Why I Do Not Let My Heart Beat Too Fast

As a follow-up to my previous post, I thought I would blog about heart rate monitors. I use one myself, when I go trotting around the neighbourhood.

The model I use has three parts - a wrist watch, a chest strap and a little shoe pod. As you run, the chest strap device and the shoe pod will continuously capture information and transmit it to the watch.

By looking at your watch, you can find out your heart rate, your average running speed and the distance you’ve covered. Depending on the model, you can also check how many calories you’ve burned, how much running you did in the aerobic/anaerobic range, and so on.

For me, what’s the most useful function of a heart rate monitor? Well, the watch automatically starts beeping when my heart rate rises or falls below certain thresholds. If my heart rate falls below the lower threshold, it means that I’m not pushing myself hard enough and therefore not really getting any cardiovascular benefits – I should run faster. But if my heart rate rises above the upper threshold, it means that I could be pushing myself too hard and should stop or slow down.

Monitoring the upper threshold is important to me because I was born with certain heart defects. According to medical science, those heart defects are not a good reason for me to refrain from physical exercise. However, also according to medical science, those heart defects make me a better candidate for sudden cardiac arrest than a completely normal person.

Since medical science can be such a contradictory pain in the neck, I take the middle ground, by exercising, but not too hard. And my heart rate monitor helps me to do that.

(For those of you who are wondering, yes, there are ways to roughly calculate how fast or slow your heart should beat during exercise, depending on your fitness goals. Click here for more information about training heart ranges).

Just in case I gave anyone the wrong impression, the heart rate monitor is not a medical device. In other words, it wasn’t invented to help heart patients exercise safely. It was invented to help serious athletes and fitness enthusiasts to train for optimal performance.

Thus there is no scientific study (as far as I know) proving that the use of a heart rate monitor can help to reduce the risk of sudden cardiac arrest (whether in serious athletes, ordinary folks or heart patients). Nevertheless it seems logical to me that this should be the case.

This post comes too late, of course, to help the Unfortunate Major.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

The Unfortunate Major

A letter to the Straits Times Forum:

ST Jan 7, 2008
Modify 2.4km IPPT run to ease strain on heart

I REFER to the report, 'SAF officer dies after 1.2km run' (ST, Jan 3).

There has been a spate of deaths recently with the victims collapsing while running. Most national servicemen have to complete a 2.4km run in order to fulfil their annual Individual Physical Proficiency Test (IPPT), so I think it is high time the Ministry of Defence looked into revamping this segment of IPPT.

On average, in order to obtain a Gold standard in the IPPT, a national serviceman has to obtain a minimum of four points (out of a maximum of five points) for each of the four stationary fitness stations and then run 2.4km in about 10 minutes, plus or minus half a minute.

Anyone who has ever achieved a sub-10 for a 2.4km run can attest to the power of endurance needed, and the pain and fatigue undergone. Of course, the excitement and sense of achievement are what push one through.

However, it is unrealistic to expect the majority of national servicemen to reach that level of fitness. Many have unintentionally injured themselves trying to break the 10-minute barrier by overtaxing their bodies.

Hence, it is not advisable to set such a short time limit for a 2.4km run.

Fitness experts recommend that we engage in a cardiovascular exercise continuously for at least 20 minutes in order to maximise its benefits. Running a sub-10 does not seem to serve that purpose.

My suggestion is to extend the distance of the run to 4km or 5km, with a time limit of 30 to 40 minutes, thereby focusing more on the endurance and general fitness than speed. This should put less strain on the heart and body, while giving the runners some time to warm up and ready their bodies for the run in a less gruelling manner.

We cannot delude ourselves that these 'running deaths', which have led to the demise of healthy men in their 20s to 50s, are coincidences. Neither can we attribute the concerns expressed over these occurrences to 'sensationalised news' by the press.

Instead of a sudden burst of energy to complete a run in a short time, a longer run may be all it takes to prevent a cardiac arrest.

