Monday, May 25, 2009

National Service

National Service- How can this be amended or improved further to alleviate the problem of dodging?

               Despite all the propaganda about National Service being a glamorous and macho way of showing one’s devotion and loyalty to our homeland, many young men would rather skip National Service, if possible. While this rite of passage may be deemed by young boys to be cool, the older we grow, the more we feel that our two years spent in National Service is a total waste of time. With modern values, and as due to higher standards of living, why should spoilt young men waste time and energy on something that does not benefit them? The pay is meagre, the training extremely intensive, the hours long. Thus, many young men choose to ‘dodge’ National Service by staying overseas and not coming back to serve National Service.

               This problem of dodging has led the government to mete out stiffer punishments for draft dodgers, as ‘If we (the government) don’t come down hard on those who default, it would undermine the dedication and commitment shown by those who have gone through NS.” While the government is right in this punishment of dodgers as this is only fair to those who had to go through the full two years of National Service, maybe sometimes the ‘stick’ is not the only approach to solving such problems. One possible drawback would be that to avoid the harsh punishments, dodgers might never dare to return to Singapore. Sometimes, some of the young men who skip National Service may in their later years, voluntarily return to Singapore in remorse over their actions, but even stiffer punishments would further discourage this group of people from returning to Singapore.

               Thus, I advocate amending the very root of the problem – National Service itself. You could hardly blame young men with bright prospects for placing their career and studies over National Service. Furthermore, with globalization, the new world order is now less about geographical borders and absolute national loyalties, and more about global movements of people and talent. National Service either chases away talent who refuse to come back for fear of being punished, or put these talents through 2 years of mundane training for a war which might never come in the next century, wasting precious hours that could go a long way to maximise the potential of these talents, which also benefits Singapore which relies on a knowledge-based economy.

               However, it would also be unrealistic for elitism to decide who goes through the two years of living hell and who does not. Where do you draw the line between talent and average people? Will people who failed at studies in their teens never be successful in their later life? What if Bill Gates went through National Service? Would Microsoft still exist, and would computers be as advanced as today? There would definitely be public out-cry against this elitism and people who do not make the cut may out of anger at the system; decide to skip National Service also. It is terribly unfair to see fellow countrymen being able to skip the two hard years that one underwent, so it would be understandable that people who went through National Service expect others to do the same.

Another solution is for the appeal system, which could be on a case-by-case basis. If one wants to skip or rather, postpone National Service because of issues pertaining to furthering studies, then perhaps if he does seem serious and is not skipping National Service for other reasons, then perhaps permission could be granted. Such cases will have to be dealt with care, as like I said, it is hard to draw the line. To prevent public grievance, National Service should remain as it is, and the stricter laws should stay. It is impossible to please everyone, but it is possible to please the majority.  

No comments:

Post a Comment