg

$9000-compensation-for-ns

MINDEF unveils details of NS recognition award

Will $9000 make NSmen STFU and vote PAP?

Welcome the new: frack the old nsmen!

NSmen 'benefited from the peace and prosperity they've helped create'

National Service: View from a foreign mum

2010-08-25T08:41:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

National Service: View from a foreign mum

http://kementah.blogspot.com/2010/08/national-service-view-from-foreign-mum.html

If you cut through the platitudes, Ms Aarti Giri's letter (The Straits Times 20 August 2010) emphasizes several issues that defence information managers should not lose sight of even after 43 years of National Service.

The first concerns the gulf in attitudes towards NS among Singaporeans. Another red flag is the perception that NS is a sacrifice capped at the duration of a full-time National Serviceman's service to Singapore.

As increasing numbers of foreign-born citizens approach conscription age, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) - which account for the bulk of defence manpower - have little time to lose in calibrating their messages properly.

Every family that sinks its roots in the Lion City brings essentially the same mindset, outlook, fears and prejudices towards NS that Singaporeans harboured when conscription began in 1967. This gulf in attitudes between New Citizens and long-time citizens (Old Singaporeans?) is not easy to bridge.

Dumb down defence information messages for New Citizens and the tone of the messaging could be seen as smug and patronising by older folk.

Calibrate it for Singaporeans who have embraced full-time NS and you risk losing the New Citizens who have yet to buy into the lofty ideals of nation-building and national security.

More worrying is the fallout MINDEF/SAF will be saddled with should a New Citizen NSF end up as a training fatality. Going by probability and the rules of chance, it is only a matter of time before a training accident/incident/glitch that involves a New Citizen NSF triggers the proverbial wake-up call.

When the clarion call is sounded, will New Citizens be rattled?

And how will New Citizens who hail from caste-based societies react when their sons are commanded by someone from outside their social circle? Will centuries-old prejudices undermine their commitment to defence?

Chinese parents in the 1960s knew of the old saying that good sons do not become soldiers, just as good iron is not used as nails. After years of public education more or less erased that point of view, in comes the influx of foreign talent. The wheel has turned full circle and defence information managers may find themselves back at the start line, educating and engaging New Citizens with zero exposure to the military.

This is why MINDEF needs a Public Affairs Directorate (PAFF) at the top of its game. In my opinion, the time for rebuilding will have to begin in earnest after the Director Public Affairs (Designate), Colonel Desmond Tan Kok Ming, formally assumes command of PAFF next month.

Ms Giri's letter is useful because it exposes how expatriates feel towards NS.

She wrote: "I have often come across expatriates discussing how they can help their children avoid NS. To me, it is only fair that if one wants to become a permanent resident or call Singapore home, one should willingly serve because that is what every Singapore male does."

For Singapore's sake, one hopes her point of view is not in the minority.

If Ms Giri keeps it up, her attitude and pro-NS letters may, someday, win her a Total Defence Award.

Be that as it may, even converts such as Ms Giri seem to cling on to fallacies about NS.

She noted that "sacrificing two years of a man's career is a small price to pay for Singapore's safety and security".

This statement ignores the sacrifices that Operationally-Ready NSmen make every time they are called up for NS. It is an obligation that stretches till 40 for other ranks and the age of 50 for officers and key appointment holders.

So New Citizens will need to know, appreciate and accept the stark reality that NS is really a life-long commitment.

NS in Singapore is not a limited tenure, 24-months stint in which citizen soldiers serve and forget.

Free museum admission for NSmen: What good is that?

2010-08-12T08:45:00.000-07:00

Free museum admission for NSmen: What good is that?

The government announced today that all NSmen will be granted free admission to NHB museums from August 1.

Minister Lui Tuck Yew said 'These visits will broaden your knowledge and enable you to share with friends and relatives why this country is special.'

Is this all the government can do to recognise our NSmen? Increasing an existing 50% discount to 100% free?

Yes, the announcement was concerning museum attendance and not NS benefits. But it shows what the government considers acceptable as benefits for NSmen/NSFs.

Back in August 2009, the RECORD committee set up to look into ways to recognise the effort of NSmen came up with lame suggestions like fitness corners, vouchers for the Singapore Discovery Centre (full of NE propaganda), clubhouses (with payable membership) and mementos (like the infamous NS watch).

Is that how we recognise the years of sacrifices, injuries and lost youth; with vouchers, free museum admission and fitness corners?

This is a government of the cheapest order.

Just look at how President Obama speaks to the wounded veterans of the various American-led wars (watch video below). Note that the US military is comprised entirely of those volunteering on their own free will. Yet, they are so well taken care of and highly recognised (personally and monetarily) and respected for their bravery and service to the nation.

The SAF is a forced-conscription military. Singaporean males cannot choose whether they want to give up two years of their prime youth and weeks of reservist duty. To add insult to injury, the government misuses the NSFs as free labour during NDP parades and shows.

With the influx of PRs and new citizens exempted from NS, the government will continue to face increasing anger and outrage from disaffected citizens used so callously in the name of national security.

Problems in deferment for NSMen

2010-06-06T19:00:00.000-07:00

Problems in deferment for NSMen

May 26th, 2010 | Author: Contributions

Readers of TR,

I believe I am not the only person doing his best to balance between reservist, work, family and study life. The government encourages us to study and so I did a part-time degree in UniSim with government grant.

However I am experiencing such difficult and unreasonable situations with my reservist deferment unit. Ever since I started studying last year, I found out that I’m not eligible for deferment because it is not a local university like NTU/NUS/SMU. However, in order to be eligible for grant, it has to be a local university in which UniSim is recognised by the Government. But its not a university recognised by Mindef. I wonder why is there a difference in view between Mindef and the Government?

Mindef officers later called me to work out with my commander(CO), I believe them at first. On the first day, I was told by CO that I should planned out my study without affecting my NS work. He does not understand that studying part-time(night class) in Unisim also have to do the assignments and submit them. If I’m not able to leave for class, how am I able to study effectively and submit assignments which will affect my grades? He does not have an answer and was bent on NOT working with me.

On Mindef’s website, they mentioned that if you have ROMs/local wedding, you can get deferred. This year is a good year for me to get married. Therefore I applied for deferment. However, I get a different opinion once again from my Unit and Mindef views. The same commander and other officers rejected my marraige deferment this year. They said I have to work out with my commander again. I doubt that is going to happen.

For 2 straight years, I get caught in these kind of situations. I have not been following much on army news but I recall Mindef is transforming. However, all I see is that it is transforming into a more harsh, critical and less understanding organization and that the peoples’ best interests are not served.

So much of the talk about growing Singapore’s population.

Yours,

Discourage Singaporean

Editor’s note: Letter was published verbatim.

Issue of NS for Singaporean Men Part II

2010-06-04T03:35:00.000-07:00

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Issue of NS for Singaporean Men Part II

http://singapore-lighthouse.blogspot.com/2010/06/issue-of-ns-for-singapore-male-part-ii.html
Well, I have to said that NS is good for Singapore, but there are many ways for PRs to "Siam" or dodge NS using many methods. I quote an Anonymous who commented:

" It's been like that for 40 years already. Just that the problem is much more acute now due to much harsher competition in the real world. 30 yrs ago, you can still fully pay your HDB flat within 10 years and raise a family of 2 kids even though you don't even have full 'O'-Level qualification. Today even if you have degree, you still need to stay with your parents until 33, 35 yr old in order to save up enough to pay the deposit for the govt pigeon-hole in the sky. If you don't have degree, be prepared to live like foreign workers and S-Pass workers in your own country.

This thing about male PRs has been on-going for over 20 years already. I have a neighbour where whole family took up PR almost 20 years ago. Both parents hold high-paying jobs in the finance sector, so S'pore govt probably begged them to take up PR. My neighbour also quietly told me that PR allowed him practically all the benefits of citizenship e.g. subsidised school fees for his 3 children, subsidised fees in govt hospitals, ability to buy resale HDB for investment etc.

The real kicker came when this neighbour's son completed 'A'-levels. Immediately the son gave up his PR, and was sent to US university to study. This boy and his family enjoyed all the privileges similar to citizen, and yet when it came time to reciprocate responsibility, they packed the son off overseas without any punishment or repercussion. The rest of the family -- father, mother and 2 grown-up daughters -- still keep their PRs as they have no NS-liability. That son worked 2 years in US after graduation, and recently came back to a high-paying job in S'pore as a foreign talent, earning over $150K a year at age 25. At 25 yr old, most of our local guys have only just graduated and have to fight tooth & nail with China and India "FTs" for $2K-$2.5K jobs."

Really irony isn't it? So we used to said in Camp "Squeeze balls"! But this thing not camp issues or instructors or officers make us Squeeze balls, but our PR loop holes :(

And You Tell Me A Singapore Passport Is Priceless!

2010-06-03T18:43:00.000-07:00

And You Tell Me A Singapore Passport Is Priceless!

http://blog.marcustan.com/index.php/2010/06/and-you-tell-me-a-singapore-passport-is-priceless/

So sorry to just jump up on all of you like that after close to a month of not posting and then diving deep into a chant-like rant. But really, the impetus for this post is this nagging frustration I have had over the past 10 years and a sudden desire to transcribe the abstract ideas into prose.

Well, it just happens that I am about to collect my new passport (it’s still a red one, unfortunately, if you happen to make some remote connection) tomorrow and have been flipping the pages of my old one. It is a respectable booklet which has served me well, in my honest opinion. It has identified me to numerous customs officers, gained me entry to many countries, and unbelievably survived 6 separate trips to the singapore immigrations and customs authority (aka passport office) for extensions to its validity.

“6 trips to the passport office in 10 years?!” you must be thinking now, “is this person a criminal or what?”

I’m sure that the common person’s experience with passports is a simple one: collect passport from passport office, use it till it expires in, perhaps, 10 years time, done deal. No, I apologise, not for me. My passport was issued in October 2000, and expired in July 2001. Yes, however impossible, that’s what’s written on its photo page.

Which is the reason why I always get one, if not two, stares from customs officers each time I travel. I do not blame them – just imagine if you were the officer at Washington Dulles who, in March 2010, was presented with this passport which has ‘expired’ for 9 years!