Rick Lim Say Kiong

Rick Lim was referring to the recent death of Major Tan Yit Guan. It was probably the TODAY newspaper which reported this incident most thoroughly.

TODAY tells us that Major Tan did not even manage to jog the full distance of 1.2 km. He ran only about 600 metres and then walked the rest of the distance back to the finish. This suggests that Major Tan was already unwell that day.

Rick Lim says that it is unrealistic to expect the majority of servicemen to achieve the Gold standard time. However, I don't think that the majority of servicemen are expected, or expect themselves, to achieve the Gold standard time (barring servicemen in certain elite vocations like the Commandos or the Guards).

Rick also says that the standard recommendation for cardiovascular exercise is to do it continuously for at least 20 minutes in order to maximise its benefits. Of course it is always possible to relook the way the IPPT is done. However, at the same time, I would say that the IPPT in the SAF isn't done for the sake of your cardiovascular fitness or personal health goals. It's done for the purpose of ensuring a certain level of fitness in the soldiers, for military purposes.

Also, it's not clear to me that extending the IPPT distance and increasing the time limit would help reduce incidences of sudden cardiac arrest. The real point is how hard you are pushed to exert. Is it really any safer for your heart, to complete 4 or 5 km as fast as you can, than to complete 2.4 km as fast as you can? For that matter, are people less likely to die from a 100-metre sprint, than they are from a 42-km marathon?

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Realities of the Working World

ST Nov 7, 2007
Labour chief calls job-hopping, poaching short-sighted
By Marcel Lee Pereira

NO SOONER had Mr Kalaichellvan Krishna been crowned the service 'superstar' of the restaurant sector than new job offers began trickling in.

Minutes after the 26-year-old, who works for the Jack's Place steakhouse chain, was given the SuperStar Award at the Excellent Service Award (Exsa) ceremony held at the Raffles City Convention Centre yesterday, the poachers pounced.

They offered him jobs at other restaurants and hotels, but he turned them down politely.

His reason? His first loyalty is to his customers.

'They know me. Without them, I couldn't have won this award,' said Mr Kalaichellvan, an assistant manager at the chain's West Coast Recreation Centre outlet.

This business of loyalty and poaching of staff is something that concerns many employers these days.

The red-hot job market - figures announced last week put the jobless rate at 1.7 per cent, a 10-year low - is causing a scramble for talent and pushing up wages, and some companies are finding it hard to hold on to workers like Mr Kalaichellvan.

The problem is serious enough that Minister Lim Swee Say, from the Prime Minister's Office, who gave out awards to 10 winners in different sectors yesterday, touched on it during his speech at the ceremony.

Warning that the labour market is set to get tighter as major events such as the Formula One race come to Singapore, the labour chief urged service staff not to job-hop, and told employers to refrain from poaching.

'For workers to job-hop for a few dollars more during good times is a very short-sighted move, because the journey towards excellence is a long one,' he said

……… Turning to employers, he said: 'Every time we give out the awards, when the superstars appear in the newspapers, many employers will want to take a short cut and go after the winners, ask them what is their pay now, offer another 20 per cent.

'I think it's a very short-sighted move on the part of employers, and I hope that the Exsa superstars today, no matter how hard your competitors try to poach you, say no to them,' he added, to applause.

Isn’t this ironic? Minister Lim Swee Say tells you that it is very short-sighted to change jobs for the sake of earning more money. But for years and years, the PAP has been saying that if we don’t pay our ministers the world’s highest ministerial salaries (and give them further increases after that), then they’re all going to run away to join the oh-so-lucrative private sector.

If PAP ministers can’t be expected to serve out of a sense of loyalty to the nation, why would we expect people like Mr Kalaichellvan to serve out of a sense of loyalty to a steak restaurant.

But what do I know. Maybe loyalty to restaurants gets you further than loyalty to the nation these days. See how the Singapore Armed Forces discarded this old soldier (and he isn’t even that old):

ST Nov 6, 2007
Warrant officer asked to retire 5 years earlier

I WAS a regular serviceman in the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). I served a total of 32 years, comprising full-time national service, reservist and regular service, from 1974-2006.

