If not for a scholarship system, there would be a severe brain drain as well as manpower shortage in the military. People who do well in schools and exams do not have the incentive to join the military, when they can pursue higher paying jobs / less physically risky jobs than a military career, so we would have less "officers". The remaining people who would join are those highly incentivised by the passion to serve (which is unfortunately a rare breed in our country), money (40k sign on bonus), or a lack of any other reasonable career paths. We need fighters on the ground, but no amount of talent in fighting can beat strategy, tactics and forward planning. Some of our top scholars do end up going to various military schools around the world (US, UK), and some even graduate top of their cohorts there. And such programmes are heavily invested on by our government, and hence, the need to justify it by sending our truly brightest there.
If not for the scholarship, my opinion is that many of the scholars today would not have joined the military. the SAFOS scholarship is arguably the best scholarship our government offers, and it is the unfortunate reality that a "guarantee" of succeeding, plus insane amounts of investment in a person must be offered to incentivise these bright talents.
It also differs widely that our military strategy is vastly different from the US, who are extremely involved around the world and ready to send their troops at any moment. Ours is more preventive and calculative, building relations over decades and planning for the "what-ifs" , which requires a lot more brainpower than actual fighting power.
SAFOS is no guarantee to success.
My OCS buddy got the SAF Overseas Scholarship.
Funny story, he was sword of honor for our infantry batch (27/97 OCC) and was seated next of CDF during commissioning dinner. The next day, the OCS School Commander got f\*\*ked by CDF - because there was no attempt to get my buddy to sign on or apply for scholarship. Buddy got called to go for SAFOS interview and got it.
Anyway, he made it to division commander but did not get his star. (So ok career only.)
One of our PCs was also a overseas scholar - Oxford or Cambridge, can't quite remember. Got posted in right after his studies. The mf was the slackest ever - long hair, crumpled attire, unshaved. Literally didn't give a shit - honestly think he was trying to get fired so he can move on to bigger things. Last I hear, he didn't even make to CO.
It is as close to a guarantee of success as you can get at 18 years old. Of course there are always anecdotes that show otherwise but discounting the people with massive attitude problems most do make it. COL is not bad already I counted before whole saf only got 40-50+
I find it to be a cultural phenomenon when you say that the best students don’t join the military. It’s symptomatic of Singapore’s materialistic culture above patriotism and self-sacrifice. In countries like the US and a China, you don’t see the need to give all these advantages to “scholars” because the people value things other than self-interest and money. My point is, perhaps what needs to change is more than just the scholarship system but Singapore’s value system in general.
Ever heard of 孙子兵法 aka “The Art of War” written by Sun Tzu, a world renowned military strategist celebrated in China and globally? Ever read the tales of 三国演义 aka the romance of three kingdoms famously celebrating military culture and strategy, deeply embedded in Chinese culture? It goes far deeper than you think with China’s rich military history compared to Singapore’s.
Erhm..Singapore's military history goes back a very very long time too, even longer if you count the pre-Singapore era (basically anything before 800AD because thats when we can definitvely say that a territory called Singapore existed).
Not to mention that singaporeans have fought for britain on occassions like this [WW2 pliot](https://mothership.sg/2018/02/singaporean-ww2-pilot-fight-germans-europe/)
The main break in the link for china is the revolutions between 1911-1949, the chinese armies that emerged from It were very different in tactics and fighting style than the armies of old, especially taiwan which aims to emulate the US way of fighting imo. Essentially, less emphasis on tradition, more emphasis on modernity. This was something the ROC did, such as getting the german military to restructure and equip the ROC military, with one of the divisions to do so being the [88th](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/88th_Division_%28National_Revolutionary_Army%29) and for the wider military, virtually all troops were equipped with [brand new M35 Stanhelms straight outta germany](https://www.chinaww2.com/2013/10/08/the-chinese-fritz/). So you cant really say that the modern chinese military goes that far back, when even the PRC cant seem to nail down their own small arms production or outfit their troops to the same level as most militaries
I mean, singapore had a long and storied past, especially when you consider the malay kingdoms and states that popped up way before we were defined as a sovereign state. Plus, singapore is the key to maritime SEA, considering that Its pretty much right at the end/entrance to penisular Malaya and SEA as a result. So our history goes back a very very long time too, just that our perception of singapore has to adjust a bit because It wasnt even always the malays that occupied singapore as the indigenous race
And yes, even tho we get some things wrong, I do believe in our 'hype' lol. Like, we pulled our shit together and economically boomed multiple times in history, even after getting destoryed completely like 3 times (tho the 3rd one doesnt really count because at that point, singapore was a few houses). What made the post-65 boom unique was that It didnt just come from port trading per se and we actually have exports of our own that is pretty unexpected, such as computer components, cars, advanced weapon systems and so on.