Continuing on with the customs officer role play, you would then be told by none other than myself to “flip down a couple pages”. What you will subsequently see confirms your suspicions of my ‘criminal past’.

~~~flips 2 pages~~~
- 9 month extension in March 2001
- 2 year extension in May 2001
~~~flips another 2 pages~~~
- 2 year extension in October 2002
- 2 year extension in June 2004
- 2 year extension in November 2005
~~~flips another 2 pages~~~
- 3+ year extension in May 2007

By the time you actually flip to the correct “passport extension” stamp, you would not only be irritated, but also puzzled all the same. “Why was this young man given a restricted passport? What crime did he commit?”

Truth be told, I have never committed any crime. This passport pain in the butt is also not an isolated case. In fact, every Singaporean male of my era (they scrapped passport restrictions on NS-liable Singaporean males in 2006) has experienced it before.

The incredibly long afternoon queues at the passport office (which really were incredibly long) just before an overseas trip to extend our passports; the odd stares from customs officers in foreign lands; the hassle of not being totally sure of our passport’s expiry date each time we fill those customs forms out on claustrophobic airplane seats. That was the price we paid since age 11 for the paranoid and autocratic policies of our government.

Yes, when I was only 11 years old, my government was so afraid of my leaving the country to escape military conscription that they issued me a passport which was only valid for 9 months. It signals paranoia when the government of a country which is not at war forces all males into 2 year conscriptions. A panic attack occurs when such a government pre-empts AWOL attempts and implements unnecessarily strict passport restrictions on all 11 year old males.

I’m not here to effect any changes – those passport controls have been abolished since 2006. I, however inappropriate this may sound, am just here to rant. You may be a Singaporean female or non-Singaporean, and do not know how being issued a passport which is valid for 9 months feels like. Let me tell you straight in the face now: it sucks.

Many people have ridiculed my every attempt at bringing up the topic of migration. They typically centre on one main argument: that the red little booklet gains you visa-free access to a buffet selection of countries. They then tell anecdotes of non-singaporean friends having to go through the troublesome motions of applying for visas, and expect me to conclude that a singapore passport is best. Well, haven’t I been experiencing that all this while? If we summed up the total amount of time I spent queuing at the passport office for passport extensions, I think it would be enough time to apply for all the visas I would have ever needed in the past 10 years. And how about my 2 year conscription? 2 years is definitely enough time to apply for all the visas the world can offer you ten times over.

And now you tell me a singapore passport is priceless? So sorry, I must be blind!

2010-06-01T19:12:00.000-07:00

Monday, May 31, 2010

Risking Life and Limb as a Conscript in the Lion City

http://military-life.blogspot.com/2010/05/saf-commando-shot-by-thai-villager.html

The recent news of how not just one but two SAF servicemen (one a regular, the other a full-time NSF) were shot and injured by Thai farmer discharging his shotgun shows how one risks life and limb in mandatory conscription in the Singapore Armed Forces.

It was fortunate that no-one was killed but the regular serviceman now has a serious eye injury. The NSF is now living with pellets embedded in his skin possibly for life. How is he going to be compensated (if any) by the SAF for this accident?

Again it shows up how the scale of benefits and responsibilities is tilted against the Singaporean male citizen who has to serve full-time and reservist national service in the Singapore Armed Forces, the Singapore Police Force and Singapore Civil Defence Forces.

Our young male citizens are risking life and limb; protecting us with their lives and in return, they are amply rewarded with Safra/Home Team Club memberships (which they have to pay their own subscriptions) and get the few thousand tax relief (and not rebate!). Do you think that human life is worth a few hundred dollars in tax savings and the additional $50 or $100 top-ups from the Government that occurs on the occasional year?

Do you think this is a fair exchange given that female citizens do not serve the same responsibilities and neither do first generation male Permanent Residents, female PRs and foreigners who enjoy the economic benefits of working and living in Singapore but none of the requisite responsibilities imposed by this archaic and wasteful system of conscription?

Is duty, honour and country the only thing male citizens can cling to in understanding why there is an uneven playing field for competing for jobs in Singapore Inc?

Why are we still clinging on to an out-dated system of mandatory conscription when many developed countries have either shortened their NS liabilities (e.g. Taiwan, South Korea etc) and even our neighbours Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand depend mostly on regulars and supplemented with a small group of conscripts (Thailand by lottery) or volunteers (Malaysia)?

Don't give me the old propaganda/national education spiel about Singapore being too small to deploy a fully professional force type of argument. When your defence budget of about $13 billion annually is 2-3x your neighbour's, you can afford to plough some of that budget into funding a fully professional army. It should be noted that our Navy and Air Force is staffed mostly by regulars or professional soldiers.

Conscription is an anarchronism in today's world. It is less about mobilising the citizenry to military defence than a mechanism to enslave the young male citizens to a system of compliance, obedience and fear of authority.

Why else do we have a system when clearly there is sufficient money to fund a fully professional army that is more suited to fight the low intensity conflict that is characterised by the war on terrorism?

Majullah Singapura.

The Issue of NS for Singaporean Men

2010-05-28T06:11:00.000-07:00

Even today, things still have not changed for the better for NSmen. Are you going to wait some more?

Friday, May 28, 2010

The Issue of NS for Singaporean Men

http://singapore-lighthouse.blogspot.com/2010/05/issue-of-ns-for-singaporean-men.html
Some one wrote to Today paper Voices saying that part time students of UniSim cannot get deferment from ICT as the University is not recognised by Mindef. Mindef then adviced him to seek the NS unit CO's understand, but the CO told him that NS duties come first....

I was thinking is this the deal male citizens get when comes to NS? Doing a part time means juggling between work and study and needed alot of commitment. Unless someone's family is rich enough to sponsor himself for full-time local or even overseas university education, part-time university course is the only option.

However, we, the Singaporean men still lacks behind the PRs who need not serve NS.

My friend who was in the human resource company was telling me that there were PRs from Malaysia who was in Singapore since young and yet need not serve NS. I was told that one of the parent, usually the mothers are Singaporean. Their kids are just PR and they need not serve NS.

This period the Poly gradation ceremonies are just been over and the Singaporean males students are now in BMT while these PR males are out looking for jobs. They will have 2 years lead time over Singaporeans.

If they did not take up any grants from Singapore government, they can carry on the university education and the gaps between Singaporean and PRs become wider.

I am not saying NS is no good, but the PAP government should look into these PR loop holes and even the playing field.

However, the local political playing field is control by PAP alone and I am doubtful the PAP government is even bothered by this issue.

As some said, the NS and the SAF are here to protect the PR and the wealth associated with them....

Shooting incident: Mindef should have told public

2010-05-27T18:48:00.000-07:00

Shooting incident: Mindef should have told public

http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_531934.html

YESTERDAY'S report ('Another SAF soldier shot by Thai farmer too') made me feel greatly disappointed with the Ministry of Defence's public affairs division.

Mindef's failure to admit that not one, but two Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) soldiers were shot in Thailand, until a relative of the second injured soldier approached The Straits Times, has demonstrated the ministry's basic reluctance to tell the public the truth about military casualties.

The second case also was a matter of genuine public interest, especially since a full-time national serviceman was involved.

As citizen soldiers and taxpayers, we have a right to expect that Mindef will account for all military casualties - whether in training or actual operations -where there are no national security implications.

Matthias Chew

Another SAF soldier (NSman) shot by Thai farmer too

2010-05-25T21:32:00.000-07:00

May 26, 2010

Another SAF soldier shot by Thai farmer too

By Jermyn Chow & Lester Kok

http://www.transitioning.org/2010/05/26/another-saf-soldier-shot-by-thai-farmer-too/

NOT one but two Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) soldiers were hurt while out on a night military exercise in Thailand in March.

A local farmer out hunting accidentally shot Private J. Pritheery Raj, a full-time national serviceman (NSF). Two shotgun pellets are still lodged in his cheekbones and his right shoulder.

The 19-year-old is now on medical leave.

News of this second shooting surfaced after a relative of Pte Raj called The Straits Times on reading its report that a villager had fired his shotgun at First Sergeant Woo Teng Hai. The regular commando is said to have been blinded in his right eye.

The Defence Ministry, which had confirmed the accidental shooting of 1st Sgt Woo on Monday, admitted yesterday that another soldier had also been hurt in the same incident.

It would not say how many other soldiers were with them at that time. All it would say was that these were the only two who were injured.

The Straits Times understands that another SAF officer was with Pte Raj and 1st Sgt Woo as they walked along a plantation in the Kanchanaburi province, west of Bangkok, on March 13.

The SAF has been carrying out training on Thai soil since 1973.

The night mission was part of the 1st Commando Battalion’s annual proficiency test, which is conducted by the Army Training Evaluation Centre, or Atec, the unit that Pte Raj is serving in as a trooper.

The soldiers crouched on seeing flashlights about 20m away, and that was when the farmer fired.

Pellets hit Pte Raj’s face and shoulder, while it is understood that 1st Sgt Woo was shot in his right eye.

An army medic attended to them onsite before they were evacuated to a local hospital. Both servicemen were then flown back to Singapore and hospitalised.

Pte Raj’s mother, Madam Isaac Kanaeswary, said doctors here could not remove the pellets lodged in her son’s cheekbones and shoulder because they deemed the procedure too risky.

The NSF declined to comment on what happened but said he would be reporting for duty next week, after being on medical leave for two months.

Save for the occasional headaches, Pte Raj said he ‘feels fine’.

A shotgun is generally used to hunt animals or birds using pellets half the size of a pea. It could kill a person if fired at close range, within 30m.

Two months after the shooting incident, the SAF is still discussing with Madam Kanaeswary’s family Pte Raj’s role for the remaining year of his full-time national service.

The NSF’s superiors from Atec visited the family at their Thong Soon home near Upper Thomson last night. The mother of two said she wants everything to be over and for her son to complete his stint.

Military conscription to be abolished in 2015

2010-05-25T06:19:00.000-07:00

Military conscription to be abolished in 2015

http://taiwantoday.tw/ct.asp?xitem=54708&ctnode=413&mp=9

Taiwan aims to abolish the compulsory military service system starting 2015.(CNA)

Publication Date：07/15/2009
Source： United Daily News

Beginning in 2015, the compulsory military service system that generations of Taiwanese males have had to undergo will be abolished, it has been announced.

In other words, males born after Jan.1, 1995 will not be required to undergo the one to two years of military service that has historically been required of all Taiwanese men. They will still need to receive four months of basic training, however.

Males born before Dec. 31, 1992 will still need to undergo military training. Even if these males do not perform their military services until after 2015, they will be required to perform one year of compulsory military service duties.

As to males born in between Jan.1, 1993 and Dec.31, 1994, their fate is still not entirely clear. The Ministry of National Defense has not announced if 1993 or 1994 will be the final dividing line separating those who do and do not have to perform compulsory military duties.

In regards to the uncertainty, Wang Chun-chiang, director-general of the Department of Manpower at the MND, explained July 14 that the issue has not been decided and is still under review.

But the MND will follow the requirements of the Legislative Yuan and make a decision at the very latest one year before the new system takes effect.

When the MND reaches a decision, it will submit it to the Executive Yuan. After the Executive Yuan approves of the decision, the MND will make a formal announcement on the matter, Wang said.

In terms of funding the new all-volunteer force, Lin Yu-pao, deputy minister of national defense, admitted that a volunteer force would be more costly than a conscription force. However, the extra costs are not as high as others have speculated, Lin said.

In order to fund the new forces, the MND does not rule out requesting additional funds from the Executive Yuan, said Jaw I-ming, director general of the MND's Comptroller Bureau.

In principle the MND hopes that its total budget will be less than 3 percent of the gross domestic product. If its budget exceeds 3 percent of the GDP, one acceptable solution would be to have personnel costs make up 45 percent of the entire military budget, up from 40 percent, Jaw said.

Enlisted men will serve a period of four years after the new system takes effect in 2015. After one year, enlistees can apply to become non-commissioned officers. The salary for an enlisted soldier would be roughly NT$35,000 (US$1,060) per month, about twice as high as the basic labor wage. (HZW)

France salutes end of military service

2010-05-24T17:23:00.000-07:00

Thursday, 29 November, 2001, 15:48 GMT

France salutes end of military service
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1682777.stm

The last 1,000 conscripts are leaving armed forces

Almost a century of French history has come to an end as the country's last conscripts completed their military service.

Around 1,000 young men were being demobbed after their 10-month stint in the armed forces.

The ending of military service marks France's move to a purely professional armed forces. Several other European countries, like Spain, Italy and Portugal, are also phasing it out.

I think that they could have made better use of us

Conscript Philippe Guiffault

Among those coming to an end of their enforced army life were the last 24 men to be conscripted into the 16th Rennes Artillery Unit, based in western France.

The conscripts had contrasting views on their time in the army.

At a ceremony to mark the occasion, Emmanuel Lepine told French La Chaine Info television that he had found it beneficial.

"You can integrate with everyone and different social classes. It's a good thing. Honestly, I think that it was a good experience for me," he said.

But Philippe Guiffault reflected a not uncommon view among conscripts that they could have made better use of their time.

Emmanuel Lepine was happy in the ranks

"In light of the duties that we were given, I think that they could have made better use of us," he said.

National service was originally going to be ended next year, but 200,000 young men breathed a sigh of relief in June when it was announced that they would not be called up.

The French Government decided to withdraw the service earlier than planned because it said it had had major successes in recruiting professional soldiers.

However, military experts have said conscripts are expensive to call up and then feed, clothe, house and train, but are of little use in a modern fighting force.

Over the years increasing numbers of young men also refused to do military service and as conscientious objectors opted for a longer civilian service.

Century of service

The modern form of universal national service was introduced in France in 1905 when conscripts had to serve two years in the armed forces.

Some conscripts said service was a waste of time

This increased to three years in World War I but was progressively reduced to 10 months and millions of young men were called up down the years.

France's armed forces are expected to comprise 92,500 professionals with another 27,000 participating as national service volunteers by the end of next year.

BBC Monitoring, based in Caversham in southern England, selects and translates information from radio, television, press, news agencies and the Internet from 150 countries in more than 70 languages.

See also:

29 Jun 01 | Europe
The death of conscription

16 Nov 00 | Europe
Spanish army goes professional

03 Sep 99 | Europe
Italy to scrap conscription

15 Apr 99 | Africa
Angola starts conscription drive

Internet links:

La Chaine Info television (in French)

French Defence Ministry

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

Top Europe stories now:

Mass resignations rock Turkey

Crash pilots given conflicting orders

Serbia jails first war criminal

New hope for Aids vaccine

Ukraine mine death toll rises

Russian anti-Jewish sign explodes

Sicilians dish up anti-Mafia pasta

Finland and Sweden plan 'Eurocity'

Links to more Europe stories are at the foot of the page.

NS in hospital or the police?

2010-05-03T22:42:00.000-07:00

NS in hospital or the police?
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC100504-0000070/NS-in-hospital-or-the-police

The way to go is for a smaller, specialised force and changed deployments

by Tang Li

05:55 AM May 04, 2010

AS A Singaporean who served National Service (NS) in a combat unit (23 SA, 1994-1997), I enjoyed Paul Gilfeather's commentary "A lesson from Singapore"(April 29). However, much as I appreciate his endorsement of our NS and my own experiences in it, I have to ask myself if NS - as we know it - is still as relevant to the current state of affairs.

Singapore established NS in March 1967 because there was a need to build a credible defence force and deterrent as quickly as possible with limited resources. Thanks to more than 40 years of NS, Singapore can mobilise nearly half a million soldiers if the need arises. Foreign military experts have described the Singapore Armed Forces as capable of defending Singapore effectively.

However, while Singapore's defence policy has thus far proved to be the right one, one has to ask if the institution of NS is suitably geared to the wars of tomorrow?

There are fewer and fewer conflicts between nation states. More often conflicts are between nation states and international terrorist groups. The United States talks about war with Al Qaeda and not with Afghanistan. Israel fights the Hezbollah and Hamas rather than Syria. In South-east Asia, we are more likely to see a scenario where we work with our neighbours to defeat groups like Abu Sayyaf or Jemaah Islamiah.

Armed forces are moving away from being about delivering massive firepower on the battlefield to being about delivering "smart" firepower on specific targets. Special forces like the British Special Air Service or the US Navy Seals are growing in prominence.

Yes, it's important to still have the capability to fight a conventional war. Yes, NS is a credible deterrent. And, yes, NS is still important to Singapore society.

However, is our ability to mobilise as many troops as we can a little outdated? Should we instead focus more on training a smaller force of more specialised troops?

If the SAF were to become more specialised and require less manpower (bearing in mind that birth rates have fallen and cohorts are getting smaller), where could the remaining enlistees be sent to?

One possibility is the Ministry of Home Affairs: To work with the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority or the police.

Given the growing likelihood that the enemy of the future will be a terrorist group, it is important that our NS personnel be trained in investigation and working with civilians.

Another area where more NS personnel could be deployed is in the Ministry of Health, where they could learn first aid skills and also help to ease manpower shortages at hospitals. In the event of a terrorist attack, shouldn't the majority of our population be able to deal with the wounded?

Our economy is moving away from labour-intensive manufacturing that competes on price to more-advanced, value-added services, where a premium is placed on brain power rather than manpower. To prepare Singaporeans to meet the needs of the economy, we are training our workers to work smart and be more productive.

Perhaps, NS should mirror the transformation in our economy - training Singaporeans who are prepared to "serve" smart.

Give up citizenship? Brothers must do NS first

2010-05-02T18:11:00.000-07:00

Give up citizenship? Brothers must do NS first – Norwegian trio’s bids rejected (Alfresco forum)

http://www.transitioning.org/2010/05/01/give-up-citizenship-brothers-must-do-ns-first-norwegian-trios-bids-rejected-alfresco-forum/

Post 1

http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?t=2989

Give up citizenship? Brothers must do NS first Norwegian trio’s bids rejected.

Only those who haven’t enjoyed privileges of citizenship exempted, says Mindef

By Amelia Tan

THREE brothers, born to a Norwegian father and Singaporean mother, want to give up their Singapore citizenship.

But the Ministry of Defence has said no. Not until they do their national service.

The Bugge brothers – Thorbjoern, 33; Ingvar, 31; and Frode, 30 – left Singapore when each turned 18 and have tried and failed several times for over a decade to renounce their Singapore citizenships.

They want to renounce their citizenship so they will be free to visit their parents – Mr O.M. Bugge, 65, and his wife Margaret, 55 – who still live here.

They cannot return here because they have been classified as NS defaulters and risk arrest on arrival.

They were all born here and are considered Singapore citizens. But they also hold Norwegian citizenships, like their father.

They first left Singapore when they were five, three and two years old respectively, and lived in Norway for 10 years before returning here.

But each left Singapore after their O levels, and just before they could be called up for national service.

Mindef sent them NS enlistment letters, but in turn, each brother ignored the call-up. Instead, they enlisted in the Norwegian armed forces for a 19-month national service term.

All three decided to renounce their Singapore citizenship when they turned 21, but Mindef rejected their initial bids to do so.

They tried several more times over the years, writing to the ministry, then-prime minister Goh Chok Tong and the late former president Ong Teng Cheong to explain their case.

Their parents have also met staff from Mindef.

But all their attempts have failed.

When contacted, Mindef’s director of public affairs, Colonel Darius Lim, said: ‘Only persons who have emigrated at a very young age together with their families, and who have not enjoyed the privileges of Singapore citizenship, will be allowed to renounce their Singapore citizenships without serving national service.’

He said the three men are Singapore citizens and are required to fulfil their NS obligations. Their requests to renounce their Singapore citizenships can be considered only upon completion of full-time NS.

The brothers said they were disappointed by Mindef’s position.

When asked, they maintained that they did not leave Singapore to avoid NS. They preferred to be in Norway, they said, and their enlistment there showed they were not shirkers of NS, they said.

Mr Frode Bugge is a career soldier with the Norwegian army and has seen action in Kosovo and Afghanistan.

Brother Thorbjoern is also a career soldier, while Ingvar is a postman.

For now, they will have to continue meeting their parents in Malaysia. Their mother spends six months in Norway each year.

Their father, a marine consultant, said he cannot afford to spend extended periods in Norway because his business is based in Singapore. He tries to visit his sons once a year.