I was one of more than 200 regular servicemen and women in the Army who were notified in May last year that we would be given Special Early Transition. Some of the reasons cited included difficulty in offering us 'suitable jobs' in the long run, restructuring and possible 'stagnation'. We were given only six months to transit.

Having attained the rank of a warrant officer in 2001, it meant that I was able to serve till the compulsory retirement age (CRA) of 55. I transitted last November after just turning 50, five years short of the CRA.

The Control of Personnel Centre announced that we were not under-performers. I was still PES 'B' and I received my performance bonuses annually without fail. I had also met all other requirements, i.e., Individual Physical Proficiency Tests, Annual Trainfire Programme, Body Mass Index, and Annual Proficiency Knowledge Test.

I also did not have any discipline or medical problems. The latter meant that I was still combat fit and still deployable. There are some who have not conformed to one or more of these requirements and yet are still serving in the organisation.

Till today, I am still somewhat in a state of depression at how the organisation had overlooked all my years of loyal and dedicated service.

The SAF Management Philosophy states:

'The SAF is concerned with the well-being of its people and their families, the SAF values its people, looks after them and their families so that they can give wholehearted attention to their assigned duties.'

The Defence Minister himself said last year:

'Every soldier is precious to us. Every national serviceman, every operationally ready national serviceman, every regular who serves with us is a precious and valuable person.'

The organisation failed to honour its word to allow me and many others to serve till the CRA of 55. I have a wife and two young children still attending school.

Second Warrant Officer (Retired)
Henry Minjoot

“Special Early Transition”, ha. Sounds more like “Extended Notice Period” to me.

Dear Henry, I am sorry for you. There is an important lesson to learn here, and this is it – Singapore doesn’t really care about you. You have to care about you. And your family.

Next time – if there’s a next time – keep your eyes wide open for a good job opportunity. And as soon as it comes along, hop. Make it an IPPT gold-star award-winning Standing Broad Jump.

Regardless of what Lim Swee Say has got to say.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Bala's on a Roll

My ex-boss, Bala Reddy, is getting cleverer and cleverer. This is a good idea.

ST May 19, 2007
Early NS enlistment for some youth offenders
By Tracy Sua

SOME youths aged between 16 and 18 and likely to get into trouble with the law are being packed off to National Service a little earlier than usual.

Between 10 and 15 such boys have been referred by the year-old Community Court to the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) for enlistment.

Community Court Judge Bala Reddy said these boys are not in school or may have dropped out of school. They are also not working, so 'the problem arises because they have nothing to do and are just idling'.

Getting them enlisted earlier would therefore bring 'some form of discipline into their lives at an early stage', he added.

He shared this idea with a group of visiting judges at the Regional Judicial Symposium held here last month.

The Community Court, set up to deal with cases involving youth, the mentally disabled and family violence, among other issues of community interest, had approached the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) to ask that it consider its referrals for early enlistment.

Court spokesman Seeto Wei Peng told The Straits Times that youths who are required to be electronically tagged have the tag removed if they are enlisted early.

This is because being a military recruit already entails staying put in camp, at least in the initial stages, and having their movements restricted.

Offenders who have been ordered to stay in a hostel meant for youth probationers may also have their hostel term shortened in lieu of early enlistment.

Mindef's public affairs director Colonel Benedict Lim said that under the Enlistment Act, the majority of male Singaporeans and permanent residents are conscripted from age 18.

But the Voluntary Early Enlistment Scheme (Vees) will take in boys who are over 16, subject to their being medically and physically fit, and their parents' consent for early enlistment.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

The Dead Don't Need Memorials. The Living Need Insurance.

