Training to be soldiers
To fight for our land
Once in our lives
2 years of our time
Have you ever wondered
Why we must serve
'Cos we love our land
And want it to be free...to be free..yah!
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.
Posts
3 comments:
I support the part about stopping national service.
However, spending on big ticket items is a requisite for reduction of manpower.
The rationale for this is written on one of my blog entries: My last ICT, and the future of National Service in Singapore
Dear Choonway
Even Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary is moving the US Military away from big conventional weapons systems towards upgrading the US's ability to fight terrorism and unconventional warfare.
Spending on big ticket items is not always the solution to streamlining the military. Remember, we are STILL spending on BIG TICKET WEAPONS systems and CONSCRIPTING.
Why aren't we reducing our reliance on conscription? Conscription is not cheap. Reservists are reimbursed their salaries by Mindef and many are professionals earning top dollars e.g. lawyers, CEOs etc. Professionalising the ARMY would help reduce the need to rely on CONSCRIPTS.
Our armed forces are still going to be conventionally orientated.
The way to fight terrorism is through police action. (Like how the british handled the malayan emergency.) Soldiers make poor cops. And vice versa.
---
National Service is a all or nothing thing. I don't think we can ever stand for the lottery system practiced in Malaysia.
A volunteer force capable of replacing NSF/NSmen would take considerable time to train and develop.
It's hard to imagine conscription scrapped without a credible volunteer force. That's why we're still spending on big ticket items and conscripting.
An analogy would be paying rent for your HDB flat while waiting for your condo to get constructed, having paid the downpayment.
---
I think at one time MINDEF is trying to professionalize via the ADF. These guys are the people who go into Iraq, East Timor as peacekeepers, as regular riflemen. You could never send NSF to those areas...
However, pay and recognition still remains an issue. Turnover is high. I sense that MINDEF is sort of hesitating at this point.
Post a Comment