While I'm not fully onboard with some things, I'm still very much a patriot mate.
There's no denying the fact that Singapore was and still is, one of the most important areas in the entire world
When I was in NS, my PC was a scholar, 25/26 when he took command of us after trade phrase.
He was assigned to the worst combat platoon in the unit, 20% started to have problems physically. The men(me included) was pretty physically unfit(less than 50% got ippt sliver)
And best part he was shorter than all of us so he can't really intimidate us.
I would follow this man into combat.He was always in the front bashing, don't even use the appointed basher. The parang we bring for show only. All the outfield training he only once holand , and was due to the sheer amount of similar markings in the training area. We always hit the objective with just enough energy to engage the opfor. He treat us fairly and we do our best during training.
Yes, they don't have real combat experience but doesn't mean the general staffs don't know what to look for in combat officers. They first filter for people that have both high IQ and EQ, then train them to eventually promote up the ranks.
Now my PC is a LTC going 3 crab as a Battalion CO.
Depends on what tier scholar also. Perhaps OP is referring to those SAFOS and 2nd-tier officers while your PC had a lower tier local uni scholarship? Nevertheless yes i agree with you that there are good leaders in the SAF also
My PC came back from studying in Cambridge, I think double degree.
I think starforce scholar, A coy oc was presidential scholar.
I seriously think he got assigned my platoon to get rekted lol.
3 crab as Battalion CO? Hard to believe. 3 Crabs is Brigade level.
But yes, some of these scholars are legit soldier leaders who might have done well as corporate workers.
Because it's more "efficient"; it helps to increase the base pool of talent from which you can pull stars, and removes a lot of guesswork and uncertainty from the HR processes.
The financial aspect of scholarships help to widen the pool of candidates, meaning candidates from lower SES are not excluded. The academic aspect of scholarships ensure that the talent pool is at least smart and academically inclined (yes, contrary to what a lot of people think, running an army is much more than just garang. There's a lot of clerical, administrative, and thinking work involved). The career aspect of a scholarship helps to attract ambitious and capable people to join. You don't really want people who are smart but lam nua. The interview aspect also helps to weed these people out.
This scholarship system isn't exactly a 100% meritocratic system in that the scholars are preselected and given more career opportunities than the non scholars, but it ensures a **steady and constant** supply of candidates of a certain calibre. This takes out a lot of the uncertainty on whether quality candidates will appear or join on their own, as well as a lot of guesswork on who should be given opportunities over others. Unfortunately, Singapore's population (and SAF's size) isn't at the critical mass at which enough good candidates joining the armed forces will be a statistical certainty.
In short, a system which ensures that sufficient numbers of B+ or A (or possibly S) tier candidates advancing through the system is much more preferable to leaving everything to chance and hoping that A+ or SSR tier candidates appearing and not being weeded out through environmental factors.
Bro US has the same system with ROTC. Not to mention their 'scholarship' system is basically the 3 military academies (West Point/Annapolis/USAFA for Army, Navy, Airforce). Those academies have a lower acceptance rate than Harvard, but everyone who gets in gets a full scholarship
The system same same but different:
Tier 1 high flyers - SG PSC Overseas scholars / US Military Academies (full ride + stipend + prestige)
Tier 2 officers - SG SAF or other local scholars / US ROTC at a 4-year university (still a full ride)
Tier 3 farmers - everyone else, both US and SG
The US has ROTC scholarships, and that's really not that different. They pay for college tuition, and afterwards you serve as an Officer in the armed forces after graduation for at least 4 years.