Back in September 2006, I proposed several ideas for improving our NS system. I understand that a certain political party in Singapore in fact conveyed my suggestions to Minister Teo Chee Hean via the Government Feedback Unit. One of my suggestions was the need to implement an insurance system to protect SAF servicemen. This is what I wrote:

Insurance Benefits. I have heard stories about how the SAF compensates the family with a few thousand dollars, when an NSF dies in a training accident. That's like an insult. I cannot substantiate these stories - they are more hearsay and rumour than anything else. But I think few of us would really be surprised to learn that the SAF pays little, if an NSF suffers death or serious injury as a result of military training.

Singapore forces its young men into military service, which in turn necessarily entails some degree of risk of death or injury. It is bizarre to me that the SAF has no standard insurance plan in place for NSFs. I think that it is only reasonable that the SAF buys life, disability and personal accident insurance for NSFs (at least for those in combat vocations, and for something significantly more than a few thousand dollars). In fact, the coverage should extend to active NSmen as well. As a fringe benefit, NSmen should have the option of continuing with the coverage (and paying for it themselves), when their NS liability is completed.

These measures would show that the SAF has the welfare of NSmen and NSFs at heart (I have to make that assumption, of course) and also serves the very real purpose of protecting the individual financially. The other significant side benefit is that the SAF will have an added incentive to maintain high safety standards (otherwise the occurrence of training accidents will drive insurance premiums upwards over time - costing MINDEF more money). Personally, I have a poor impression of the SAF's safety record.

Four days ago, I reiterated this suggestion, when I heard about the Lawrence Leow case - an ex-serviceman now permanently paralysed. He receives a paltry $500 per month from the government.

It's also rather timely to reiterate the suggestion, in view of the very recent incident where some SAF servicemen were badly injured, and some SAF servicement were killed, while training in Taiwan.

(Incidentally, as a result of this incident, one of Singapore's worst-kept military secrets is now openly reported in the international media. Notice, for example, Reuters using a certain codename in its reports. And recall that officially, the SAF has no relationship with Taiwan whatsoever).

Today, we look at a letter in the ST Forum. Someone has proposed the same insurance idea as I did. I wonder if he read my blog. I'm glad that this idea has made it to the mainstream media.

ST May 16, 2007
Memorial to NSmen who die while on duty
THE sudden, horrific deaths of and serious injuries to our national servicemen in Taiwan came as a great shock. Young men in their prime about to embark on a promising career were stopped suddenly through no fault of their own. Their parents must have felt devastated to lose their sons in such circumstances.

All Singapore parents with sons in NS, or who are about to enlist, must have felt a strong sense of sadness and empathy for the parents of the dead and injured NSmen. However, we can comfort them only with words of condolence and support. Soon, the incident will be forgotten except by the affected parents and family members.

NS is now 40 years old and there are many families with members from three generations who have served the country. NS has become a rite of passage for all Singapore men and is well entrenched in all families. Unfortunately, as a conscripted force, NS is still viewed by parents as a high-risk activity and most feel anxious and concerned for NSmen's personal safety, notwithstanding training precautions taken.

The effort and sacrifices of NSmen are given recognition in various ways, for example, tax rebates, bonuses and club facilities. However, there appears to be a lack of recognition of unfortunate ones who fall while on duty in the defence of Singapore. They may have fallen but they should not be forgotten.

I suggest that, as part of the 40th anniversary of NS, the Government go one step further in recognising the sacrifices of our young men and at the same time, alleviate the emotional devastation and hardship of parents who may lose their sons in the defence of the country.

I propose that the Government provide insurance coverage for all NSmen during their full-time service and allow them to carry on the policies at their own expense after their operationally ready date (ORD). I believe the premium for group insurance is within the budget of the Government. This is in addition to any payment currently made to families of affected NSmen.

Another proposal is to build a memorial to NSmen who lose their lives while on duty. This could be in a prominent location where the public could visit at any time. Their names could be inscribed on the memorial. On National Day, a simple ceremony could be held there to remember them.

Lim Chong Leong

I hope something concrete happens out of this. If it does, it won't happen that soon (these sorts of things take time to put together). But better late than never.

