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.
Comments (4)
I would argue the reverse. Ex-generals in government, especially chief of army types, reminds one of Thai government. Coups are not uncommon there. In a case of freak election results, the possibility of a coup in singapore is very high.
Posted by Madness | March 12, 2007 11:46 PM
In retort of the previous comment:
I think Singapore has made the military too much of a professional form of civil service with a bit extra. The SAF did not fight wars nor was it historically involved as an organisation that fought for independence, which is the case for some very involved Armies in other countries. If you think hard about it, the fact that ex-generals are becoming ministers and civil servants would give the current generals more reasons to be compliant to the civil leadership - if not it would make it harder to look for a job in the civil service later on.
Besides one of the big reasons SAF has a young officer cadre is that they use a strategy of high pay and gratuity for a shorter period to keep them in for 20+ years because lower pay and indefinite retirement makes it really hard to keep good people in the SAF.
Posted by tntlus | March 29, 2007 7:36 AM
I agree with the need to keep the leadership of the Armed Forces young for 2 reasons:
(1) It keeps the Armed Forces dynamic and allows the newest doctrines, technologies to be adopted. For a small Armed Force like Singapore's, our key competitive advantage is really in having a flexible and agile force
(2) It prevents the consolidation of power in a hands of a few generals/senior ranking officers. Notice how the CDFs (other than Winston Choo)never served more than 3-4 years. No "private/personal" armies can be developed.
The criticism that Army leaders are too inexperienced to fight wars is valid but exaggerated. Anyone who has been through NS will realize that the real soldiers are the Warrant Officers. These are the backbone of the Armed Forces.
However, the model of fast-tracking Armed Forces Generals, retiring them for the force at 45, then plugging them into the civil service ought to be reviewed. For selected positions in government - e.g. Minister of Defense etc. it helps to have people with military background. But certainly not positions like Chairman / Directors of CPF Board, SMRT, SIA etc. Particularly for businesses (GLC or otherwise). Just give them a fat golden handshake. If these Generals are really that good, they don't need cushy jobs like this.
Singapore prides itself to be a meritocratic society. Let's keep it that way. Bring in the best talents to fill these positions.
Posted by Mr Economics | March 29, 2007 3:03 PM
If the success of the armed forces, is truly based on the fact that it is to be meritocratic, then singaporeans indeed need to be worried.
Scholars, once achieving the goal of securing their scholarships and managing to keep it till they graduate know that they will be "looked after". They will get to higher offices much faster and easier than other officers like the "farmer-officers". Further more, if you care to look into it, most of these offices are almost always exclusively held by the scholars. Therefore putting them in a better position to perpetuate this system.
To challenge this system from these offices is unlikely as doing so would be indicating that they know they are undeserving.
I have heard of numerous instances where officers where course results are doctored even where bribes are offered so that some persons are put ahead of others. I understand that these are serious accusations. I present no evidence and i shall not quote no sources for this. Just that if these rumors are indeed true, there is indeed a reason to worry.
Additionally, the practice of promoting a few officers from the minority and putting it forward as evidence as a lack of discrimination seems that discrimination indeed does not exist. But if these examples are properly studied, it can be seen that these "exceptions" are not persons who are truly integrated into their respective groups.
Its excellent that there are individuals who are open to other cultures and such, but since there are still distinct minority groups in Singapore, there still is a case of a lack of representation from their communities.
Posted by unwitting | December 24, 2009 10:54 AM