He said: ‘My sons’ cases are about a choice of citizenship, and not a case of national service…They would like to get this matter cleared up and be able to travel to Singapore for a visit like any other Norwegian.’

He is hoping that the law will be changed.

‘My sons’ situations may seem unique now. But as more foreigners marry Singaporeans, there will be more of these cases,’ he added.

NS defaulters can be jailed up to three years and/or fined up to $10,000 if convicted.

ameltan@sph.com.sg

—————————————————————————————————

Post 2

I am the Father of these three Norwegians who are the subject of much of this tread and would like to set a few facts straight.

They were born in Singapore in the middle of the “Two is Enough” or “Stop at two”-period (1975-78). As such they had to follow the Father’s citizenship and was included on my passport within weeks after birth to avoid being deported as “illegal aliens”, although the Singapore Constitution gave them the right to a Singapore Citizenship.

As they got older they got their own Norwegian Passports, which had to be endorsed with a “Dependent Pass” to allow them to remain in Singapore. A letter from the Norwegian Embassy here confirms the facts.I was running my own small P/L company in Singapore at the time and held an Employment Pass.

We left Singapore in 1980 and moved to Norway in order for the boys to learn how to be Norwegians. They arrived there at the tender age of 4 1/2, 3 and 2 years.
None of them spoke a word of Norwegian but, thrown into a Kindergarten with all Norwegian kids, they quickly learnt. Within 6 months you could not hear the difference between them and their playmates, but we kept them speaking English at home.

In 1990 we moved back to Singapore to give them a grounding in their other identity. They arrived here as Norwegian Citizen and received a Social Visit Pass in their Norwegian Passport, like any other visitor. This was renewed a few times as we applied for places in Government Schools for them. But that stranded as they were not Singapore Citizen and required Student Pass to be accepted. They actually lost a full year of schooling in the process.

One day an Immigration Officer asked; “why do you apply for Student Pass for your sons, they are entitled to dual citizenship until 21, which give them the right to stay and study in Singapore until they are 21″
A few minutes later they had a stamp in their Norwegian passport to the affect. Nothing said that they would expose themselves to NS liabilities, or be refused their right to choose.

We managed to enrolled two in a private, but government sponsored school here. (Seventh-day Adventist School) The oldest studied for his O-levels as a private candidate.

Now we made a big mistake. They were offered Pink ICs, which we accepted on the understanding that they would be able to choose which citizenship to hold and which to renounce at 21 per Singapore Constitution and Citizenship Laws. Little did we know that this would be interpreted as an acceptance of NS liability later.

As the first son finished his O-levels, he left to further his study in Norway as a Photo Journalist.
While he was there the first letter from MINDEF rolled in. I replied that he was a Norwegian Citizen and was studying in Norway and to please defer him from NS registration until he returned to Singapore, which was granted.

At the time it was not clear to me which citizenship he, or his brothers, would chose at 21 as they had been groomed to make up their own mind when the time came.

On completion of the one-year course he enrolled in the Norwegian Army to do his National Service. Shortly after we were informed that he had volunteered for service in the Norwegian peace keeping contingent in Bosnia. He has later served in Lebanon, Kosovo and Afghanistan and is due to go back to Afghanistan to train the Afghan Army soon.

His youngest brother has followed in his footsteps and are due back in Afghanistan for the fourth time. He has also been in Kosovo twice earlier.

It therefore became quite clear that he had made up his mind which citizenship he wanted to retain and which to renounce. As he became 21, he sent in an application to renounce his right to Singapore Citizenship, which was promptly refused by MINDEF. He has not been back in Singapore since and he will be 33 in a few days time (9. Sept)

The other brothers also left on completion of O-levels and returned to Norway, as none of them found Singapore to their liking at the time. After all they had grown up with wide open spaces, mountains and the sea, and found Singapore to be too restricted to their liking.

As the youngest brother turned 30 earlier this year, they all sent in an application to renounce their right to Singapore Citizenship again, with the same result.
MINDEF insisted that they were defaulters from NS and should return to Singapore “to face the music”.

I have had numerous meetings with the person in charge of such cases at CMPB, sent letters to the Minister of Defence through our MP at the time and later through a Lawyer. I have also sent letter to the Registrar of Citizen, the Prime Minister (then Goh Chok Tong) and the President (the late Ong Teng Chong) but all letters were replied by the same person at CPMB, with the stock reply, NO.

This is NOT first and foremost a question of NS and where, or whether, it should be served. It is a question of the right of a person born with two citizenships to have the right to choose which to keep and which to renounce at the age of 21.
Once he/she have made their choice they will have to comply with whatever obligations that goes with it, whether military service or others.
To deny anybody this right is against UN Charter of Human Rights, and against the Singapore Constitution.

As it stands, our three sons are unable to visit family in Singapore without risking 3 years jail and S$ 10,000 fine, although they have complied with the law and renounced one of their two citizenships as required, and served National Service in the country to which they belong.

This may not affect all that many yet, but with the number of mixed marriages in Singapore today it will be more and more of a problem.

I have spent most of my life here and has a very clear understanding of the need for a strong defence, but to force foreign nationals to serve in SAF does NOT improve military readiness or moral.

We allowed the interview in Straits Times in the hope that we could get a discussion going on this subject, but the article published was angle in such a way the it appeared that our sons had left Singapore “just before they could be called up for NS” and joined the Norwegian Army to obtain Norwegian Citizenship.
Nothing could be further from the truth, which raises a question about the agenda of the Journalist, and her Editor.

Capt.O.M.Bugge,
Proud Father.

________________________________________________________

Post 3

http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?p=234330#post234330

I thought in view of the interest expressed, it might be pertinent to put couple of things together for those who are planning to migrate and seek a new life. You will never find anything with clarity with the autocratic PAP and I do not want to see the Elites benefiting and the rest making the wrong decision.

This thread is not about migrating. This is for those who have made the decision and looking for help with some aspects. Others are welcome to throw in their view and experiences

Do note that things change over time.

NS Obligations

Those with boy migrating and who leave these shores before their boys reach the age of 11 yrs are not obliged to do NS but have to follow the necessary procedures to get exemption. Passports expire at the age of 11 and that should be an indicator.

Once you have left, do not renew the passport, apply for NRIC etc as one is deemed to enjoyed the privileges of citizenship and NS become mandatory.

At age 13, apply to CMPB for exit visa stating that your family has migrated and the kids is enrolled in a school in the new country. No bond is required. CMPB uses an outsourced agency to handle call centre matters and they have no clue about migrant cases. Go directly to CMPB.

At age 16.5, you need to register for NS ( an interesting term as you are actually seeking deferment). You can do it by post to CMPB again citing that you have migrated, acquired new citizenship and the kids is schooling. You will be given deferment until the age of 21 where the kid must decide if they want to hold on their Singapore citizenship. If they do, than NS must be served. If not, exmeption for ever.

All Singaporeans, male and female cannot renounce their citizenship until age 21, and if they have acquired new citizenship, they will be dual citizens.

In the meantime, one can travel in and out of Singapore without bond and using the passport of their new country.

Those who left after 11 years, unfortunately are obliged to serve.

Note: If your child’s Singapore passport expires at the age of 11 and the family is not eligible for new citizenship, the kid will not be able to travel. Do resist the pain of not visiting Singapore unless you want him to serve NS. Do not let friends and extended family members make decisions for your kids.

Whatever it is, do be careful so that your kid can travel in and out of Singapore when he grows up and not be banned.

2010-04-26T19:18:00.000-07:00

Why SAF Officers have fast track promotions
http://perspectives.singaporeangle.com/2007/03/why_saf_officers_have_fast_tra.html

By BL on 12 Mar 2007 1:15 PM

The headline "US soldier takes potshots at SAF" by Loh Chee Kong (Today, 12 March 2007) examines several themes in an research journal article "The Roar of the Lion City: Ethnicity, Gender and Culture in the Singapore Armed Forces" (Armed Forces & Society, 2007, 33:265-285) and the rebuttals from MINDEF in response to several issues raised in the article. The piece was written by Sean P. Walsh, a graduate from United States Military Academy currently assigned to 2nd Cavalry Regiment in Vilseck, Germany.

In the article, Walsh explored several themes such as ethnic diversity, professionalism & civil military relations of officers and role of women in the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). While most of his sources are cited as private interviews, it is difficult to ascertain the quality of the interviews, given that we only know that one of the interviewees is a United States army officer stationed in Singapore.

One issue of interest revolves around the fast track promotion and professionalism of SAF scholars. Walsh asserted that some SAF officers see that their military careers as "a stepping stone to other careers in politics, business, or the civil service" and inferred that there is a lack of professionalism at the institutional level.

We offer a hypothesis to show why the policy makers in SAF have decided to adopt such a policy of fast track promotion of military officers, particularly the overseas SAF scholars. The basic reason is to prevent military officers from consolidating too much power such that a military coup is possible in Singapore. In fact, by adopting such a policy, it reinforces the culture of the military being integrated with the civilian government. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew once mentioned the possibility of a military coup if a freak election result happens, "Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it." (Reuters, 16 Sep 06). That adds to another dimension in asking the question, "Is a military coup possible in Singapore given that there exist such a mechanism to stop the military officers in acquiring too much power?" (see this article Après nous, les militaires by Alex Au). Of course, that is an extremely complex question which we can leave it to another day.

2010-04-26T04:17:00.001-07:00

More flexible NS deferment policy can help sportsmen

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Story/STIStory_519119.html

I READ with disappointment last Saturday's report, 'Jumper not allowed to defer NS, will miss 2 key junior meets'.

I feel the disappointment of long jumper Matthew Goh, whose dreams of winning a medal at the World and Asian junior athletics championships in July were dashed after the Ministry of

Defence (Mindef) rejected his appeal to defer his national service stint.

I understand that Mindef has to follow its rules and guidelines, but I wish it could be more flexible in this case as Matthew has already qualified for both meets and he is asking for only a three-month deferment.

I wonder if the people who decided not the grant his appeal know the impact their decision has on his life? I cannot understand how a three-month deferment would have any impact on Mindef's operational readiness.

Mindef should learn from the government of Cyprus - a small country with a big heart that exempted professional tennis player Marco Baghdatis from otherwise mandatory national service so he could concentrate on playing tennis.

I hope Mindef can reconsider its decision as it should not just be the job of the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports to nurture local sports talent - other ministries need to chip in too.

Cheryl Tan (Ms)

NSman dies of heat stroke

2010-04-13T20:33:00.000-07:00

Apr 13, 2010

NSman dies of heat stroke

By Elena Chong

A FULL-TIME police national serviceman died of heat stroke two days after an IPPT trial at the parade square of the Home Team Academy, a coroner's court heard.

Mr Roslan Saharo, 18, had complained of having a fever to two squad-mates on the day of the 2.4km run on May 13, 2008.

But he did not tell the squad's field instructor that he was unwell, and carried on running.

At an inquiry into his death, the court heard that trainees were supposed to run three to four rounds around the parade square.

During the run, two squad-mates noticed Mr Roslan - who weighed 93kg - to be unwell but he indicated that he was fine and continued running.

Subsequently, another trainee saw him run diagonally towards a block and collapse on a sheltered pavement.

Mr Roslan picked himself up and continued, but but fell down again after a few steps.

When the field instructor realised what had happened, he ran over to Mr Roslan who threw up twice.

He received medical attention at the clinic but when he became restless and disoriented, he was taken to National University Hospital.

He remained in intensive care and died two days later of heat stroke which caused multiple-organ failure and left him brain dead.

In recording a verdict of misadventure on his death, State Coroner Victor Yeo said it was an unfortunate case where his death could have been avoided had he reported first, to his instructor.

He also urged all trainees to take good care of themselves and their fellow squad-mates during training, and to keep a lookout for one another.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_513952.html

SCDF NSmen at fire stations to serve 18 days for in-camp training

2010-04-10T04:26:00.000-07:00

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1049047/1/.html

SINGAPORE: NSmen with the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) spend eight days when it comes to in-camp training.

But from this month, those attached to fire stations will have to serve 18 days instead.

This was outlined in the SCDF workplan.

The move is to ensure that these men can be deployed in immediate response teams for fire and rescue operations along with regulars and NSFs.

Speaking at the Workplan Seminar, Law Minister and Second Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugan said it is also essential for the SCDF to use new technologies to enhance its capabilities.

A new drive for public education is also necessary, said the Minister, adding that SCDF's successes also depend on whether it is able to continue to rely on strong public support.

"As a further extension of its current outreach efforts, SCDF will be conducting Emergency Preparedness Awareness Training Programmes in the heartlands from this year," he said. "This is a new partnership with the People's Association to teach grassroots leaders and residents essential emergency preparedness knowledge."

The SCDF also plans to introduce a Demerit Point System to track and act against those who repeatedly commit fire offences.

- CNA/yb

An indoctrination process during NS

2010-02-01T06:54:00.000-08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/01/an-indoctrination-process-during-ns/

An indoctrination process during NS

Tags: Alvin Phoon, ns

Alvin Phoon

Being Singaporean means experiencing a lot of things. Good food. High prices. SPGs. It also means constantly receiving some excellent reasons for why things are; reasons that may or may not (mostly not) justify fallacies in the current political system. I’m sure we’ve all heard some amazingly creative comments and justifications for shortcomings in our society, most of which have been provided by the beloved leaders of our country. Just recently, I was subjected to a talk during my reservist training in which the speaker, whom I shall address as Mr X, provided some interesting viewpoints.

Mr X is eloquent, intelligent and charming. In fact, he manages, within the first five minutes, to capture the undivided attention of the room, and it remains that way for a good hour. How he does this is simple. First, he makes it clear that he understands the predicament of everyone in the room. Complete with hand gestures, a passionate tone and a slightly higher volume than normal, he questions the intelligence of those who put us in the room. Next, he likens himself to the group –working men pulled out of their busy schedules by a higher power to attend unnecessary activities. That one garners him even more support from the group. Finally, he tells the group that instead of having a normal presentation, he is going to make it a discussion, just so that it’s more interesting for us. That completes the group’s transformation. They are now relatively contented, wide awake and ready to debate, when before it was mostly a propensity to swear.

Now, Mr X is ready to serve up the main course. He asks the group if there is anything they are unhappy with as Singaporeans.

ERP Gantries

The issue is raised by one of the guys, who says he disagrees with the government’s decision to increase the number of Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries. The opinion is echoed around the room. Some say it isn’t fair that they have to pass through the gantries several times.

Mr X’s response: The ERP gantries help regulate the flow of traffic. They are there to discourage Singaporeans from driving so that the roads will stay clear. Public transport in Singapore is efficient enough to provide alternative means of travelling. He then compares the prices to the London Congestion Charge (£8 a day) and tells us how much better we have it here.

National Service

The inevitable question surfaces relatively early. Why are Singaporean men subjected to National Service? Is conscription really necessary?

Mr X uses a brilliant lock analogy to justify the necessity of National Service. He asks us if we lock our front doors when we go to sleep at night.

“If you don’t lock your doors, you might wake up at 3am to find someone pushing your plasma TV out the door. If you ask him why he’s doing that, he’ll tell you it’s because your door was open.”

He then explains the analogy: Everyone serving national service, including those who are Operationally Ready NS men, are considered the country’s lock. We are the guys who lockdown the nation so that the rest of the population feel safe enough go to sleep.

Foreigners

Mr X brings up this next point himself, which implies that he had prepared himself thoroughly for such a question. Why are there so many foreigners in the country? Why do we need to import so many of them?

Singapore is targeting a population of six million, so as to ensure that the country maintains a progressive long-term economic order. Everything sounds right. Then, Mr X begins his tirade.

First, he questions if it is wise that Singaporeans are refusing to have more than one child, if any at all. He is backed up by statistics which show that Singapore has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world; about 1.25 per resident female compared to about three in the 1970s. He wants to know if we will remain economically stable if our population dips to three million. That is the reason, he claims, why the government is importing foreigners: Because Singaporeans refuse to help solve the problem.

“At the rate we’re going, in about a hundred years’ time, Singaporeans may not even exist anymore. By then, the only place you can see one is in a museum!”

He continues by saying that Singaporeans are feeling threatened, and uses the reactions of Singaporeans towards news of our top PSLE student being a Chinese import as an example. He talks about how foreigners working as sales personnel in local malls have better attitudes that their local counterparts. He emphasizes that Singaporeans were all children of immigrants anyway, and so why shouldn’t we welcome foreigners?

Corruption

By now Mr X has stopped taking questions. He begins talking about how the Singapore government has done such a good job resisting the lures of corruption. Despite my best efforts, he didn’t hear me snigger. He then asks if it is possible that the government will one day succumb to temptation. Raising, as an example, the rise of the Philippines as one of the world’s top trading centres and their fall from grace, leading to women coming to Singapore to work as maids, he asks if our women might suffer that very same fate one day.

He ends his talk with two stories. The first is about an Australian family he encountered while on holiday. After a barbeque, the Australian family replaced the charcoal before driving off. Mr X emphasizes that although there was a sign telling users to do so, there was no one around to enforce the rule. But they did it anyway. Subsequently, he drives into a small town where he sees a table full of fresh fruit with no one manning it. He notices a tin labeled ‘50 cents’, and says that there is no way something like this could ever happen in Singapore.

The second is about an incident he observed while in a local supermarket. After finishing a food sample given to her by promoters, a young girl was instructed by her grandmother to throw the toothpick on the floor. According to him, Singaporeans have been spoon-fed by the government so much that we now expect them to clean up after us.

“Throw it away and the government will send someone to clean it up.”

He adds that there isn’t a strong sense of community and trust in Singapore, and finishes off by saying that it is up to us, and not the government, to be civic-minded.

Later, I discover that Mr X served as an Army regular for 30 years, before setting up his own company to provide leadership programmes and “National Education” talks to various organizations. His clients include the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports, Ministry of Defence and the Singapore Civil Defence Force. Explains a lot doesn’t it?

The condescending manner in which Mr X delivers his points suggests that he considers the men in the room to be intellectually inferior to him, thus rendering them incapable of making their own decisions and opinions about their own country. Visualize a kindergarten teacher talking to her students about evolution and you’ll get an accurate picture. Besides being a complete waste of time, it is an immense insult to our intelligence.

The question remains though: Why us? Is the whole thing an elaborate set-up manufactured to exploit whatever feelings of patriotism an In-Camp Training session may incite? Are we easy targets because we are old enough to vote and young enough to be considered easily influenced? Or is reservist training more about feeding us false information and justifications, than making sure we maintain our physical fitness?

Mr X epitomizes everything the government is: intelligent, cunning, articulate, and committed to the cause. The question is whether we have what it takes to identify their methods. Judging from the reactions of the other men in the room as they trek off to lunch, it seems like we have some way to go.

Photo 1: http://beconfused.com

Photo 2: http://military-life.blogspot.com

NS deaths: Confidential Operational Matter or Issue of Public Interest

2009-12-21T03:43:00.000-08:00

NS deaths: Confidential Operational Matter or Issue of Public Interest

(Unpublished - Dec 13, 2009)
http://thinkingbetterthinkingmeta.blogspot.com/2009/12/ns-deaths-confidential-operational.html

I refer to the report on Alex Tan's ban from the Young PAP Network Facebook group (Dec 13).

I am shocked at the part of the report which stated he was put into detention barracks for five days for blogging about the number of National Service related deaths over the years.

He was reported to have been detained because this is an operational matter, which suggests that what he did was a compromise of operations.

Since the number of training-related deaths is a statistic for public interest, I cannot understand the extent to which knowing the number of deaths is a compromise of operations.

Furthermore, should the government not be more accountable for something that annually receives a lot of public funds and taxpayer money?