I can predict that Lim's second idea (about setting up a memorial in a public place) will not happen. Why would the SAF want to build a public monument to its own failures? Most accidents, whether they occur in the home or on the roads or at the workplace, are preventable. And deaths in the SAF have a particular tendency to appear very unnecessary- see here and here, for example.

MINDEF surely wouldn't want to remind you of that. Don't expect to see a memorial.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

See What I Mean?

The young man in the wheelchair is Lawrence Leow. He suffered a tragic incident during his NS training.

Lawrence is now paralysed and he can't talk either. His condition is probably permanent. The Ministry of Defence is "compensating" him with a grand total of $500 per month.

Lawrence, who communicates by using small finger movements to type out words on a digital pad or handphone, wrote: "The $500 is not even enough for me to hire a maid!".

This case illustrates one of the points I made, back in September 2006. I wrote:

"Singapore forces its young men into military service, which in turn necessarily entails some degree of risk of death or injury. It is bizarre to me that the SAF has no standard insurance plan in place for NSFs. I think that it is only reasonable that the SAF buys life, disability and personal accident insurance for NSFs (at least for those in combat vocations, and for something significantly more than a few thousand dollars). In fact, the coverage should extend to active NSmen as well. As a fringe benefit, NSmen should have the option of continuing with the coverage (and paying for it themselves), when their NS liability is completed."

If you would like to help Lawrence in any way, please click here and contact his friend Edmund Ng.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

To Join or Not to Join

Recently I said that I would change the focus of my blog. I had planned to make it more practical and useful for the average Singaporean, taking into consideration the prevailing social trends, government policies etc in this country.

Well, here goes. Today we look at HR policies in the civil service. There are certain things you ought to know, before you decide to join or not to join the civil service.

ST April 14, 2007
Promotion in Civil Service based on merit

I REFER to the letter, 'Is promotion in Civil Service based on tenure?' (ST, April 11), by Ms Elsie Tan Hwee Lian.

To be promoted, a civil servant has to show potential to handle a bigger job. A person with a high potential can expect to progress more quickly, provided he is also a consistently good performer.

An officer who does not show the potential to take on greater responsibilities will not be promoted, even if he has many years of service. Promotion is based on merit and not automatic, according to his years of service.

Ms Tan also noted that there are officers who continue to perform the same job after promotion. Unlike the private sector, civil servants are paid according to their salary grade and not by job appointment.

It is not unusual to have officers doing higher-level jobs while still in a lower grade. This is to stretch and test them. They will be promoted to the grade commensurate with the job size only when they are able to handle the higher job competently.

All Civil Service salary schemes have a performance-bonus component. Those who do well will be paid performance bonuses, with the better ones getting a higher quantum. Those who just meet the job requirements or under-perform will not get any performance bonus.

Most of our graduate schemes have a variable merit-increment system, where the annual increments are linked to performance.

In short, the appraisal system ensures that officers receive salaries that are commensurate with their contributions, abilities and potential.

Ong Toon Hui (Ms)
Director, Leadership Development
Public Service Division
Prime Minister's Office

This letter is well-written. It is a very careful, very deliberate gloss, over actual reality. Nothing that the letter says is actually untrue. Yet the overall picture that the letter does paint is quite misleading.

To understand how the system works, you first have to understand that performance and potential mean two completely different things in the civil service. They lead to very different, very distinct consequences in the official appraisal system.

For example, a civil servant may be judged to have very high potential, even though his performance is very poor. Alternatively, his performance may be judged to be utterly outstanding, and yet his potential may be judged to be extremely low.

Performance is linked to your annual bonuses and increments. Whereas potential is linked to your promotions. So Ms Ong Toon Hui is correct to say that those who perform well in their jobs will get bigger bonuses.

What Ms Ong isn't telling you is that those who perform well in their jobs may never get promoted. That's because promotions depend on your potential, and potential has nothing to do with performance.

Okay, then. How is a person's potential assessed or measured? It is measured by your CEP score. "CEP" stands for Current Estimated Potential. Theoretically, CEP measures the level of certain inherent, long-term qualities in each employee.

