Why SAF Officers have fast track promotions
By BL on 12 Mar 2007 1:15 PM
Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

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.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://perspectives.singaporeangle.com/spamfw.php?tb_id=148

Comments (3)

Notice: Each writer on Singapore Angle is in control over the comment threads associated with his own posts, to edit or delete individual comments, or to close the thread as he pleases.

Madness:

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.

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.

Mr Economics:

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.

Post a comment

Please refrain from signing your comment as "anonymous" or "anon": doing that makes it harder for others to refer to your arguments when responding (especially when more than one comment signed this way appears). Rather, make up a unique pseudonym. In addition, note that each writer on Singapore Angle is in control over the comment threads associated with his own posts, to edit or delete individual comments, or to close the thread as he pleases.

About this Post

382 words | Categories: Defence | Tags: ,

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Singapore Angle is a group blog published since June 2006. Copyright to the articles is reserved to the individual writers unless otherwise stated.

All opinions expressed on this site by the authors are strictly expressed by the authors alone and remain the sole responsibility of the individual authors of each post; they are not representative of any third party, except where otherwise attributed and they certainly are not meant to reflect the views of the organizations which the authors are working for. Unless explicitly indicated, the authors neither endorse nor take responsibility for any information or opinion expressed by any third party in any comments, trackbacks or links external to this website. In addition, all of the articles are copyrighted to the individual authors unless otherwise indicated. If you are unhappy with anything you read on this site, please feel free to contact the editor and authors, we will see what we can do about it. (Find out more about us...)

Singapore Angle is powered by
Movable Type 3.34