Most training and operational matters deserve their confidentiality, but I hope the rules are not abused just to silence people who are deemed to be potential threat to the establishment. We are today definitely beyond such political strategies, because such strategies remove the agents of debate and lead to the avoidance of debate itself.

Having served five cycles of reservist training and being fortunate enough not to suffer any severe injury, I feel as a member of the public, that I deserve to know training-related deaths and injuries. I want to know how our training safety track record and serviceman welfare have improved.

It is sometimes relatively apparent that the blanket ruling of confidentiality and secrecy is more of a public relations management strategy than an actual safeguard of training confidentiality itself. The related defence organisations see public embarrassment and lack of public faith and trust as great a threat as actual confidentiality compromises.

I hope Alex Tan's detention will not create a chilling effect on servicemen, preventing them from providing feedback, contributing to public opinion, and demanding accountability.

Ho Chi Sam

Taiwan to End Military Conscription

2009-12-13T04:04:00.000-08:00

End of military conscription

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/editorial/taiwan-issues/2009/03/13/199883/End-of.htm

On Monday Minister of National Defense, Chen Chao-ming, announced that Taiwan's military will become an all-volunteer force within five years. Speaking to a military committee under the Legislative Yuan, Minster Chen explained that the process would commence on 2011 and by 2014 all divisions of the R.O.C. Armed Forces will be filled with career soldiers instead of conscripts. In the future, local men will only be required to serve four months of basic military training.

A decade or two ago many men could look forward to a military term of at least two years. The inductees were first separated into “A” and “B” groups depending on physical strength and other factors. Then lots were drawn to determine the length and location of military service. Some unlucky conscripts drew terms as long as three years in places such as the front-line island of Matsu. Over the years the length of conscription has been reduced to where today, a young man will generally only have to serve a one-year term. We salute the sacrifice of veterans — conscripts and volunteers — who have kept Taiwan safe over the decades. These brave men and women suffered immense physical and mental pressures so that their fellow citizens could remain free. Truly, without their heroism, Taiwan could have long ago been assimilated into communist China.

But we must also agree with Minister Chen that the time has come to repeal conscription. Quite simply, unless a threat is direct and imminent, conscription during peacetime is not a viable economic policy. Even with a full two years of service, most conscripts lack the training to be effective wartime soldiers.

Aside from economic considerations there is also a humanitarian issue. The mostly young men who are conscripted have generally just finished high school or college and instead of continuing the momentum of youth, are forced to delay their careers, segregated from society and subjected to the rigors of military life. Some of these young people do not adapt well and almost every year there are stories of suicides due to depression over military service. Filling the ranks of the Armed Forces with professionals can only improve the R.O.C's capacity to respond effectively to any threat. President Ma's policies have brought a degree of detente with arch-nemesis China and are certainly a factor in the military's decision. The time has come for Taiwan to move into a new, 21st century military posture and ending conscription is a great first step.

Changes to NS Basic Military Training and medical classification from 2010

2009-12-04T01:37:00.000-08:00

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/11740/
Singapore MoD Outlines Changes to Basic Military Training

13:18 GMT, December 4, 2009 Basic Military Training (BMT) equips recruits with the basic military skills to become combat-ready soldiers. It also aims to give them a sense of purpose and a positive experience in their National Service. To better engage and train recruits, the SAF undertakes periodic reviews to strengthen the BMT system.

The current review was conducted in two phases. In the first phase, the SAF looked at how recruits undergoing the 4-week Physical Training Phase (PTP) could be better prepared for BMT. This resulted in the introduction of an 8-week PTP which will raise PTP recruits' physical fitness to a level that is comparable to their direct-BMT peers'. The new PTP programme will begin in December 2009. The second phase of the review focused on customising the other BMT programmes to engage recruits and prepare them better for their subsequent combat, combat support and combat service support roles. The BMT system will now include a new 19-week BMT for obese recruits with effect from February 2010, a new 9-week BMT for PES B2 recruits from June 2010, a new 9-week BMT for PES C recruits from June 2010, and a new 4-week BMT for PES E recruits. There will be no change to the standard BMT for PES A/B recruits.

19-week BMT Programme for Obese Enlistees

The new 19-week BMT programme will be conducted for recruits whose Body Mass Index (BMI) exceeds 27. This BMT programme is designed to help obese recruits improve their physical fitness incrementally while equipping them with basic soldiering skills and knowledge. Over time, obese recruits have shown that they can achieve optimal fitness levels and weight loss in about 19 weeks, hence the 19-week BMT programme for this group of recruits.

9-week BMT Programme for PES B2 Enlistees

The new 9-week BMT programme will be conducted for recruits who are medically fit for deployment in selected combat and combat support vocations, such as signal operators, combat medics and naval system operators. These recruits will be given a new medical classification of PES B2, in place of the existing PES C1 classification. This is to ensure that the medical classification of our soldiers is consistent with their deployment. The new 9-week programme will include customised physical training, as well as basic combat training to prepare them for their combat and combat support roles.

9-week BMT Programme for PES C Enlistees

The new 9-week BMT programme will be conducted for PES C recruits. This programme will include light physical training and vocational training to prepare them for combat service support vocations, such as service medic, and those related to logistics and administration such as supply assistants.

4-week BMT Programme for PES E Enlistees

The new 4-week BMT programme will be conducted for PES E recruits. This programme will focus on National Education, SAF core values, regimentation and discipline, as well as vocational training to prepare recruits for combat service support vocations.

Defending your country? Then pay for your own insurance

2009-11-26T23:06:00.000-08:00

http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/27/defending-your-country-then-pay-for-your-own-insurance/

Defending your country? Then pay for your own insurance

November 27, 2009 by admin
Filed under Opinion

Dumb Answer, Dumb Answer

2009-11-24T05:44:00.000-08:00

http://todayinsingapore.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/dumb-answer-dumb-answer/

Dumb Answer, Dumb Answer

By todayinsingapore

When asked how the Government would deal with resentment over new citizens not having to do National Service (NS), Community Development, Youth and Sports Minister Vivian Balakrishnan gave this non-answer: “I don’t want to get into the technical and operational and security reasons as to why we don’t enlist them for NS, but the point is that their children will do NS and that their children should be indistinguishable from our children in their accents, hopes, aspirations, obligations and duties to our nation.”

This must be the most blatant affront to the people’s expectation of an elected representative – he refuses outright to give a response to a tabled query from a fellow parliamentarian. Oh, we forget, not all parliamentarians are created equal, some are paid more than others. Consider the atrocious excuses he gave for not doing his homework:

Technical reason: Is there a constitutional amendment hidden somewhere we have yet to be enlightened of? That new citizens are exempt from NS in perpetuity? When a bright lawyer once argued successfully in court it was illegal to exact tolls to enter the Central Business District (CBD) since the motorist had already paid taxes for usage of public roads, they simply rewrote the law. That’s the way they take care of a “technicality”.

Operational reason: Are we running out of training grounds? Pilots now have a home in Idaho to wear Tom Cruise sunglasses and fly around in their spanking new F-15s. Even India is providing facilities for our young men to soldier in realistic terrain, unlike our geographically challenged Tekong camp. Too bad the R&R there pales in comparison to the Pei-Toh district of Taiwan.

Security reason: Lee Kuan Yew told Charlie Rose that we have Ukranians serving in NS. So why should we be afraid of a potential Major Nidal Malik Hasan hiding in the ranks? Is he eying Wong Kan Seng’s job (and pay scale)?

Balakrishnan boasts that, over time, “their children should be indistinguishable from our children in their accents, hopes, aspirations, obligations and duties to our nation”. He conveniently skips the missed unemployment opportunities for Singapore men because their career advancement is handicapped by the disruptive in-camp training demands. Meanwhile, their NS obligation-free contemporaries jet around in their high profiled international marketing trips, invaluable exposure that lands them juicy careers like heading a major local bank. Citizenship is not an issue.

Perhaps the Minister chose to be reticent on a hot topic because he doesn’t want to be reminded how he shot his own foot shortly before the Government approved bar-top dancing:

“If you want to dance on a bar top, some of us will fall off that bar top. Some people will die as a result of liberalising bar-top dancing. Not just because they’ve fallen off the bar top, but because it’s usually a young girl with a short skirt who’s dancing on it, who may attract some insults from some other men. The boyfriend starts fighting. Some people will die.
Blood will be shed for liberalising the policy.” (Straits Times, 3 Oct 2001)

20-year-old NSman dies after being found unconscious

2009-11-21T18:25:00.000-08:00

http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/22/another-non-combat-death-in-ship-incident/
Another non-combat death in ship “incident”

November 22, 2009 by admin
Filed under Top News

Counting the cost of NS

2009-11-09T05:14:00.000-08:00

http://frankcomment.blogspot.com/2009/11/counting-costs-of-ns.html

Counting the cost of NS

Salary.sg posted an article entitled "Your Citizenship is Worth $4,511 More Than a PR Per Year". I'm not sure how $4511 was derived, but a glance shows the calculation is full of errors. For example, almost every single grant mentioned is for children. Depending on how you see it, almost all sums should be divided by two, or even three if you take the child into account. Not to mention, at the "average" of one child per woman, how does one simultaneously enjoy child care subsidy and subsidized school fees?

Even the $30-40k HDB grant does not go to a single citizen. It is the combined grant of two citizens. If you marry a PR or foreigner, or a citizen who is disqualified due to pay or owning private property, you get half of that.

That sum of $4511 is a gross exaggeration. Then again, it does not take into account measures that only the low income citizens enjoy, like Workfare, one off grants like GST credits and Jobs Credit. Don't count the Utilities Save though. Foreigners get that too.

But how about the costs of a citizenship vs PR?

How much does it cost a Singaporean man to serve NS?

Can we account just by the loss of salary over two (or two and half years for old timers like me)?

How about families that are plunged into financial crisis because their sole breadwinner was called up for NS? It is not as rare as most people who had not served NS think. Better yet, administrative screwups resulting into two breadwinners of a poor family being called up at the same time. I know it has happened because I have seen it myself.

I was paid around $200 per month for my 30 months of NS. No 13th month bonus. No CPF. No OT pay. The pay is much more now, but hardly market competitive.

Because it neither tracked inflation nor market rates, those who served NS in the 70s and early 80s were paid much more, relatively.

Why does a country that boasts of first world status and out of this world ministerial salaries persist in paying our national servicemen poorly? If the country has no money to pay our national servicemen, the ministers should consider a pay cut. But no, they believe in paying themselves first. And they sure track market rates closely.

How about care for servicemen who are disabled due to service injuries? Singapore seems to have no system to care for disabled servicemen. MINDEF's attitude seems to be pay a lump sum up front, discharge the servicemen and run away as quickly as they possibly can.

How do you account for the intangibles? The opportunity costs of our two years in our prime? The inconveniences erected when we turn 11 to prevent us from escaping NS? The continued inconveniences as we have to plan our lives around our reservists obligations?

And how do we account for the letter that threatens to suspend our freedom to travel, when we forget to inform to MINDEF of our overseas travels? Priceless?

What price, to account for the hostile work environment? My superior officer once threatened to kill me, wanted to slam my head against the wall. That, after yelling at me for half an hour. This is a job I cannot resign from. I cannot even apply for a transfer.

I am sure, knowing that my citizenship is worth $4511 over a PR makes me feel better. Right.

Despite the costs, serving NS is worth it, right? It's all about defending Singapore from an invasion of foreigners, right?

2009-11-08T22:08:00.000-08:00

http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20091002-171274.html

No need for women to do NS, says PM Lee

By Dawn Tay

A DIALOGUE between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and around 200 women from various women's organisations yesterday focused on an arguably male-centric issue - national service.

Of the 10 women who spoke, six rose to debate whether NS should be made compulsory for women and children of new citizens and permanent residents, and whether it disadvantaged men, at the People's Association Women's Integration Network Council dialogue.

Asked whether Singapore women are disadvantaged as, unlike men, they do not receive NS allowances as part of their pay, PM Lee assured the mainly female audience that career advancement for men and women alike would depend on the individual's ability.

Allowances for Singapore men who have completed NS are to ensure that they are not left behind when they start work after their two-year army stint and to compensate for their time in reservist training, he said.

NS should not be made compulsory for women for the sake of career advancement, he said.

"The purpose of national service is to have an operationally ready Singapore Armed Forces."

Dialogue participants suggested making NS mandatory for children of PRs to ensure a level playing field for all young people here.

But PM Lee rejected this, saying that doing so would scare away potential citizens. He added that each year, several hundred children of new Singaporeans and PRs elect to serve NS.

Before opening the floor to questions, PM Lee spoke on employment opportunities here and stressed the need for women to return to the workforce after having children.

He urged companies to be more supportive by adopting flexi-work schemes, and husbands to help with housework and bringing up the children.

He also said that the Government hopes to announce in two weeks whether the Jobs Credit Scheme - the $4.5 billion, one-year scheme to help employers retain local workers during the recession - would be extended beyond this year.

Conditioning and Conformity - How the military enforce them upon us.

2009-10-22T06:20:00.001-07:00

I like this part "Conditioning assumes that a person’s behaviour is controlled by the environmental stimuli, so to control a person; they just have to manipulate the stimuli around the person. On a sidenote, conditioning does not distinguish the difference between animal and human behaviour, so essentially conditioning a human is like training a dog." Woof woof.

Conditioning and Conformity - How the military enforce them upon us.

http://psychointhemaking.blogspot.com/2009/10/conditioning-and-conformity-how.html

Sorry for the late post, a lot of stuff to do.
Today I will discuss about a subject that invokes either admiration or hatred from the male population of Singapore. My friend who recently enlisted in NS and is currently supposed to be training in Pulau Tekong. He recently told the medical officer that he seriously can’t take it anymore, so, the medical officer directed to a SAF counsellor in MMI (Military Medicine Institute). The counsellor interviewed him and said he is fine and can continue on with the training, but, when I saw him, I saw bloodshot eyes, dark bags around his eyes that indicate insomnia and twitchiness. If these don’t indicate that something’s wrong, I don’t know what will. Inside my mind I just said: “That counsellor is a fucking moron”.

My friend is showing quite a lot of signs that he is suffering from depression, and from my experience, disregarding it and still forcing the person to go back to the harsh training is a recipe for disaster. In all likelihood, this can be followed by suicide or the trainee snapping and turning his gun on the superiors, and mind you, this has happened before.

The SAF military training employ conditioning to enforce obedience to their troops. In fact, most countries employ this kind of training, not just Singapore. Conditioning comes in two subfields, Classical and Operant. I won’t bore you with a lengthy explanation about what those two but I will give two links that explains what they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/skinner.html

This is what the “normal” process the recruit will go through: The recruit will first arrive on Pulau Tekong with all the other recruits and go through the motion of doing the “pledge” and later distributed to their respective companies. They will have their heads shaved and dressed in the same way to ensure uniformity to enforce obedience. This is also an important element on shaping the mind of the recruit; some Social psychologists will call it conformity.

The recruit will realise that he will be alienated from the group if he does not do the same thing they do. Humans are social creatures, they need to socialise, and they can’t stand being alone (especially in a “hostile” environment like BMT). The people who put this training together know this fact very well; so they utilised it to its fullest potential. Uniformity is one of the methods to force the individual to conform along with the rest the of the other recruits. Everyone must look the same, walk the same, wear the same clothes and think in tandem with each other. It’s like line dancing; everyone must face the same direction and execute the dance steps at the same time; anything out of place stands out like a sore thumb. Like military marching, it also requires people do things in sync. Another method is social pressure, if the particular recruit does not conform and obey like the others; the superiors will punish everyone. In turn the recruits will pressure the offender into conforming eg: blanket parties, ostracising the person or generally making his life more difficult. Another form of social pressure is telling the recruit “Everyone can do it, why can’t you?” or making comparisons with other “more capable people” to “coax” the recruit into working harder in conforming to the group. The “ideal” end result of this training is that when the person is released from service; he is a compliant person that will obey authority figures without complaint or protest.

During the course of the training, the recruit will soon realise that his freedom has been taken away. What was once his right is now merely a privilege that is given whenever his superiors see fit. This is where conditioning comes in. The recruit will realise that to get back his freedom, he has to obey his oppressors in order to get it back even if that freedom is only temporary. That’s why during the course of the training, rewards are book outs or anything that resembles normal life like trips to the canteen or shops while punishment is not giving back that freedom like solitary confinements. The process is extremely simple, you obey and you get a treat. You don’t obey, you get a punishment. That’s how conditioning normally works. Conditioning assumes that a person’s behaviour is controlled by the environmental stimuli, so to control a person; they just have to manipulate the stimuli around the person. On a sidenote, conditioning does not distinguish the difference between animal and human behaviour, so essentially conditioning a human is like training a dog.

Conditioning is one of the only psychology disciplines that most governments only bother to learn. Why? It is simple really, it’s extremely easy to understand and utilise on the masses. We are subject to conditioning practically in our everyday lives. It is so subtle and common that even the most self-aware person can be potentially vulnerable to external control. Anyone can use it on you: you’re parents, your friends, your teachers and the list goes on. Conditioning is already there way before even Pavlov performed his experiments on his dogs; he just simply gave the process a name.

The “ideal” end result of conditioning in military training is that disobeying authority equals a negative consequence, so the person will learn to fear authority.
How one responds to the training is a matter of ideals, a person who can’t conform and obey will feel that NS is a completely unnecessary torture session that waste away two precious years of their life, they might respond negatively like going into depression or worse. A person who feels that the SAF is a good thing and considers it a potential career choice will respond well with the training.

Now people who are regulars or like the training might call my friend and I “gu niang (Chinese for lady)” or “chao keng (malingering)”, well; like I said, it’s a matter of ideals. My right can be your wrong. We see the same things with the same pair of eyes but interpret the information in a different way unique to the individual. To me, everyone is entitled their opinions but they must not force them upon others.

Ungrateful Platoon Commander, Insensitive Leader

2009-10-01T18:54:00.001-07:00

http://feedmetothefish.blogspot.com/2009/09/ungrateful-platoon-commander.html

Ungrateful Platoon Commander, Insensitive Leeder

I saw this pic at BigTalk [Link]

I'm shocked that these words can come from a former Brigadier-General of the Singapore Armed Forces, the current Prime Minister of Singapore!

“If we make it (NS and Reservist for PR) a requirement, we would not get the people we wanted. Secondly, if they did serve NS at 30, 40 and 50 years old. I would not like to be their platoon commander.”

If I have not learned to be cool, calm and collected from my guru, Wisdom, the first words that should come from my mouth would be: "KNNMCCB" or, "Fcuk you, man!"

So why am I so bloody mad?

I was released from the bondage of NS and reservists' in-camp training almost 20 years ago at age 40! It hurts me to know that having been considered over the hill as a NSman at 30, I was still asked to waste my time to serve certain platoon commanders who did not appreciate my service.

I do not know the context at which such stupid statement came from a statesman but to belittle the contributions and sacrifices of thousands of NSmen who serves till 40 is appallingly sick! It is so sad to know that Singapore citizens who recite the Singapore Aspiration (Pledge?) are lesser mortals in Singapore than PRs who spice up the lives of elite Singaporeans!

Why such callous deed tears my guts out?

At this moment, my 18 month-old grand-daughter is yearning for her father. She is fatherless for 3 weeks because her 35 year-old dad (who is my son) is out of Singapore in some godforsaken jungle somewhere doing reservist training which his Platoon Commander (if he were PM Lee) does not appreciate because he's too old to be in NS.

It's all well and good when careless politician speaks of buying votes and fixing oppositions [Link] but to callously deride the sacrifices of so many true blue Singaporean NSmen is really asking for trouble.

NSmen and reservists are already disillusioned by ministers who make a mockery of nation serving by paying themselves millions; the 'white horse' classification of NSmen and the disadvantage they face in equal employment opportunity [Link].