What this means is that once you have been assigned your CEP score, the civil service is probably not going to change that score (at least for the next seven or eight years, if ever). After all, CEP is a measure of certain inherent, long-term qualities in you - which cannot change.

Now, the civil service will assign you a CEP score, on your first day of work. Actually, that is untrue - your CEP score is assigned to you, even before you start work. Thus you can see that in terms of actual work, nothing that you actually do (whether it is utterly brilliant, or utterly dumb) can actually affect your CEP score.

The civil service generally does not tell individual employees what their CEP score is. (If such disclosures were made, no doubt some people would resign in double quick time. Then who would be left to do the donkey work?)

CEP scores depend largely on your educational qualifications (one or two ministries will also consider other things - for example, the Defence Ministry would consider your OCS performance) . There is a pecking order. PSC Scholars automatically get an extremely high CEP score, even before they start work. Non-scholars with a basic degree, no honours, go to the bottom of the pecking order.

I hope that by now, the implications are becomng clear.

If you do badly in school, and then you join the civil service, you will have a low CEP score. Even if you subsequently produce the most utterly outstanding performance year after year after year, you will still get promoted very slowly, if at all.

That's because your potential has been assessed to be low, and CEP is a measure of your inherent, long-term qualities which can't change.

In contrast, suppose a PSC scholar performs quite badly year after year after year. He will not get good bonuses, because bonuses are linked to performance. However, since his CEP score is high, he will still get promoted year after year after year. That's because CEP is a measure of his inherent, long-term qualities which can't change.

Thus how much career success you can achieve in the civil service, by the age of 45 or 50, has already been determined. It was determined when you were 22 or 24 years, at the time you first joined the civil service, on your very first day at work. Sorry, before your first day at work.

Below is an excerpt from an essay written by a US military officer, who had spent some time studying the Singapore Armed Forces. This part of his essay focuses on how SAF scholars and non-scholars are promoted differently. Note that the Government of Singapore uses essentially the same appraisal system for all government ministries (including the Ministry of Defence). So the excerpt below gives you a good idea of how the entire civil service, in general, operates:

"After being awarded a scholarship, scholar officers are commissioned four months ahead of their peers amd miss the second half of their professional military training during OCS. Although they make up some of this training during their academic summers, they are still very inexperienced compared to their peers who have spent four years in operational service.

Despite this vast difference in experience, scholar officers still will be promoted to captain one year after graduation at approximately the same time as their nonscholar peers. This program results in scholar officers being promoted far faster than their nonscholarship peers, despite the fact that they have considerably less operational experience.

.... The SAF uses a system in which officers have a currently estimated potential to determine how far an officer can go and terminal rank during his or her career. For the most part, this CEP is formed during OCS based on the officer's cadet performance and educational background ....

An officer's CEP spells out his or her career path for assignments, education opportunities, promotion and attendance at military schools. The result of this system is that officers are selected and groomed for even the most senior leadership positions in the SAF based on little more than on how they performed as a cadet during OCS and the strength of their high school transcript."

Baca Selengkapnya »»

One for Mr Wang's Files

Not much to say about this topic that I haven't already said before. I'm just preserving the excerpt below, from a STAR article, for my own records:

NS Rumblings on the Rise
By Seah Chiang Nee
17 March 2007

...... With Singaporeans facing growing competition from foreign workers, however, national service has become a strain when bosses pass them over in favour of permanent residents (PRs) because of their “cumbersome” reservist duties.

Singaporean employers who have gone through it are generally more ready to employ reservists, but foreign companies often feel no such responsibility.

They often turn away locals who are still doing reservist duty, preferring to hire foreigners or PRs, who are free of the obligation.

An average of 30,000 foreigners (2006: 57,000) and PRs are accepted every year, and they are not required to serve military service.

This anomaly is causing rumblings among NS men who feel – quite rightly – that the system reduces their ability to compete in the workplace.

Recently, a fresh Singaporean 26-year-old graduate related his interview at a foreign-owned fabrication plant here.

The first question the Taiwanese manager asked him was: “I see you are a Singaporean. Do you need to go back to serve NS every year?”

When he replied that he had to report back for in-camp training every year, the manager reacted negatively, observing that reservists who failed fitness tests would need to train until they passed.

He also mentioned frequent absence of employees who had to attend occasional military meetings, which disrupted workflow.

“If every Singaporean needs to do all this, then I’d rather not hire you all then. Every year you all have to take long periods of absence for NS and no work is done,” he added.

The Singaporean didn’t get the job.

“Singaporean males are going to suffer from this influx of foreign talents. We don’t have an even ground to compete on!” he complained.

The government appealed to employers not to discriminate against reservists, but it in many cases, it has fallen on deaf ears.

The logic of appeals borders on the absurd, remarked a blogger.

“Why should a business entity which has to earn a profit for shareholders support an obligation imposed on Singaporean males?”

Baca Selengkapnya »»

US Soldier States the Bleeding Obvious

An article from TODAY.

US soldier takes potshots at SAF
Mindef responds to criticism over inexperienced scholars, soft soldiers, status of Malays

Monday • March 12, 2007

Loh Chee Kong
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg

ARE Singapore's top military commanders too young and inexperienced?

Are they fast-tracked to the upper echelons because of their scholar credentials, while more experienced non-scholars or "farmers" — as they have been unceremoniously labelled — toil in vain?

Are soldiers here soft because of the emphasis on safety during training at the expense of realism?

And do officers lack professionalism and commitment because mandatory retirement at 45 means many see their time in uniform "as a stepping stone" to a second career in politics or business.

These questions, and several others, are the subject of a critique of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) published in United States-based journal Armed Forces & Society. The quarterly circulates some 2000 copies worldwide.

I can't help laughing. It's so funny, the way these questions are being asked - as if everyone didn't already know the answers.

Regarding Question 4, I was just accosted by an ex-SAF major two months ago who wanted to sell me insurance. I ended up giving him some advice on how to structure his own investments.

The article, which has made its rounds in Singapore and created a stir among the uniformed ranks, was written by an American soldier Sean Walsh, who was stationed at the United States Embassy in Singapore for several weeks in 2004, during his summer break from the US Military Academy.

In the article, The Roar of the Lion City, the writer also claimed that women have been held back from holding high posts in the SAF, and that there is a policy to keep Malays out of sensitive areas.

Despite his criticism of the SAF, Mr Walsh, who graduated from the US Army Ranger School, concluded his article by saying "there can be no doubt that the SAF is the most competent, well-equipped and best trained force in the whole of South-east Asia" — a claim the SAF itself has not made.

He also admitted that the SAF was "more than capable" of defending Singapore's borders, conducting peacekeeping missions and dealing with asymmetric threats in the wake of 911. It possessed a "world-class" special operations force which would not require outside assistance, he noted.

So, why the paradoxical praise and criticism of the SAF?

Umm, because the angmo was being fair, reasonable and truthful?

But once again, let's not get confused. The man wasn't actually saying anything new. For many years, Jane's Defence has consistently held the view that the SAF is the top military force in South-east Asia.

I wonder if this is even surprising. Singapore is the richest country in South-east Asia; it spends the most money on defence, and it is the only country with conscription.

(Malaysia doesn't count. They started only in December 2003, and only called up 85,000 youths, out of the roughly 450,000 youths born in 1986).

Mr Walsh, who is deployed in Germany, could not be contacted, but in his article he pointed to the age of SAF's top commanders — such as Brigadier-General Desmond Quek, who was 39 when he was promoted to the post of Army Chief — and concluded that "youth naturally corresponds to inexperience" and this "casts obvious doubts on their ability to lead in a conflict against battle-hardened troops".

However, responding to queries from Today, Col Benedict Lim, director of public affairs at the Ministry of Defence (Mindef), said: "The SAF does not seek out wars but will not flinch from putting its soldiers into harm's way to fulfil its primary mission of protecting the vital interests of our country."