Mr Prime Minister, why rock the boat further with such insensitivity?

Under the current economic and social condition in Singapore,

A grateful heart
A touch of kindness
A sense of solidarity
A caring demeanour

is what we expect from a leader.

A high falutin ingrate is furthest from our minds!

God bless Singapore.

feedmetothefish

MinDEF: More action, less talk please, we're Singaporeans

2009-09-29T06:31:00.001-07:00

MinDEF: More action, less talk please, we're Singaporeans

Today at 10:53am

(Unpublished - Sep 22, 2009)

I refer to Colonel Darius Lim's response (Sept 22) to Mr Sylvester Lim's letter explaining his in-camp training (ICT) call-up during his undergraduate course.

Like Sylvester, I am a student, but pursuing full-time graduate studies at the National University of Singapore.

I am currently attending an ICT in the middle of of my semester.

This has caused disruptions to my obligations as a teaching assistant, my research and thesis writing. On top of that, I am unable to attend seminars or be around for consultation for my students.

I returned home for the weekend exhausted and nursing blisters on my fingers, both obvious impediments to catching up on any student and research obligation.

Months ago, my application and later appeal for deferment had both been rejected.

A letter of rejection and a response from the Ministry of Defence (MinDEF) following my letter to MinDEF both expressed MinDEF's understanding and appreciation of NSmen pursuing higher education.

I have since made the decision to put my studies, research and teaching aside and attend the ICT.

I suggest that MinDEF put more than just consolatory words into "understanding" and "appreciation" for Singaporean sons who are pursuing degrees and sacrifice a lot to do reservist.

As a student, two weeks away from lessons and research results in backlog work and loss of momentum, and more than two weeks would be required to regain what is lost.

There is no such thing as a cover or replacement for a student or researcher when he is doing his ICT.

I suggest MinDEF reimburse NSmen for a semester or half a semester of school fees, in the period they are called up for ICT. This gesture will benefit those who are called up for ICT during their studies, and be less burdened by student loans.

This way, NSmen do not end up on the deeper side of the losing end, with only a few consolatory words and a huge sense of helplessness and resignation.

Most NS-liable people are well acquainted with being helpless and resigned, so something must be done to lessen that.

In my case, as I am on research scholarship which expires August next year, I would like to ask if MinDEF is willing to pay for two and a half weeks of school fees in the event I am unable to complete my course and submit my thesis by then.

This question has been ignored in my letter to MinDEF and I would like to repeat it here.

It is time MinDEF offer solutions that thoughtfully, sincerely and genuinely help, instead of giving us reservist-liable Singaporeans doses of dead-end communications rhetoric.

I suggest that MinDEF do public relations communications that are - or at least tend towards being - mutually beneficial, rather than one-way.

The fact that conscription and reservist are mandatory does not mean that MinDEF have the right treat Singaporeans this way, students included.

Furthermore and with all due respect, MinDEF should not only talk about their "understanding" and "appreciation", but show that they are mean it and do something that the NSman will feel is reasonable and meaningful, that they feel "understood" and "appreciated".

At the same time, NSmen should not be afraid to speak up, make suggestions and stake a claim in their relationship with the organisation.

Ho Chi Sam

Mr PM: Please Release Exact Figures

2009-09-23T20:18:00.000-07:00

http://singaporeanskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/09/mr-pm-please-release-exact-figures.html

Mr PM: Please Release Exact Figures

Lee Hsien Loong is supposed to have a degree in maths. For someone who is supposed to have studied the subject at Cambridge University, it is ironic that he is incompetent when it comes to numbers. What is hundreds? He never give us the specific numbers or details. It can be 200 or it can be 900. So...confusing. Trust the PAP to be so 'transparent'

Furthermore, how does this stack up against the number of locals enlisting every year? Skeptic couldn't find any figures but he decided to guesstimate based on the figures of live birth in Singapore. Last year there was roughly 39,800 live births in Singapore. Even taking a conservative 1/4 of those births being males eligible for NS when they turn 18, it is safe to say that between 5000-8000 male citizens enlist every year.

So what is hundreds when citizens contribute thousands? Given the fact that more than a third of the population are foreigners the burden is unequally shared.

So the speech about hundreds is misleading. When you do statistics, absolute numbers are meaningless unless you do a comparison with some other data you collected. 100 degrees Celsius is too hot for a room but cold in comparison to the sun. 5 degrees Celsius is cold for human beings but too hot for superconductors. Every thing depends on a proper context and in this case the lack of a proper one is very dishonest.

What does this mean? The majority of foreigners are enjoying Singapore without any NS burden but the PAP fails to address this problem. While it is commendable that some of the foreign born choose to do NS, you have to understand that they are but a tiny minority among the foreign born population.

When you do a rough comparison between the two numbers, you realise that rather than having too many foreign born NS men, we have too few.

Straits Times Sep 16 2009 Many foreign-born do NS yearly

PRIME Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday addressed a pet peeve among Singaporeans, that new immigrants do not do national service (NS) or are called up for reservist training.Mr Lee said every year, hundreds of foreign-born youths do their NS as new citizens or permanent residents (PRs).'They come from different races and countries, but they have consciously committed themselves to do NS, and march together with Singaporeans,' he said at a dialogue with students of Nanyang Technological University.

In July, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean had said in an interview the number of such youths is in the 'high hundreds every year'. Yesterday, PM Lee also said a 'good number of these new citizens' excel in NS, attending Officer Cadet School or topping their cohort and being awarded the Sword of Honour. Some have signed on to be regulars in the Singapore Armed Forces while others have won SAF scholarships, he said. Mr Lee cited Lieutenant Kok Khew Fai, 21, a Malaysian-born officer, who became a citizen in May 2007. Lt Kok received the SAF merit scholarship last month and will be an air engineering officer after completing his aeronautical engineering studies at Britain's Imperial College. He was awarded the SAF Medal for Distinguished Act last September for shielding a recruit from a grenade blast during an exercise in March last year. Besides defence, PM Lee said new citizens and PRs also contribute in other areas. 'They not only contribute to our economy, they also enrich our society and make up for our population shortfall.' Singapore made sure these newcomers raised the population's quality in terms of education, skills and drive, he added. Mr Lee also urged Singaporeans to intensify their efforts in engaging new citizens, who have different social habits. 'Singaporeans must understand that they come from societies very different from ours. 'In China and India, one has to be assertive and even aggressive to get anywhere. In Singapore, our social norms have become more restrained and considerate.' He noted that there are programmes to help new citizens adjust to life here, such as explaining to them the culture of queuing and other social practices. But Singapore needs to do more, which is why the National Integration Council set up in April will announce new initiatives soon, said PM Lee. The council is scheduled to do so today

Stay connected while in-camp

2009-09-22T09:47:00.000-07:00

Stay connected while in-camp

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_428364.html

To ensure compliance with the security rules, NSmen must safe-keep their devices in the lockers provided and use them only within the compounds of the business centres. -- ST PHOTO: CHEW SENG KIM

TO HELP National Servicemen better balance their military training and work demands during their in-camp training (ICT), three training institutes business centres will be set up, enhanced with wireless Internet access and basic facilities to enable them to access their office network outside of training hours.

NSmen will also be allowed to bring in and use their work devices, such as office-configured laptops, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and Blackberries, within these centres.

The centres will be equipped with photocopiers, facsimile, Skype facilities, as well as wired and wireless internet access.

'Security will not be compromised as a result of the increased flexibility given to NSmen,' said the Ministry of Defence.

To ensure compliance with the security rules, NSmen must safe-keep their devices in the lockers provided and use them only within the compounds of the business centres.

As an additional layer of security, closed circuit television (CCTV) will be installed in the business centres, said Mindef.

All devices with image-capturing capability such as camera handphones would continue to be prohibited in accordance with the current Mindef security policy.

As some company laptops and Blackberries come with image capturing devices, these would be allowed for use only within the business centres. No laptops or phones with image capturing devices will be allowed outside of the business centres.

A trial run will be carried out in the last quarter in the Armour Training Institute (ATI) located in Sungei Gedong Camp, the Infantry Training Institute (ITI) located in Jurong Camp II, and the Army Logistics Training Institute (ALTI) located in Kranji Camp III.

Mindef will review this in the middle of next year before introducing the facilities SAF-wide.

SAF must disobey any order to overthrow opposition-led government

2009-09-14T08:09:00.000-07:00

http://singaporedino.blogspot.com/2009/09/duty-of-saf-soldiers-to-disobey-illegal.html

SAF must disobey any order to overthrow opposition-led government

MM Lee has still not renounced his statement that if there's a freak election result, the army will have to come in to take control.

It is shameful that a senior leader of our country can declare that he will sabotage a government freely elected by the people just because he thinks it's a "freak" result. I strongly condemn MM Lee for such arrogance.

Every NS Man has taken the SAF Pledge:

We, members of the Singapore Armed Forces,
do sincerely pledge that we will always bear true faith and
allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore.
We will always support and defend the Constitution. We will preserve and protect the honour and independence of our country with our lives.

The SAF is not obligated to act as Lee Kuan Yew's or the PAP's private army to do as they please. Our soldiers sacrifice two years or their lives and years of reservist duty to protect our country, not to subvert citizens' choice of government just because one man doesn't like it.

Even though the SAF's top brass has close links with the PAP, they are first and foremost soldiers pledging allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore, and to defend the Constitution. Under no circumstances must they order the rank and file soldiers to overthrow a freely elected government.

Even if they did, our NS Men have the duty to disobey such clearly illegal orders.

Why does Mindef discriminate against NSmen who are pursuing full-time studies in other institutions?

2009-09-13T19:47:00.000-07:00

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_429354.html

Call-up blues

'Why does Mindef discriminate against NSmen who are pursuing full-time studies in other institutions?'

MR SYLVESTER LIM: 'The Ministry of Defence (Mindef) requires operationally ready national servicemen (NSmen) to apply online for deferment from reservist training, even if they are attending full-time studies at institutions such as the Singapore Institute of Management (SIM). While NSmen pursuing full-time studies at local polytechnics, Nanyang Technological University, National University of Singapore and Singapore Management University are called up only during their holiday period so as not to disrupt their study curriculum, why does Mindef discriminate against NSmen who are pursuing full-time studies in other institutions? Singaporean men have already sacrificed two years of their lives and should not be saddled with this uncertainty, even when they want to pursue further studies.'

Original email to STforum.

Dear Sir/Madam,

It is disconcerting to note that MINDEF requires NSmen who have finished their two years service, having to apply for deferment from reservist training even if they are attending full time studies at institutions such as SIM Singapore Institute of Management. While NSmen pursuing full time studies at local polytechnics, NTU, NUS & SMU will be posted into the Institute of Higher Learning (IHL) whereby they will only be called up during their holiday period so as not to disrupt their study curriculum, why does MINDEF discriminates NSmen who are pursuing studies via other venues? What about other institutions such as MDIS, John Cook Universities and other private institutes of higher learning in Singapore? These institutions are already approved by the MOE. Singaporean men have already sacrificed two years of their lives and should not be saddled with this uncertainty even when they want to pursue further studies.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Lim Sylvester

Reply by Mindef

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_432712.html
Why these students get common call-up
I REFER to Mr Sylvester Lim's letter, 'Call-up blues' (Sept 14), on the call-up of operationally ready national servicemen (NSmen) who are pursuing full-time studies in institutions such as the Singapore Institute of Management.

To maintain the operational readiness of army units, the Singapore Armed Forces requires NSmen from the same unit to attend in-camp training (ICT) together. Hence, it is not possible for the unit to accommodate the different schedules of each of their NSmen when scheduling ICT.

However, the Ministry of Defence understands our NSmen have to balance their work, academic and other commitments with their ICT obligations. Most NSmen studying in the three local universities (National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University and Singapore Management University) are scheduled for ICT call-ups during their academic vacation period. This arrangement is made possible because these universities have a common vacation period, and the majority of our NSmen study in these institutions.
NSmen pursuing full-time studies in other educational institutions can apply for deferment from their ICT as per the normal deferment process.

Colonel Darius Lim

Director Public Affairs Ministry of Defence

Two-thirds of NSmen to get 20% hike in allowances

2009-09-11T08:15:00.000-07:00

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1004377/1/.html

Two-thirds of NSmen to get 20% hike in allowances

SINGAPORE: About two-thirds of all National Servicemen will receive at least a 20 per cent increase in their allowances from next year.

The government accepted all the eighteen recommendations made by the Record V Committee to reward the NSmen for their contributions.

One of the recommendations included faster and larger rank allowance increments.

For those who take on more demanding combat roles, monthly allowances are expected to increase by S$100.

NSmen working in leadership positions and as warrant officers and specialists will witness a 5 to 35 per cent increase in rank allowances, whereas commanders will get an add-on allowance, pegged at 20 per cent of their key appointment allowance.

Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean said that the changes have been made to recognise NSmen's sacrifices.

"They have many conflicting demands on their time, particularly nowadays, when life is much more fast-paced. They have their family, business and job commitments. And this is particularly demanding at a time when the economy is not doing so well," said Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean.

Another signicant change would allow NSmen to bring work-related computing or mobile devices for use when they're not training.

"While the facilities at business centres are fairly basic now, with just a few terminals - after the changes, there will be far more terminals, perhaps up to 40, in some of the bigger centres. There will also be wireless access and equipment like photocopiers and fax machines. And there will also be the ability for NSmen to bring in their own devices such as Blackberries, for use within the centre," he added.

Supporting the change, a National Serviceman, Ridzuan Ismail, said, "I am going through my MBA programme and it's a company-sponsored programme so I have a lot at stake. Things like allowing me to bring in my laptop and accessing it through the business centre is very useful."

Further approved recommendations include improving fitness corners in public housing estates so that NSmen can better train for their IPPT or physical proficiency tests, and giving away vouchers to chalets and attractions to recognise the wider efforts of NSmen's families.

The changes are expected to be implemented in phases from October.

NSman: How about irregular pay?

2009-09-02T07:12:00.001-07:00

NSman: How about irregular pay?

I REFER to last Friday's report, 'In-camp NSmen can stay connected to workplace'.

I am concerned over my make-up pay claim for my time spent on in-camp training. My company pays me solely in commission on sales I bring in. For the past few years, as I progressed in my career, I assumed a managerial role and spent a lot of my time grooming a team of salesmen. In return for this contribution, I am paid in overrides over my team's sales. This compensates me for the reduction in income as I have to spend less time on my own sales.

For my time spent in camp, the logical assumption is that I would be paid for lost time I could have devoted to both sales and managerial work, but that is not the case. To get my make-up pay, I need to give proof of my income and a detailed breakdown of pay for my own sales and pay in overrides. I am paid only for my own sales and not overrides. The reason given was that I still get overrides from my team when I am in camp, and it is therefore not 'loss income'.

This implies that my time spent in camp affects only my own sales and not those of my team. In other words, my presence as manager and team leader is worth nothing and immaterial. How can that be true? Worse still, the more one progresses in one's career, the less one gets in make-up pay.

A project manager is paid in full, and a business owner based on his profit-and-loss statement. They are paid for their management and leadership value. Why am I paid for only part of my taxable income?

CPT (NS) Lee Tian Shek

NS Issue Revisited

2009-08-31T23:58:00.000-07:00

http://singaporeanskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/09/ns-issue-revisited.html
NS Issue Revisited

Now that I have calmed down. I decided to revisit the NS issue and write a less emotional analysis of the compensation report.

To understand the issue of NS, we need to first examine the root cause of unhappiness over NS. There are three separate issues which are related but not technically the same. The first is the issue of forced conscription. The second issue is the issue of inequality of treatment. The third is the issue of compensation for service.

Conscription is akin to slavery not service. It is wrong to force a fellow human being to work against his will. Most people (in the street) would agree with this view of forced conscription. We know that from a survey on Tan Kin Lian's blog that given a choice, a staggering 81% of respondents would not do NS. Strangely, most of the remarks about NS on the online forums, do not talk much about the illegitimacy of forced servitude but more on the second issue- the inequality of treatment.

This has been a hot topic on the online forums. It used to be rantings about gender discrimination- how male citizens had to serve while female citizens did not. Over the past decade, the issue of inequality has taken over an added dimension- that of foreigners. Adding up the numbers, it seemed that only a minority of the people living in Singapore have to pay a price for living on the Island. Looking at the statistics, only 32.65% of the people are liable for National Service. (Calculated by assuming 32.65% female citizens, 34.7% foreigners[numbers from this post]) The inequality of treatment is the one which evokes the most emotional response. Because it is in human nature to compare ourselves with others. Skeptic suspects that if everyone on the Island suffered the same fate, the resentment towards NS would be reduced significantly.

Finally, there is the issue of compensation for those who serve NS. Given the fact that there is a huge opportunity cost towards earning money and career advancement, the allowance and compensation for NSF and NSmen is a joke.

Okay so let us see whether the compensation report can address these sources of resentment. The illegitimacy of forced servitude? No. The inequality of treatment to male citizens? No. The compensation for the lost of opportunity? It tries to but it is still inadequate.

That is why, Skeptic finds it strange that the PM in his NDP rally 'promised' a lot of goodies in the compensation report. That is the PAP for you. They have been Promising And Promising for the past decade. But the truth is they have failed to deliver the goods since the mid-nineties.

Should NS be Reduced or Scrapped

2009-08-11T05:49:00.000-07:00

Should NS be Reduced or Scrapped

See also, discussion on http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/showthread.php?t=2038383

NATIONAL SERVICE

Introduction

National Service, or army conscription in Singapore, was first introduced in 1967 due to pressing issues such as national security after Singapore's "forced" independence in 1965. In 1971, the British completely pulled out of Singapore. It has been 41 years since the introduction of NS.

Since then the world and Asia has changed significantly in terms of security and economic arrangements. But has Singapore's conscription policy kept up with these changes to reflect and cope with the new geopolitical landscape?

First let us review the service that all able-bodied 18-year-old male Singaporeans have to undergo. Basic Military Training, or BMT, is the "boot camp" for all new recruits. This lasts for three months whereupon the soldier then gets posted out to other units for further specialised training.

The conscripts then serve the remainder of their two-year stint polishing up their combat skills. Following the two years of full-time service, NSmen are required (for up to 40 days a year) to serve in a part-tme capacity until they are 50 years old for commissioned officers and 40 for others.

Reduce the two-year full-time service

In an age where warfare has turned to "smart" technology, is it still logical and necessary for Singapore to insist that its National Servicemen undergo 24 months months of active, full-time service? Such a policy is rare among countries that maintain a conscription policy. Below is a list of countries with periods of full-time conscript service:

1.Austria (6 months)
2.Bolivia (12 months)
3.Brazil (9-12 months)
4.Denmark (4-12 months)
5.Estonia (8-11 months)
6.Finland (6-12 months)
7.Germany (9 months)
8.Greece (12 months)
9.Guatemala (12-24 months)
10.Moldavia (12 months)
11.Mongolia (12 months)
12.Paraguay (12-24 months)
13.Poland (9-12 months)
14.Serbia (6 months)
15.Switzerland (18-21 weeks)
16.Taiwan (12 months)
17.Tunisia (12 months)
18.Turkey (12 months)
19.Ukraine (12 months_
20.Uzbekistan (12 months)

From the above data, it can be seen that for all intents and purposes a conscript army training programme need not be as long as the one we have in Singapore. The more advance countries like Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and Switzerland all have full-time services limited to one year and less.

Even Taiwan, which has an identifiable enemy in the form of China, limits its active service to 12 months. Only countries like South Korea and Israel have conscription periods that are longer than Singapore's. These countries are, however, in a state of war.

Given the situation in Singapore there is no reason why we cannot employ more efficient training methods and reduce full-time NS from the present two-years to twelve months or less.

Reservist training

The current period of reserve training for NS men of up to 40 years old is also a burden on the servicemen and, by extension, the economy. Not only does the serviceman have to contend with the influx of foreigners, they are disadvantaged in terms of employment, remuneration and promotion when employers compare local men who have to be away for weeks in anyone year with foreign workers who have no such obligation.

The span of a serviceman's reservist training should not go beyond 30 years of age. Men tend to settle down and start families around this age and job stability and carreer prospects are essential during this period. Unfair competition from foreign nationals would handicap local males and add to their already stressful lifestyles.

In addition, the human body goes into a physical decline after the age of 30. To keep our military personnel in top condition, it makes little sense in keeping men over the age of 30 in the frontline if military conflict does indeed breakout.

Increase volunteer, professional army

To compensate for the decrease in the number of active and reservist NSmen, the Singapore Armed Forces should expand volunteer army recruitment to complement the reduction in the number of conscripts.

In fact, the number of countries that have scrapped conscription are on the rise: Argentina (1994), Belgium (1994), Czech Republic (2004), France (1996), Hungary (2004), Italy (2004), Netherlands (1996), New Zealand (1972), Portugal (2004), and Spain (2001).

While Singapore may not be ready to follow suit, it would be prudent for us to reduce NSmen in favour of a professional military outfit

At the moment, NSmen are exploited for their services to glorify the PAP during National Day parades. The energy and time of these men can be put to more productive use than as entertainment for the PAP regime.

Conscientious objectors

What about people who do not believe that it is right for them to do military service due to moral, religious or ethical grounds? At the moment such conscientious objectors are charged and imprisoned for the length of their service.

In some of the countries that have compulsory military service, there is also a provision for conscientious objectors to serve in non-combat roles. There is an argument that this would open the flood gates for men to opt for non-combat positions. Such a loophole can be plugged by increasing the length of active service by, say, six months. The experiences of other countries like Germany and Sweden have not been negative in this aspect where males try to avoid combat service by claiming to be conscientious objectors.

Tranparency and openness

Obligation in Singapore seems to be a one-way street. While the Government holds the people accountable for their NS liabilities, the Ministry of Defence remains non-transparent and non-accountable in their dealings with the public.

The recent deaths of National Servicemen have opened a can of worms on training safety. In addition, the number of training fatalities and injuries are not made known to the public as a matter-of-course. The Government which compels the people to give their lives for the country are obliged to be absolutely transparent with information pertaining to safety issues. Compensation for deaths and injuries must also be reviewed and revised upwards.

The Government must also not exploit NSmen as cheap labour during major events such as the WB-IMF meeting or, possibly, the upcoming Youth Olympics. In must be remembered that the Enlistment Act was enacted for a specific purpose and any detraction from that purpose must be shunned.

Conclusion

When citizens are forced to serve in the military with the possibility of being killed if called to war, it is imperative that the government is a democratic one where citizens can hold the government accountable for its decisions and actions. Otherwise we may end up in a situation where wars are waged for the ruling elite rather than for the security and sovereignty of the nation.

http://forum.yoursdp.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3

what-ns-has-done-for-me

2009-08-09T07:45:00.000-07:00

http://singaporeanskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-ns-has-done-for-me-sleeping-on.html

what-ns-has-done-for-me

"Looking back, I am glad I went through NS. Because of NS, it forced me to work harder, seek opportunities abroad and settle down overseas. I met a friend of mine who once commented that Singaporeans have a high tolerance for abuse by the government. It is like someone hits you, you complain but you take more beatings and after a while, you get used to it. The issue is not about the 'privilege' of being a Singaporean, but that many Singaporeans lack the courage to do something about it." -John

This is a comment from John regarding a recent post about NS. Skeptic wonders if it is the same commentor who talked about finding a job overseas. Anyway, what he said stirred up my own personal bad memories of NS.

To be honest, I wasn't so keen on leaving Singapore until I myself suffered 2.5 years of NS. Up till then, I had experienced many bad things growing up but it seemed that NS was the tipping point. This makes me wonder whether, for some of us, NS makes us less patriotic rather than more.

Like the commentator, the pain and humiliation I suffered in NS made me more resolute in seeking my future away from Singapore. So if you are right now suffering under the system, my advice to you is to channel your resentment and anger towards something more productive. Use that energy to develop skills that would make you valuable outside of Singapore. Pretend to love the PAP system but plot to leave. Develop your abilities and resources so that you can one day become a productive citizen in another country.

I suppose the best phrase to describe it is the Chinese idiom 卧薪尝胆 which means 'steeling oneself for bitter revenge'. The best form of revenge is to lead a successful life abroad and deprive the PAP system of your abilities.

Note to non-Chinese speakers: There is a very interesting story behind the phrase 卧薪尝胆 which literally translates as 'Sleeping on Brushwood and Drinking Gall'.

Make English and modified NS a must

2009-08-07T07:35:00.000-07:00

Yah, like the government will tell the PRs to serve part-time NS. After all, these 'talents' are here to enjoy our work environment at the expense of 'less talented' Singaporeans and not to defend the country. Money, money, money.

Make English and modified NS a must
http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_413578.html

SUNDAY'S reports, 'Mah urges new citizens to adapt to local ways' and 'Be mindful of racial, religious fault lines', bring to mind two measures that may encourage meaningful integration of naturalised citizens with 'true-blue Singaporeans'.

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan, in calling on new citizens to make an effort to become 'true-blue Singaporeans', said he noticed that some new citizens appear to make no conscious effort to integrate or learn spoken English.

This prompts the question: Why are we giving citizenship to people who cannot communicate in Singapore's lingua franca?

Most naturalised citizens come from China. While they can converse in one official language, they are not equipped to have any meaningful interaction with minority Singaporeans and Chinese Singaporeans who do not speak Mandarin.

Not surprisingly, Mr Mah is concerned about new citizens forming cliques in their own communities.

To reduce the likelihood of ethnic enclaves becoming a problem, the Government should require future citizenship applicants to pass an English language test.

Pointing out the threat of racial and religious disharmony to Singapore's stability, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng said the Government's key approach to managing race and religion matters is to build common spaces in schools, communities, workplaces and national service.

However, national service is one area in which adult new citizens currently do not participate, and the Government should introduce a modified, shortened form for adult new citizens under the age of 40.

While it is true that they did not enjoy the benefits of citizenship during their childhood, they will enjoy these benefits for the rest of their lives.

They could learn the basics of army combat, policing or civil defence over a predetermined number of weekends, a practical compromise given work commitments.

Besides helping them integrate better with their new compatriots, the modified national service stint will also empower them to play an active role in Singapore's national defence or internal security.

After all, the enemy's bullet or bomb does not distinguish between naturalised and native-born Singaporeans.

Michael Ang

NSF gets five days’ detention

2009-07-26T07:15:00.000-07:00

Mindef needs to catch with the rest of the world with conscription and permit Conscientious objectors alternatives. Must Singaporeans always conform to the standards of military life in NS?

What about people who do not believe that it is right for them to do military service due to moral, religious or ethical grounds? At the moment such conscientious objectors are charged and imprisoned for the length of their service.

In some of the countries that have compulsory military service, there is also a provision for conscientious objectors to serve in non-combat roles. There is an argument that this would open the flood gates for men to opt for non-combat positions. Such a loophole can be plugged by increasing the length of active service by, say, six months. The experiences of other countries like Germany and Sweden have not been negative in this aspect where males try to avoid combat service by claiming to be conscientious objectors.

NSF gets five days’ detention

Channel NewsAsia - Sunday, July 26

SINGAPORE: A full—time National Serviceman was summarily tried on Friday under the Singapore Armed Forces Act for conduct prejudicial to good discipline. He was sentenced to five days’ detention at the SAF Detention Barracks.

Private Madana Mohan Das, a trainee driver, was charged with misconduct because he did not comply "with his superior’s lawful orders to cut his hair in conformance to SAF’s requirements and for refusal to consume food provided by the SAF", said Colonel Darius Lim, director of public affairs at the Ministry of Defence.

The sentence was backdated to Monday, when Pte Madana was put under close arrest. He has since complied with the requirements and was released from detention on Friday afternoon and returned to his unit.

Before being charged, he was given "ample opportunities" to cut his hair and to eat the food provided by the SAF, and his "repeated acts of misconduct" were "undermining discipline in the SAF", said Col Lim in reply to media queries.

"All SAF servicemen are to abide by SAF rules and regulations on military turnout and bearing, military discipline and lawfully given orders. Pte Madana was treated in the same way as any other SAF serviceman," he said.

"The SAF cannot allow deviations from its rules and regulations for any serviceman as this will weaken military discipline, which could compromise the SAF’s operational effectiveness and the safety of SAF servicemen. Disciplinary action will be taken against any serviceman who refuses to comply with the SAF’s rules and regulations."

TODAY has learnt, though, that during his Basic Military Training in December, Pte Madana’s unit accommodated his requests to keep his tuft of long hair, which he wanted to maintain because he was a Brahmin priest at a temple here. The unit also allowed his request to have home—cooked food to be delivered to him daily.

But these "accommodations were a mistake due to a lapse of judgment by his previous unit", Col Lim told TODAY, and when Pte Madana was posted to the SAF Transport Hub in March, this was explained to him.

His and his father’s appeals were rejected and the NSF was ordered to conform to SAF regulations, which he did not, added Col Lim.

TODAY understands he brought in food from the temple when he booked out on Tuesday and Thursday evenings and on weekends, since he did not consume SAF food.

Singapore Brahmin Association president G Srinivasan told TODAY that Brahmin priests ordinarily eat only food cooked from their temple, "prepared according to tradition and with prayers".

But while he was "a bit" concerned to hear about Pte Madana’s case, he said that if this food is not available, "then food from outside is permissible as long as it is vegetarian from an acceptable source, like a vegetarian restaurant, house or temple".

He also said that while it would have been good if Pte Madana could have kept his hair, known as a sikha, the NSF would have to "follow the rule of the land" if there are no provisions for this.

Asked why exceptions are made for Sikhs serving NS, Col Lim said: "Sikhs serving in the SAF are allowed to wear turbans only because this is a carry—over from the past.

"This is a long—established practice going back decades to colonial times. We cannot allow further exceptions to be made today for other servicemen. Allowing further exceptions would undermine what we have achieved so far to make sure that our rules, regulations and standards are fair to all.

"This will be detrimental to not only the security needs of the nation, but will also weaken the strong national identity that NS forges amongst its servicemen." — TODAY/ra

Mum wants to ban NS men from taking buses

2009-07-24T20:40:00.000-07:00

Mum wants to ban NS men from taking buses

http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=106544671793&h=1NQZg&u=JzZiV&ref=nf

A Netizen who claimed to be a mother of two girls made a post in an online forum recently, demanding that NS men be banned from taking public buses because they are dirty and smelly.

The post drew furore from other forum members, who have called the poster insensitive and disrespectful towards NS men.

The Netizen, who goes by the username JusticeLegal, described an unpleasant bus ride on 10 July which prompted her to propose the ban.

JusticeLegal said that she was bringing her children home from Downtown East when a group of "army boys" boarded the bus with them. The NS men were sweaty and smelled, and soon the Netizen's daughters were "making sick faces" at her.

The Netizen proposed that SAF ban soldiers from taking the bus, reasoning that the pay NS men get should be enough to pay for taxi rides.

She also said that the soldiers, having just returned to Singapore from Tekkong, might have contacted "germs and viruses" and might spread the diseases to others.

Calling the NS men "smelly green things", JusciceLegal said in her post that her two daughters should be spared the eyesore.

If she had a grandson in the future, the Netizen said that she would teach him to be a responsible citizen and take a cab, or wait for her to fetch him.

The forum thread, which has since attracted some 900 replies, was started on 17 July. A large majority of replies expressed anger at JusticeLegal's comments with many saying that the Netizen should at least recognize the contributions of NS men.

See sgforums link http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/368533

If I am a Malaysian

2009-07-07T20:07:00.000-07:00

The paragraph below was pulled from this letter and it really frustrates me that the government is saddling our Singapore males with NS and reservist training as well as yearly IPPT. In today's competitive environment and I'm talking about the private sector, a moment's delay can mean a make or break business deal. How many NSmen have lost opportunities in life and for what? A thank you note from MINDEF? Thanks but no thanks. This PR made a smart move as he was willing to move out of his comfort zone, he reaps the benefits of this move. What about us Singaporeans? What can we do? Move to JB, PR in Malaysia? Ironic isn't?

"Unfortunately, our greatest selling point to foreign talents is also dissuading them from settling down here permanently. What additional advantages does being a citizen have over a PR?

I failed my last IPPT and has to go for remedial training thrice a week. Can you imagine the hassle and torture of reporting to Khatib Camp to run 2.4km after a long and hectic day? Due to my frequent travels, I have to apply for deferments often. There was once I forgot and I received a letter from SAF almost immediately threatening to charge me.

My relative, however, have no such concerns. He has zero NS obligations at all - no ICTs, RTs, mob-manning and whatsoever. He can concentrate fully on his work and career. He does not care a bit about local politics. His aim is simply to make money here. His son is born in Malaysia, but studying in Singapore. He need not worry about him having to go through NS when he grows up.

Foreigners flock to Singapore in search of a better life. If they are willing to turn their backs on their homeland and become Singapore citizens in the first place, how patriotic can they be? How many of these new citizens give up their pink ICs later?

J.F. Kennedy once said: “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.”

Most Singapore males have served 2 years of national service followed by over 10 years of reservist training. Are we getting a fair deal from our country?"

http://wayangparty.com/?p=10426

If I am a Malaysian

July 8, 2009 by admin

By Fang Zhi Yuan

There are a few letters to the Malaysian media lately from Malaysian PRs and Singapore citizens whose parents are Malaysians about the ugly side of Singapore which has sparked a furore amongst Singaporeans who are indignified by the “ingratitude” shown by their brethen across the causeway.

What if I am a Malaysian working in Singapore? How will I plot my future and that of my children? Will I take up the Singapore citizenship or continue being just a PR to enjoy the best of both worlds?

Let’s imagine I was born in a middle class Chinese family in Johor Bahru. My family is not exactly that rich, but pretty well off by ordinary Malaysian standards.

My father run a small family business, like the majority of the Chinese in Malaysia and I live in a terraced house on the outskirts of the city.

After finishing my primary education in Johor, I was sent packing to continue my secondary education in Singapore. I went through the Singapore education system till university where I graduated with a Bachelor degree in Engineering.

As a Malaysian with no National Service obligations, I entered the workforce two years earlier than my Singapore counterparts. Within 6 months of working, I was offered to take up Permanent Residency in Singapore which I gladly obliged.

Singapore has been good to me. It gave me an education, a job and a future, opportunities which I will never be able to get in Malaysia as a result of the racist bumiputra policy.

Two years later, I was invited to become a Singapore citizen which threw me into a dilemma as I will have to give up my Malaysian citizenship, not that I was particularly loyal to my country of birth.

Malaysia has always been close to my heart though the government does not treat the ethnic minorities particularly well.

My parents, relatives and friends are all in Malaysia. There is a kampung spirit and human touch which is absent in Singapore. Despite living here for a number of years, I do not feel a sense of belonging.

If I become a Singapore citizen, I will now have to contribute 20% of my monthly pay to the CPF which will effectively tie me down here in the future.

My children will naturally become Singapore citizens and my sons will be mandated to serve two years of National Service under the law.

Other than being entitled to slightly higher education and healthcare subsidies, becoming a citizen does not confer any additional advantages over a PR.

After much contemplation, I have decided to maintain the status quo. My children were born in Johor as Malaysian citizens. I plan to enrol them in a Singapore school. There is little doubt that the Singapore education system is far superior than that in Malaysia.

My children will be brought up enjoying the best of both worlds. Singapore schools are well recognized worldwide. It will be a springboard for them to further their education elsewhere. At the same time, my boy need not waste two years of his precious life to serve the Singapore army.

I will leave the decision whether to become Singapore citizens to my children. As for myself, I do not intend to retire in Singapore. Life is too tough and stressful here.

Being still a Malaysian citizen, I am entitled to a housing grant which I intend to use to purchase a bungalow in Johor as a retirement home which cost about RM$500,000, the price of a three-room HDB flat in Singapore.

Had I remained in Malaysia, I will probably not achieve so much in life. I am thankful to the Singapore government for giving me the opportunity to study and work in Singapore. However, I want the best for myself and my family and Singapore is not quite the place to set up home when there are greener pastures elsewhere.

I have done my part and contributed to the Singapore economy. I do not intend to work till the day I drop dead. I want to retire and spend time with my children and grandchildren without having to worry about healthcare expenses.

Should I forfeit my Malaysian citizenship and become a Singaporean or continue to make money here and retire in my hometown?

Over the years, many Malaysians have worked in Singapore and become Permanent Residents. What percentage of these PRs have taken up citizenship?

Given a choice, would you prefer to be born in Singapore as a citizen or as a PR born in Malaysia?

The above account is not entirely fictitious. It is adapted from the personal life of a relative who is in the top echelon of a statutory board. In spite of numerous invitations by the government to him to become a Singapore citizen, he has adamantly refused to do so.

The Singapore government makes no distinction between locals and foreigners. We welcome foreigners with open arms. They are given equal opportunities as locals to succeed in Singapore.

Unfortunately, our greatest selling point to foreign talents is also dissuading them from settling down here permanently. What additional advantages does being a citizen have over a PR?

J.F. Kennedy once said: “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.”

Most Singapore males have served 2 years of national service followed by over 10 years of reservist training. Are we getting a fair deal from our country?

2009-07-07T06:08:00.000-07:00

How much of this budget is used to prop up money losing GLCs that are dependant on MINDEF contracts? Are their books open and is there any accountability? A larger budget could have been used on education or even creating more jobs for Singaporeans instead of supporting the "chiak liau bees". But then again, this is Singapore and we screw things up differently.

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/07/singapore-to-have-one-of-the-highest-defence-budget-in-the-world-in-2009/

Singapore to have one of the highest defence budget in the world in 2009

Tuesday, 7 July 2009, 5:51 pm

Defence spending around the world (click to enlarge)

From Official Wire:

Singapore’s defence spending will amount to US$11.4bn or 6% of GDP in 2009. As a percentage of GDP, this amounts to one of the biggest defence budgets in recent history.

Singapore has consistently had one of the largest defence budgets in the Asia Pacific region. Given its small population base, Singapore has focused on maintaining its expenditure on sophisticated and superior weaponry. Singapore has consistently spent over 4% of GDP on its defence budget. However, the principal recent development affecting the future of Singapore’s defence spending is the recent rapid deterioration in economic conditions.

Singapore was the first Asian economy to slip into recession in the current global downturn, and will move deeper into recession in 2009.

According to advance estimates by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), Singapore’s GDP registered a dismal seasonally-adjusted annualised contraction of 12.5% quarter-on-quarter (q-o-q) in Q408 (its worst performance since at least 1980), due to a sharp fall in the services sector. On a year-on-year (y-o-y) basis, GDP contracted by 2.6%, implying that full-year growth for 2008 slowed to just 1.4% from 7.7% in 2007. The manufacturing sector contracted by 9.0% y-o-y in Q408, due largely to falling demand for electronic products in developed markets and a plunge in output for precision engineering.

Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean has announced that defence spending will amount to US$11.4bn or 6% of GDP in 2009. As a percentage of GDP, this amounts to one of the biggest defence budgets in recent history. The Defence Minister stressed the importance of maintaining military spending, noting that threats do not diminish but, rather, often emerge during testing economic times, owing to increased social and political frictions. He noted several factors that had enabled Singapore to build up its defence capability over time: careful spending, sourcing and upgrading second-hand equipment, an ongoing maintenance regime, and investment into research and development.