He also pointed out that the SAF carries out about 70 exercises annually with other countries' armed forces, some of which have considerable combat experience, and has been praised for its professionalism. The SAF has also carried out humanitarian missions, for example during Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.

Defence analyst Dr Alvin Chew told Today that the debate centred on Singapore's defence policy, which is based on diplomacy and deterrence. As such, the relative youthfulness of SAF officers, who are groomed in building bilateral or multi-lateral relationships with foreign militaries, was not a major drawback.

Watch the next few valiant attempts to defend the status quo:

Also, given that fighting a war is not the Republic's most pressing concern, defence analyst Dr Bernard Loo said that early retirement meant that the SAF's best and brightest could be deployed for "broader or higher national purposes — whether it is in running the economy, or running the Government".

Where the SAF's best and brightest will no doubt do a great job, since they have highly relevant experience. After all, operating a submarine is exactly the same as managing a bank or running a statutory board.

Hahahaaa.

I skip to the next interesting part, about the Malays in the military.

Perhaps the most controversial claim by the US soldier was that "official discrimination against the Malay population remains an open secret" and those of the race are "systematically kept out" of sensitive areas.

I don't see why this is a "controversial" claim. It isn't even an "open secret" - it's not a secret at all. If I recall correctly, years ago, Lee Kuan Yew himself had publicly spoken about this matter; I'll try to dig that up. The rationale is that there are concerns about where the allegiance of Malay SAF men would lie, in the event of any conflict with our Muslim neighbours.

Whether you agree or disagree with the policy, is a different question from whether the policy exists. I think it is quite clear that the policy exists (or had existed). However, the extent and degree to which it has been implemented may have changed. During my time, it was rather obvious that a disproportionately high percentage of Malays were sent to the Singapore Civil Defence Force, and not to the SAF at all.

Notice that Col Lim, as quoted below, also refers to "the challenges of building ethnic and religious harmony in Singapore" and says that "integration in the SAF would proceed in tandem with nation-building".

Mr Walsh claims that this has two major consequences: It "limits the involvement of the ethnic group most inclined to join the military" and it feeds the "perception of a second-class status among Malays, a fact which terrorist recruiters have taken advantage of before, and they may do so again" — referring to the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) members arrested in Singapore for plotting terrorist attacks.

Addressing this charge, Col Lim said: "The writer's prescription for ethnic integration in the SAF seriously underestimates the challenges of building ethnic and religious harmony in Singapore.

"Singapore has made much progress in ethnic and religious integration. Singapore does not gloss over the fact that there is yet more to be done and addresses these challenges directly and openly."

Stressing that integration in the SAF would proceed in tandem with nation-building, Col Lim added that there are a good number of Malay SAF officers, some with higher degrees, whose studies were sponsored by the SAF, and whether a Malay SAF officer makes it to a higher appointment depends solely on merit.

In fact, Malay officers have risen through the ranks and held senior appointments.

"We have Malay pilots, commandos and air defence personnel. Those who have shown the potential to take on higher appointments in the SAF are given every opportunity to do so. Malay officers in the SAF hold key appointments such as Commanding Officer," said Col Lim.

"In fact, the proportion of eligible Malays selected for specialist and officer training is similar to the proportion for eligible non-Malays."

Personally, I have always felt that the discrimination issue is not such a big deal. The simple reason is that the Singapore Armed Forces is a conscript army. The vast majority of people in the SAF are not there by choice. They are forced to be there.

Most NSmen just want to serve their time and get out, in the least painful way possible. If the colour of your skin excludes you from the "siong" (tough) vocations in the SAF, then this is not necessarily a bad thing. Personally (and I stress that this is my personal view), if I were Malay, I would be quite pleased if there were an official policy that kept me out of places like Hendon Camp, or Guards or Singapore Combat Engineers.

Also, remember this - SAF officers have 10 extra years of reservist duties! I'd rather not, thank you very much.

Baca Selengkapnya »»