In February 2009, the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) announced that they will participate in a US-led task force in the Gulf of Aden designed to target pirates operating in the Gulf and adjacent waterways.

Singapore will supply a landing ship tank, two helicopters and two-hundred personnel. Joining an international flotilla comprising some forty-five warships from Europe, China and Malaysia, the SAF deployment will help to escort vessels traversing the Arabian Sea, Indian Ocean, Red Sea and the Gulf.

Singapore Defence and Security Report Q2 2009

Picture from: Singapore’s defence spending ranked 4^th worldwide. Why?

Parents grieve death of NSman

2009-07-06T22:01:00.000-07:00

As a parent myself, I feel for the loss of their son while in NS. We sometimes live in fairy land and keep hoping that nothing will happen to our son while in NS. Was the loss of a life worth it? For nation and for county blah blah....

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_399594.html

Parents grieve death

Family has questions; Mindef says incident still being investigated

By Kimberly Spykerman
		Nicholas Chan Wei Kit was killed when an army land rover rolled back, pinning him underneath. -- PHOTO: MINDEF

HE WAS their only child. And the parents of Second Lieutenant Nicholas Chan Wei Kit, 21, are still unable to believe their son is gone after his sudden death last Friday afternoon at Seletar Camp, in which an army land rover rolled back, pinning him underneath.

A recovery vehicle was dispatched, although the Defence Ministry did not say how soon after the accident, to lift the vehicle off him. But 2LT Chan died in hospital of his injuries - a little more than an hour after he took over the vehicle.

His mother, a housewife, received a call at their flat in Bukit Batok, telling her that 'something had happened' to her son, and that he was in hospital. Together with her husband, an engineer, they rushed down. But by the time they got there, it was too late.

The family is still questioning what led to 2LT Chan's death. After all, he had been on military trips to Brunei and Taiwan, and had always returned safely.

His mother said she is still too distraught to probe much into the details of her son's death.

But one thing they want to know is whether any other military personnel were with their son at the time of the incident. The family said Mindef has told them that it cannot reveal this now as the matter is still under investigation.

What little they know is that 2LT Chan - a newly commissioned officer - was a Motor Transport Officer based in Jurong Camp. He had gone to the Seletar camp that day to collect the vehicle.

It is also not known if he was alone at the time but his mother said he could not have gone to collect the vehicle alone because he did not have a driving licence.

In between sobs, she said that her son would come back almost every night to the family home to have dinner before heading back to camp. She had been expecting him as usual last Friday evening - but he never showed up.

2LT Chan's cousins described him as a 'happy-go-lucky' and 'playful' person, with a keen eye for fashion. He had a passion for clothes, they said, and even chose to specialise in retail management as a student at Temasek Polytechnic.

Close friends also called him a 'cheeky and happy' man. Said his former Basic Military Training platoon mate Audi Khalid, 21: 'He was the life of the platoon.'

Please read the full story in Monday's edition of The Straits Times.

kimspyke@sph.com.sg

Full time NSman dies after being pinned by Land Rover during inspection

2009-07-03T19:53:00.000-07:00

Another Son of Singapore "sacrifices" for the country. Lesson for parents, in NS training, anything can happen! My condolences to the family.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/440208/1/.html

SINGAPORE: Full-time National Serviceman Second Lieutenant (2LT) Nicholas Chan Wei Kit died in hospital on Friday after a Land Rover he was inspecting rolled backwards and hit him, pinning him under the vehicle.

A statement from the Ministry of Defence says 2LT Chan, a Motor Transport Officer, was taking delivery of the SAF Land Rover in Seletar Camp at about 11.30am when the incident happened.

A recovery vehicle was activated half an hour later and managed to lift the Land Rover.

A medical team from the Seletar Medical Centre attempted to resuscitate 2LT Chan immediately. He was sent to Changi General Hospital where he was pronounced dead at 1.07pm.

Mindef and the SAF extend their deepest condolences to the family of the late 2LT Chan.

Mindef says it will assist the family in their time of grief. It is also investigating the incident.

Taiwan to replace compulsory military service with 4 months of training in 2015

2009-05-31T09:02:00.000-07:00

Repost from: http://www.facebook.com/board.php?uid=7893452702#/topic.php?uid=7893452702&topic=8218

Taiwan to replace compulsory military service with 4 months of training in 2015
10 March 2009
Taiwan News, Staff Writer
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=887510&lang=eng_news&cate_img=49.jpg&cate_rss=news_Society_TAIWAN

Taiwanese men will no longer be drafted into the military for compulsory military service beginning in 2015, the Ministry of National Defense announced yesterday. Instead, they will have to complete four months of training and have to stand by as reservists for eventual recalls, Defense Minister Chen Chao-min told lawmakers. "By the end of 2014, we will reach 100 percent voluntary military service," Chen said.

In his election platform last year, President Ma Ying-jeou had promised three months of training, but military experts found the period too short and added one month. Ma later accepted the extension, Chen said. The training period also avoids potential clashes with the Constitution, which stipulates citizens must serve in the military, but doesn't detail how.

Responding to criticism from opposition Democratic Progressive Party lawmaker Chai Trong-rong, the minister said that within one year he would also solve the Taiwanese military's image problem of having too many generals and not enough soldiers. Chen said he would tell those generals that their careers would not develop further. From 2011, the armed forces will cut the number of young men it wants for compulsory military service by 10 percent a year, Chen said. The abolition follows years of shrinking military service from an original three years for some to the current one year, which will not be shortened further.

Critics of the switch to a volunteer army have expressed concern about the cost of the operation and about the threat from China. The People's Liberation Army has targeted an estimated 1,500 missiles at Taiwan, while it has been increasing its budget and modernizing its equipment and technology. DPP lawmaker Tsai Huang-liang said at the Legislative Yuan yesterday that the change might lead to a lower quality of Taiwanese soldier, poorly trained and less able to fight the enemy. Tsai also criticized the military for reportedly relying on a more defensive strategy to be explained in its upcoming first-ever Quadrennial Defense Review, implying it equaled surrendering to China.

The policy's emphasis was "turning Taiwan into a strong fortress, scaring the enemy so they do not dare to attack Taiwan," Chen replied. Tsai said the policy amounted to giving up on air and naval warfare, allowing the enemy to advance onto land, and then just trying to hold out until reinforcements came from the United States. Chen denied the opposition lawmaker's accusations, saying the main aim was to keep the enemy away from Taiwan and deter him from landing. Chen also apologized to lawmakers for the loss of a navy and an air force computer reportedly containing classified material. The ministry was still investigating the matter, but he said a personal conflict was the more likely cause rather than spying by China.

The military also announced yesterday that it had been losing pilots at an alarming rate. An estimated 699 pilots left the military over a decade, leaving the air force with only about 100 in 2007. Of those who left, about 360 had not yet reached retirement age, reports said. Chen denied reports yesterday that a new think tank was specifically aimed at promoting contacts with rival China's military. The plans for the new body were just a general effort by the Ministry of National Defense to set up a platform for international exchanges, Chen told reporters. He compared the future think tank with similar organizations formed by sections of the United States military.

The minister also denied that the organization would provide an opportunity for senior Taiwanese military officers to visit China in the capacity of academics. Newspaper reports Sunday said the think tank would focus on raising mutual trust between the military establishments of Taiwan and China. The new body would originally resort under the umbrella of the renowned Institute of International Relations at Taipei's National Chengchi University, but the Cabinet insisted it should have administrative status, reports said.

Recruit dies after booking 10 mins

2009-05-23T19:13:00.000-07:00

Sigh, another Singaporean male sacrifices for our great country. When it is your son that pays the price, let's see what you are going to say. God's will? Was it God's will that forced your son to be conscripted? Your son is still young and things may change in 10 years time? I waited 10 years and things didn't really change much except for a reduction of 6 months to the time served. 10 years ago I had also hoped that something will be done about NS and didn't bother at all. Most of the countries with conscription are adopting 1 year or less unless they are in a war zone. Are we in a war zone? Twenty years ago the situation was unsettling because of Malaysia and Indonesia. But, in the 21st century?

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_380646.html

Recruit dies after booking out 10 min-->

AN ARMY recruit leaving Pulau Tekong on a ferry on Thursday night after booking out of camp became delirious during the journey to the mainland.

After Mr Liam Kai Zheng, 19, got off the boat at the Singapore Armed Forces' ferry terminal in Changi, he was taken in an ambulance to the Changi General Hospital, where he died nine hours later on Friday morning.

Paramedics had found him unconscious at the foyer of the terminal with an abnormally high pulse rate and temperature. The cause of death is still being determined.

Mr Liam had recently completed a four-day field camp before checking out of the Basic Military Training Centre in Pulau Tekong on Thursday night.

The junior college graduate, whom friends said enlisted last month, was said to be 'soft-spoken but very cheerful'. Said one of them: 'He...had a smile on, no matter what he was doing.'

TEH JOO LIN

Son Died During NS, MP No Empathy

2009-05-13T07:31:00.000-07:00

How many sons do Singaporeans have to lose? The state should exempt the second son from NS as the first son died serving NS. Can the state guarantee that nothing will happen to this son?

http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC090513-0000097/Online-Only---MP-had-no-empathyLetter-from-LAWRENCE-LOH-KIAH-MUAN

MP had no empathy
Letter from LAWRENCE LOH KIAH MUAN
Updated 10:07 PM May 13, 2009

It started with Member of Parliament (MP) Seng Han Thong being set on fire. Then came MP Denise Phua who was threatened by a rag-and-bone man. Recently, MP Cynthia Phua was subjected to a display of violence by a constituent.

Although these incidents are disturbing and a cause for concern, I wonder whether the constituents are solely to be blamed.

Allow me to relate my personal experience.

In February 2001, my older son died in a naval accident whilst serving National Service. In that year, my younger son was due for enlistment. A friend, a very active grassroots member, suggested that I approach my MP, for help in exploring the possibility of getting an exemption for my younger son. I was reluctant but he went ahead to fix an appointment for me at the Meet-The-People Session (MPS). I subsequently relented and he accompanied me there. It was in March 2001. That was my first appearance at a MPS, and it was to be my last.

I waited until midnight before I could meet the MP. Prior to this, he was given the case paper which detailed the objective of the meeting and the circumstances of my case.

When I entered the room, his first remark was “Yes, what can I do for you?”. There was no attempt at offering a word of sympathy or condolence. I then related my situation and said that both my wife and I were very traumatised.

His next remark “What traumatic, after two months, you won’t be traumatic?”. With that, I decided to end the meeting. And with that, my respect for him hit ground zero. I was too stunned and grief-stricken to react. Someone who was less-controlled and less-measured than me could have flown into a rage and become violent.

MPs are elected or appointed to serve the constituents. People who attend the MPS are those who have real problems and need help. In a lot of instances, they are stressed, distressed and troubled. What they need is a caring soul, a helping hand, a gentle voice, and words of hope and encouragement. To dispense these, MPs need good interpersonal skills and a high EQ. Arrogance, a patronizing, chiding and belittling attitude, aloofness and lack of empathy will only trigger acts of rashness and violence. Many of our politicians have a high IQ, some are scholars. However, a high IQ is not the only attribute needed in a political career. A high EQ is equally, if not more critical, especially when it comes to dealing with the constituents.

In my case, I would have felt good if my MP could have been a warm and caring person. If he could have been empathetic, consoling and helpful. All these qualities can only come from the heart, not from the mind.

How many of our MPs can stand up and be counted for this?

Our bloated defence budget: A swift and decisive victory

2009-04-13T02:38:00.000-07:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=7630
By Gunslinger, Guest Columnist
The need for deterrence against potential aggressors is indisputable for this city state. In fact, there is a very strong case for deterrence and there is historical precedence that small states in the correct context with the right capabilities can achieve this. During World War 2, land locked Switzerland avoided Nazi Germany’s invasion through its difficult mountainous terrain, its citizen army, sheer grit and pride and without doubt a little complicity.

Yet, it would be interesting to see how the SAF might attempt to achieve a swift and decisive victory should deterrence fail. A military victory is usually defined as meeting military objectives that would fulfil political objectives. Thus, we would need to estimate what might be the SAF’s military objectives.

For this, Tim Huxley’s “Defending the Lion City” is revealing. Singapore’s leaders evidently believe that the best defence is offence and this is reflected in the order of battle of the SAF: amphibious landing ship tanks; heavy troop lift helicopters; F-16s and F-15s with conformal fuel tanks (increased striking range), the latter being F-15E Strike Eagles on steroids; air refuelling tankers; main battle tanks etc. The concept of “forward defence” described by Tim Huxley is therefore quite apt. With such offensive and power projection capabilities, she is probably more keen on punishing an aggressor, hitting where it really hurts and causing some long term damage rather than just beating off an attack.

This concept becomes even more credible when the nature of the national service is considered. Previously two and a half years of service for most young men, it was shortened a few years ago to two years. However, this should be considered a very lengthy period for a country outside a war zone or hot spot. Taiwan has only a 1 year conscription period and are considering a fully professional military force by 2014. Furthermore, the conscripts are not only trained in basic warfare but probably go through at least one exercise at the brigade or even divisional level.

On the MINDEF website, you would find information on overseas training exercises such as Wallaby in Australia resembling major combat operations. With emphasis on combined arms and integrated air force army operations, it is not unfathomable that the SAF’s defensive doctrine involve invading an aggressor. After all, Singapore’s urban areas are hardly the best places to run divisional level combined arms, with air force support.

The necessity of a short and brutal war is obviously not lost on Singapore’s Ivy League leaders. This is reflected in the SAF’s mission, doctrine and composition. It is unlikely that the SAF would or could persecute a protracted war. After all, mobilising her entire reserve forces would grind her economy to an abrupt halt. The composition of the RSAF’s offensive capabilities is also probably scaled to inflict maximum damage in the shortest time possible.

Geopolitics have immense influence in this region where one of the world’s most important shipping lanes passes through. Today, an estimated 80% and 90% of China’s and Japan’s energy supplies respectively pass through the Malacca Straits. Singapore is also a vital port and transit point for American forces between the Indian and Pacific oceans. Any armed conflict will certainly invite “international” condemnation, swift economic sanctions, international pressure and even military intervention.

MINDEF constantly reminds the Singapore public (through their website) about the British failure to defend Singapore during WW2, and that the SAF is the only guarantor for security. While there is some truth in it, they also conveniently avoid mentioning that Singapore would probably have been a much easier target without the British. They also forget to add that all countries will dash headlong to protect their own vital interests. The international community will not allow the Malacca straits to be turned into a war zone as too much is at stake for them. International action against piracy at the Horn of Africa and Japanese proactive participation in keeping the Malacca straits free of pirates are further proof. Numerous factors converge to limit the scale of a armed conflict that would threaten trade through the Malacca Straits.

Using Israel’s latest experience in Gaza and in Lebanon in 2006, the SAF would have no more than about 3 weeks to 1 month to achieve her objectives before being forced to the negotiating table for a ceasefire. This is an optimistic estimate given that Singapore does not have much leverage over the major powers nor does she have the powerful congressional lobbies that Israel possesses and uses to great effect.

Given the need to achieve a “swift and decisive victory” in this short time frame, the SAF faces a nearly impossible task although this article does not intend to cast doubt on her doubtlessly impressive operational capabilities. In fact, we shall assume that the SAF would face little opposition in a conventional face off with the Malaysia armed forces.

Yet, the ultra urbanisation of Singapore and to a lesser extent southern Johor poses immense problems to any invading army. Civilian casualties and collateral damage are almost impossible to avoid, resulting in loss of legitimacy and increased pressure to end hostilities. Case in point, the Israelis had to stop their operations in Lebanon in 2006 due to international pressure although they had international support at the beginning of the war.

Armies also advance at a snail’s pace in urban areas. The Pakistani army took more than 6 months to rout the Taliban in the tribal controlled areas which are dotted with little villages, unlike the dense cities in Singapore and southern Johor. In the process, they also had to bulldoze most of the villages. The SAF is therefore faced with a quagmire : avoid the urban zones and risk artillery and rocket attacks fired from these areas or enter the zones and fight protracted bloody battles.

Neither option is pretty. While the attacks may not do serious physical damage, the psychological damage could be severe, demonstrating the inefficacy of the SAF in defending against primitive rocket or artillery attacks. So in fact, the SAF would be forced to enter these zones to attempt to control them and stop the attacks. However, the recent Israeli wars have shown that it is impossible to stop them, despite the fact that the Israelis possessed one of the most effective armies in the world as well as the most technologically advanced weaponry available. They fared better recently in Gaza but at immense cost in terms of collateral damage and legitimacy of their cause. The ensuing international outrage is now threatening their trade status with the European Union.

A conventional conflict also assumes that both parties are intent on pitting their conventional forces against each other. An opponent can choose to prolong the conflict while preserving her forces. Such a strategy will bear down on Singapore’s weaknesses, wearing down her forces and economy while rallying for a strategic attack at the right time.

This strategy (not tactic) is in fact employed throughout the world by terrorist organisations. The Malaysian armed forces already appears to understand the concept of preserving forces, placing her most valued military assets out of easy reach from Singapore. Their newest Sukhoi-30MKM will be based in northern West Malaysia, yet they still have the range to strike the city state. Their new state of the art Scorpene submarines will be based in Sepanggar Bay in Sabah.

Even in the unlikely case where Singapore does achieve a “swift and decisive victory”, the effects of a war will have far greater and longer lasting effects on her than on any of her neighbours even after a cease fire. Wanting to avenge themselves, an intelligent adversary will bleed Singapore slowly to economic disaster with occasional skirmishes and plenty of rhetoric.

Without a hinterland or natural resources, she will be forced to look further afield to import her daily needs. The increased cost of doing business would drive away investors. Local SMEs already deprived of an adequate domestic market will be put out of business. Increased security measures needed to guard against ex-enemies will strain resources. In this context, war is not the best way to bring down Singapore. Bleeding her to death would be much easier and cheaper. This has not yet happened because it is much more profitable to cooperate with her.

This does not mean that Singapore is not defendable. It is certainly defendable. As an island, invading forces need to possess a significant amphibious or bridging capability since trying to dash the causeway or the second link, which might be blown up, under fire is suicidal.

The urban environment is a huge booby trap and makes it difficult for an invader to control the terrain and progress quickly to key objectives. These are “natural” obstacles that are extremely difficult to overcome even without significant participation of armed resistance. But this article is long enough, and I will present an alternative defence policy later and an alternative NS policy. For now, it suffice to say that MINDEF’s policies are misguided, do not take into account today’s realities and will not bring “swift and decisive victory”. Taxpayer’s money has been wasted in pursuing this current defence strategy and our youths do not need to go through a 2 year NS period.

Our bloated defence budget: A swift and decisive victory

2009-04-11T23:26:00.000-07:00

Our bloated defence budget: A swift and decisive victory
http://wayangparty.com/?p=7630

By Darth Vader, Guest Columnist
The need for deterrence against potential aggressors is indisputable for this city state. In fact, there is a very strong case for deterrence and there is historical precedence that small states in the correct context with the right capabilities can achieve this. During World War 2, land locked Switzerland avoided Nazi Germany’s invasion through its difficult mountainous terrain, its citizen army, sheer grit and pride and without doubt a little complicity.

Yet, it would be interesting to see how the SAF might attempt to achieve a swift and decisive victory should deterrence fail. A military victory is usually defined as meeting military objectives that would fulfil political objectives. Thus, we would need to estimate what might be the SAF’s military objectives.

For this, Tim Huxley’s “Defending the Lion City” is revealing. Singapore’s leaders evidently believe that the best defence is offence and this is reflected in the order of battle of the SAF: amphibious landing ship tanks; heavy troop lift helicopters; F-16s and F-15s with conformal fuel tanks (increased striking range), the latter being F-15E Strike Eagles on steroids; air refuelling tankers; main battle tanks etc. The concept of “forward defence” described by Tim Huxley is therefore quite apt. With such offensive and power projection capabilities, she is probably more keen on punishing an aggressor, hitting where it really hurts and causing some long term damage rather than just beating off an attack.

This concept becomes even more credible when the nature of the national service is considered. Previously two and a half years of service for most young men, it was shortened a few years ago to two years. However, this should be considered a very lengthy period for a country outside a war zone or hot spot. Taiwan has only a 1 year conscription period and are considering a fully professional military force by 2014. Furthermore, the conscripts are not only trained in basic warfare but probably go through at least one exercise at the brigade or even divisional level.

On the MINDEF website, you would find information on overseas training exercises such as Wallaby in Australia resembling major combat operations. With emphasis on combined arms and integrated air force army operations, it is not unfathomable that the SAF’s defensive doctrine involve invading an aggressor. After all, Singapore’s urban areas are hardly the best places to run divisional level combined arms, with air force support.

The necessity of a short and brutal war is obviously not lost on Singapore’s Ivy League leaders. This is reflected in the SAF’s mission, doctrine and composition. It is unlikely that the SAF would or could persecute a protracted war. After all, mobilising her entire reserve forces would grind her economy to an abrupt halt. The composition of the RSAF’s offensive capabilities is also probably scaled to inflict maximum damage in the shortest time possible.

Geopolitics have immense influence in this region where one of the world’s most important shipping lanes passes through. Today, an estimated 80% and 90% of China’s and Japan’s energy supplies respectively pass through the Malacca Straits. Singapore is also a vital port and transit point for American forces between the Indian and Pacific oceans. Any armed conflict will certainly invite “international” condemnation, swift economic sanctions, international pressure and even military intervention.

MINDEF constantly reminds the Singapore public (through their website) about the British failure to defend Singapore during WW2, and that the SAF is the only guarantor for security. While there is some truth in it, they also conveniently avoid mentioning that Singapore would probably have been a much easier target without the British. They also forget to add that all countries will dash headlong to protect their own vital interests. The international community will not allow the Malacca straits to be turned into a war zone as too much is at stake for them. International action against piracy at the Horn of Africa and Japanese proactive participation in keeping the Malacca straits free of pirates are further proof. Numerous factors converge to limit the scale of a armed conflict that would threaten trade through the Malacca Straits.

Using Israel’s latest experience in Gaza and in Lebanon in 2006, the SAF would have no more than about 3 weeks to 1 month to achieve her objectives before being forced to the negotiating table for a ceasefire. This is an optimistic estimate given that Singapore does not have much leverage over the major powers nor does she have the powerful congressional lobbies that Israel possesses and uses to great effect.

Given the need to achieve a “swift and decisive victory” in this short time frame, the SAF faces a nearly impossible task although this article does not intend to cast doubt on her doubtlessly impressive operational capabilities. In fact, we shall assume that the SAF would face little opposition in a conventional face off with the Malaysia armed forces.

Yet, the ultra urbanisation of Singapore and to a lesser extent southern Johor poses immense problems to any invading army. Civilian casualties and collateral damage are almost impossible to avoid, resulting in loss of legitimacy and increased pressure to end hostilities. Case in point, the Israelis had to stop their operations in Lebanon in 2006 due to international pressure although they had international support at the beginning of the war.

Armies also advance at a snail’s pace in urban areas. The Pakistani army took more than 6 months to rout the Taliban in the tribal controlled areas which are dotted with little villages, unlike the dense cities in Singapore and southern Johor. In the process, they also had to bulldoze most of the villages. The SAF is therefore faced with a quagmire : avoid the urban zones and risk artillery and rocket attacks fired from these areas or enter the zones and fight protracted bloody battles.

Neither option is pretty. While the attacks may not do serious physical damage, the psychological damage could be severe, demonstrating the inefficacy of the SAF in defending against primitive rocket or artillery attacks. So in fact, the SAF would be forced to enter these zones to attempt to control them and stop the attacks. However, the recent Israeli wars have shown that it is impossible to stop them, despite the fact that the Israelis possessed one of the most effective armies in the world as well as the most technologically advanced weaponry available. They fared better recently in Gaza but at immense cost in terms of collateral damage and legitimacy of their cause. The ensuing international outrage is now threatening their trade status with the European Union.

A conventional conflict also assumes that both parties are intent on pitting their conventional forces against each other. An opponent can choose to prolong the conflict while preserving her forces. Such a strategy will bear down on Singapore’s weaknesses, wearing down her forces and economy while rallying for a strategic attack at the right time.

This strategy (not tactic) is in fact employed throughout the world by terrorist organisations. The Malaysian armed forces already appears to understand the concept of preserving forces, placing her most valued military assets out of easy reach from Singapore. Their newest Sukhoi-30MKM will be based in northern West Malaysia, yet they still have the range to strike the city state. Their new state of the art Scorpene submarines will be based in Sepanggar Bay in Sabah.

Even in the unlikely case where Singapore does achieve a “swift and decisive victory”, the effects of a war will have far greater and longer lasting effects on her than on any of her neighbours even after a cease fire. Wanting to avenge themselves, an intelligent adversary will bleed Singapore slowly to economic disaster with occasional skirmishes and plenty of rhetoric.

Without a hinterland or natural resources, she will be forced to look further afield to import her daily needs. The increased cost of doing business would drive away investors. Local SMEs already deprived of an adequate domestic market will be put out of business. Increased security measures needed to guard against ex-enemies will strain resources. In this context, war is not the best way to bring down Singapore. Bleeding her to death would be much easier and cheaper. This has not yet happened because it is much more profitable to cooperate with her.

This does not mean that Singapore is not defendable. It is certainly defendable. As an island, invading forces need to possess a significant amphibious or bridging capability since trying to dash the causeway or the second link, which might be blown up, under fire is suicidal.

The urban environment is a huge booby trap and makes it difficult for an invader to control the terrain and progress quickly to key objectives. These are “natural” obstacles that are extremely difficult to overcome even without significant participation of armed resistance. But this article is long enough, and I will present an alternative defence policy later and an alternative NS policy. For now, it suffice to say that MINDEF’s policies are misguided, do not take into account today’s realities and will not bring “swift and decisive victory”. Taxpayer’s money has been wasted in pursuing this current defence strategy and our youths do not need to go through a 2 year NS period.

National Service and the open door policy

2009-04-11T23:12:00.000-07:00

National Service and the open door policy
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=2512

Ramifications of the intertwine between NS and open door policy towards foreigners
By Kelvin Teo ⋅ April 12, 2009

SINGAPORE - On the way back home on the bus from work one day, I overheard a conversation between a Singaporean and his foreign counterpart (FC). It went like this:

FC: What is the purpose of Singaporeans doing National Service?
Local: Supposingly to defend Singapore against perceived threats.
FC: So you will be trained to defend Singapore against potential enemies?Local (in a cynical, albeit jovial tone): If Singapore has a war, I will not be around to protect you. I think you better make your own life raft so that you will be able to jump the Singapore ship and go somewhere safe.

This conversation sums up the deep resentment among NS men towards the open door policy towards foreigners. A typical Singaporean with NS obligations is disadvantaged vis-a-vis his foreign counterparts because of the need to serve yearly in-camp trainings (ICT), which can be up to the maximum of one month. If ICT is not enough, those who fail to pass their physical fitness test (IPPT) have to attend Remedial Training (RT). If the
RT is scheduled on a week day, the NS man has to leave his office early. And there has been feedbacks that employers do ask prospective employees their extent of NS obligations during job interviews. This has happened before in my case, and my peers had the same experience.

Thus, it is not surprising that NS obligations are seen as a form of liability in the face of competition from foreigners who do not have such obligations. I managed to do some catching up with my fellow NS peers when I went back for my annual ICT last week. The news wasn’t that rosy. A good number suffered pay cuts. One got retrenched. On top of ICT, this chap for one reason or another couldn’t pass his IPPT despite the RT training. His work place brought in cheaper foreign workers, and he was unceremoniously told to leave. Now, he is working for a fast food chain, earning $3.50 an hour.

It is not far from the truth to assert that the sight of the SAF100 (an SAF form notifying NS men of their upcoming ICT) is a morale sapper. On the ground, it is not uncommon for NS men to find ways and means to obtain excuse from their NS duties firstly (read MC), and attend to their work committments next.

Ironic, isn’t it? The point of NS is to protect the livelihood of Singaporeans. Except that now it is perceived as a form of threat to livelihood. And it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to assert that this question has gone through the heads of a number of our NS men at one point of time or another - what’s the point of doing NS when my livelihood is already threatened (by the open door policy towards foreigners)? For the cynical ones, they are already asking this question - why should I protect foreigners who threaten my livelihood?

The sad thing is that despite the fanfare of the Five Pillars of Defence, the intertwining of NS with the open door policy towards foreigners is surely not doing any favors to our Psychological Defence (one of the five pillars).
With the current fallout from the global financial crisis, the retrenchment exercise will undoubtedly go into overdrive mode. Due to the downsizing of the current work force, employees are saddled with increased workloads and responsibilities. The last thing on their mind is an SAF100 telling them to report for an ICT or a reminder to attend their RT. And for those keeping their fingers crossed in the hope of keeping their jobs, they wouldn’t want their NS liabilities to affect their evaluation.

Surely now would be the time for our Ministry of Defence (Mindef) to exercise some form of flexibility. For starters, Mindef can exercise more leeway in granting deferment, especially in the case of NS men who have to take on additional responsibilities and workload due to the down-sizing of the work force. Ditto for IPPT training where NS men can be given flexibility to select schedules that best fit the interests of their work place instead of sticking to one chosen fixed schedule under the current system. In fact, the system can be made NS men-friendly in allowing them to pick their most convenient dates.

During this period when the economy is in its downward spiral, shouldn’t MINDEF adopt a flexible approach and assist our NS men instead of hindering them during moments of such crisis? Granted that MINDEF can always come up with this arguement that operational readiness will be affected if it adopts a flexible approach, a good rhetorical question would be - would our military want to appear operationally ready on the surface, but with its soldiers already deflated psychologically? What then is the difference between an army of deflated soldiers and a non-existent army?

Our bloated defence budget: What is the perceived threat?

2009-04-11T18:41:00.000-07:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=7607

By Gunslinger, Guest Columnist
While many prominent Singapore bloggers have written about the top civil servant who splurged on a cooking class in Paris and about the inadequacies of the 2009 budget in aiding the needy, none has complained about the 6% dollar increase in the 2009 defense budget to $11.447 billion, which is about 4.7% of 2007’s GDP of S$243.2 billion. The 2008 defence budget of S$10.8 billion is 4.4% of 2007 GDP, and with a nearly flat GDP growth for 2008, Singapore is actually committing more to defence.

GDP Growth Defence Budget (S$ BN) Budget Growth Remarks
FY 2000 10.06% 7.42 -%Actual Expenses
FY 2001 -2.44% 7.82 5.35%Actual Expenses
FY 2002 4.18% 8.2 4.91%Actual Expenses
FY 2003 3.50% 8.24 0.39%Actual Expenses
FY 2004 8.99% 8.62 4.66%Actual Expenses
FY 2005 7.30% 9.25 7.31%Actual Expenses
FY 2006 8.17% 9.63 4.11%Actual Expenses
FY 2007 7.72% 10.01 3.95%Actual Expenses
FY 2008 3.98% 10.8 7.89%Approved Budget
FY 2009 -???% 11.45 6.02%Approved Budget
Source: Ministry of Finance

Why the increase in the defence budget?
To put things in perspective, let’s take a look at how much others spend on defence relative to their GDP. The US spends 4.06% of her GDP on defence but does not include the current war expenses in Afghanistan or Iraq. France spends 2.6% and most other western nations spend 2% or less. Singapore is ranked 20th with 4.5% (2005). It is interesting to note that the top 19 countries are mostly developing nations in trouble spots such as the middle east and Africa. India is a distant #66 with 2.5%. This does not imply that Singapore should follow “western standards” in planning defence budgetary layouts. It only indicates that the government of Singapore must perceive a threat in order to commit such a large proportion to defence in the midst of her worst economic crisis.
Thus, what is the perceived threat? Terrorism is the first obvious answer that comes to mind. The last known “terrorist attack” in Singapore occurred in 1991 with the hijack of Singapore Flight 117 that ended abruptly and violently for the hijackers. A few years ago, Singapore was also threatened with 9/11 style aircraft attacks and embassy bombings. In contrast, some European nations have suffered actual attacks, which includes the 2004 Madrid train bombings and 2005 London bombings. The most recent attack of significance took place in Mumbai claiming the first Singaporean casualty to international terrorism. With the exception of India where the jury is still out, there has been no increase in the following year’s defense budgets of the scale that we now see in Singapore.
In the official publication “Fight Against Terror”, the government claims that while “terrorism does not threaten the existence of Singapore as an independent nation, it has the capacity to inflict serious shocks on our economy and society, causing not only material and human damage, but also psychological injury. It also has the potential to pit different communities against each other, weakening multi-racial, multi-religious character of Singapore that is vital to our success.” (Pg 59). While prevention is the best cure, it must be noted however that there has been no historical precedence showing that foreign investment will flee a country without considering the national capacity to handle the crisis that might ensue. Neither is the strain on the social fabric a uniquely Singaporean phenomenon. On the contrary, many societies, even divided ones have historically shown resilience and cohesion against a common external threat. The nationalistic American rally post 9/11 is an example. Nearer to Singapore, the peace accord between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Rebels after the 2004 Tsunami provides further cause for optimism.

Although the SAF is a key player in counter terrorism, she is not the only player. Her counter terrorist efforts can also be described as incidental. Today, conscripts guard key civilian installations such as Jurong Island without imposing on the budget. The security of air and maritime lanes of communications is a daily job that preoccupies most air and naval forces regardless of terrorism activities although the level of activities and vigilance is possibly higher. Yet, these activities should have been accounted for in the years following the 9/11 attacks. It is also widely recognized that while military forces are important, police forces, national intelligence and non security organizations play equally if not greater roles in attack prevention and post attack rehabilitation. Yet, no similar increase in budgets is noted in other Singaporean ministries in the 2009 budget.
Thus, we can safely conclude that the terrorism is not the dominant factor in augmenting the defense budget in the midst of an economic crisis. The perceived threat has to be external.

What is the perceived threat?
The stated mission of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is for deterrence. And if deterrence is to fail, its mission is to achieve a swift and decisive victory.

The question that one should ask is, deterrence against who and achieve a swift and decisive victory against who? This may be an open secret but let’s go back to basic geopolitics to see which state actor could pose a threat to the security of Singapore.

At the global level, there are currently few countries that have the capability to project their forces to threaten Singapore. In this aspect, the US military is unparalleled. If the US wanted to, the SAF would be of little consequence. The fact that Singapore has extremely close military ties with the US and that all her fighter aircraft are American practically rules out this possibility.

China, while a military giant in her own right, does not have power projection capabilities yet. While she is planning to build her own aircraft carrier(s), her strategy is clearly aimed at containing the US. Her main territorial interest is still Taiwan and keeping the country intact, and preventing the secessionist states of Xinjiang and Tibet from breaking away. Without air support and with long communications line, it is not inconceivable for her to be defeated at sea. Furthermore, any seaborne invading force that approaches narrow straits of Malacca or the narrow waters east of Singapore is exposed to air, sea and land attack. Another option is for China to approach via the land route. In all the described scenarios, an attack by China on Singapore is tantamount to starting World War III. This would not happen without intervention from at least the US. Finally, there is no motive for China to attack the tiny island state thousands of kilometres away.

Russia while trying to re-assert her influence on her borders, is but a pale shadow of her former self, the great Soviet Union. Even at the height of her power, she did not have the capability of projection like the US. Today, she has neither the will, the desire nor the capacity to threaten Singapore.
If you look into India’s strategic outlook, you will find that her priorities are firstly to keep the country together and secondly to contain Pakistan and China. Although she is nuclear and has a formidable conventional force and a somewhat “blue water navy”, she faces immense challenges on any military adventure in south east asia.

Today’s Japan is pacifist, and her forces are not configured for force projection nor for offensive operations. Merely supplying the US forces with a single supply ship had to be debated in Parliament, which eventually led to the cancellation of the said mission.
With regards to the other regional states, most can be ruled out for reasons of distance, lack of military capacity, natural obstacles, or internal problems.

With that, we have only Indonesia and Malaysia, the two closest neighbours to Singapore. Indonesia, the largest Muslim democracy in the world today, is extremely weak militarily relative to her size. Her equipment is old and obsolete with the exception of a few recently bought Sukhois. To highlight the state of derelict, the four Sukhois that were bought in 2003 are inactive, did not have compatible communication systems, and lacked weapons. Furthermore, the Indonesian military is still configured for counter-insurgency and non-conventional operations rather than conventional major combat operations and reforms continue to be extremely slow.

Finally, we come to Malaysia. Separated by a narrow strait, Malaysia is a hot destination for Singaporeans looking for cheap food, thrills and beaches. The Malaysian Armed Forces (MAF) has an impressive order of battle. These include Sukhoi-30MKMs, MiG-29s, F-18s, PT-91 main battle tanks from Poland, Astros MLRS, Scorpene submarines, Leiku class frigates and so on and so forth. Furthermore, relations has not always been good between the two countries. Disagreements between the leaders of both countries with regards to the “Bumiputra” policies led to the ejection of Singapore from the Federation of Malaya in 1965 and several disputes have soured relations in more recent years although relations are currently good. Nonetheless, of all the countries mentioned, Malaysia represents the most likely threat perceived by Singapore leaders.
(Read part 2 of this article “A swift decisive victory” tomorrow)

Mindef 2009 Budget to increase by 6%

2009-02-06T05:22:00.000-08:00

http://military-life.blogspot.com/2009/02/money-got-enough-defence-budget.html

Evidently, having a standing military force with the navy and airforce mostly comprising of professionals while the army continues to conscript its male citizens is not "free". It is a very expensive proposition because in 2008/09 Mindef asked for $10.6 billion for its budget. In 2009/10 they are asking for $11.45 b. This is no small change.

Jane's mentions that Malaysia spent US 4.5 b (taking 1.5 exchange rate is about SGD 6.75 b) but don't forget Malaysia includes Peninsular Malaysia (i.e. north of Singapore) and Sabah, Sarawak. The territories are wide and they have borders with Thailand to patrol as well as a long coastline that includes the Straits of Malacca.

Indonesia budgeted about US 3.9b (SGD 5.85b) for FY 2008 for defence and it is a country of thousands of islands an a population of close to 237 million people.

We are spending almost what both Indonesia and Malaysia spends combined and they have larger territory sovereignty to defend. In addition, they have hotspots to patrol. Malaysia's border with Southern Thailand is not exactly the most peaceful place in the Peninsula. Indonesia still has its far flung provinces of Papua and Irian Jaya to defend after Timor Leste gained independence.

I am not against scrapping our defence forces. The world is a dangerous place. Whilst diplomacy and friendly ties is the order of the day, the ability to defend yourself against potential aggressors and in today's world of Jemiah Islamiah and terrorism, defence is needed.

The question is HOW MUCH of defence then is needed and HOW should this defence be deployed using TAXPAYERS MONIES.

I am for a change in the system of defence. I see conscription as an anarchronism in today's age. It is not working effectively and efficiently to deliver a robust defence posture for the amount of resources we pour in.

Mindef has professionalised the RSAF (airforce) and the RSN (Navy). Is it such a logical leap to ask if the army can be similarly professionalised with mostly volunteer regulars instead of conscript cannon fodder?

So for the $11.45b we are going to spend even if under the guise of pump priming the economy. How much of that goes to full-time NSFs who get a miserly allowance of $600ish for risking their lives unvoluntarily to the State? Even reservists who get retrenched would only get some rank pay if they are called back for in-camp training and not their previous pay since the SAF reimburses EMPLOYERS and if you're unemployed, tough luck. Maybe ICT gives you free room and board for three weeks but not much in terms of wages.

I seriously question the wisdom of flinging our hard-earned tax dollars down the bureaucracy that is Mindef. What next big weapons systems is in Mindef's radar? More UAVs? More submarines? More Self-propelled artillery systems? More Multiple Launch Rocket systems? Hey, why not throw in a WHITE HORSE alert system that scans soldiers' 11B coded with RFID so that Commanders and Officers know who they are and AVOID giving them prefential treatment?

Majullah Singapura.

There is too much wastage in Mindef.