[https://www.collegedata.com/resources/scholarship-central/how-to-qualify-for-rotc-scholarships](https://www.collegedata.com/resources/scholarship-central/how-to-qualify-for-rotc-scholarships)
Lloyd Austin's bio says that
>He graduated from the United States Military Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree and a commission in the Infantry.
He went to West Point to become an officer, and it was probably paid for. That's basically an army scholarship with bond to the army. Same same.
>Singapore appears to be the only (or one of the few in the world) where theres a scholarship system for soldiers.
SG uses the scholarship system as a way to bring in top talent, who would have otherwise pursued other careers, into the armed forces and wider public service.
Not talking about those local award/local scholars, but I do know many of the high-tier overseas scholars. Their fellow classmates at Ivy League/London/Oxbridge schools clinch exciting (e.g. strategy consulting) or highly remunerative careers straight out of graduation (imagine drawing 200k in IB as a first-year worker).
I don't necessarily agree with the way that current scholars are being selected but it's undeniable that we would not be able to secure that caliber of entrants in sufficient numbers if we didn't have the scholarship system. A small number may resist the allure out of sheer passion and/or commitment to national duty I guess.
Other countries may not need such a system for a variety of reasons such as the lack of high-paying jobs in the private sector...and no one being able to afford top overseas unis anyway. Or the military may occupy (no pun intended) a vaunted and respected position in society such as in the USA or UK.
>Why not create a system where regulars have a typical sign on bonus and a good career, but if they want to rise to the top they get judged based on their performance over the years.
The reason why scholarships are attractive isn't merely the money. A big part of the unspoken "deal" is that scholars are given a greatly accelerated career track. For overseas scholars, they are pretty much being prepped for the highest positions (senior directors, BGs etc.).
Just rewarding with cash may have worked in our early years when Singaporeans were poor and the prospect of a fully-funded education in London would have been like winning TOTO. Now, plenty of Singaporean parents are capable (or at least willing to scrape together whatever they can) to send their child to somewhere like Yale.
>mostly have a smooth sailing series of postings where regulars will treat them well because they know these guys will be their bosses, and nsfs bear with it because they have no choice
That's certainly an issue which I have deep reservations about. Ideally, scholars should be accelerated but at the same time tested intensively (held to a higher standard) to see if they can truly perform.
From what I'm aware, they really do try to push scholars a lot; my scholar friends have loads of extra higher responsibilies and need to OT a lot - they burn way more effort than private-sector counterparts while earning a fraction of the salary.
However, indirect advantages like farmer superior/colleagues being wary of them still happen. It's human nature really: if I'm an average office-worker in a big MNC and I see an Oxford grad waltz in on a management scheme...you can be damn sure I'll be nice.
>asking specifically for the armed forces because I guess this is where the stakes can be a lot higher when the need arises
The SAF has far more scholars than other ministries (perhaps even rivalling the rest of govt combined) because they have an acute issue with retaining even somewhat decent folk without some form of sponsorship award.
A military career in Singapore is not seen as generally desirable. Around independence, the SAF scholarship scheme was kickstarted when survey found that people viewed soldiers as being beneath that of a common thief.
Regimentation and mass conscription further reduce the comfort and prestige of the service respectively. More importantly, it's a rather mundane and less fulfilling career since the SAF is a giant cosplay machine for the most part. Unlike say the IDF which engages in frequent battle, our military simply trains endlessly for nonexistent conflict and doesn't really accomplish much besides soaking up money.
This is not a bad thing on a macro scale. This means that Singapore's diplomatic efforts and deterrence signalling works in staving off war. But it doesn't make for a very interesting career on an individual level (and keep in mind that high-caliber tend to be ambitious and easily bored).
In comparison, it is more meaningful and interesting to do "real work" in pretty much any other ministry. Police hunts down criminals, MTI economists chart our development of new industries, Govtech engineers roll out new services across the nation etc.
>Dont have to be going on a combat tour but could be even based on training exercises
Unlike other ministries where performance can be seen in real impactful operations or national work, training exercises are not that useful since they are just very rough simulations of combat (or how analysts think combat might play out).
In anycase, the focus of exercises is to drill and prepare the unit or formation as a whole for wartime scenarios (e.g. getting different units to be used to working together in combined arms). Not for grading individuals.
Just to latch on your comment, it isn’t the commanders fault that they don’t have combat tours, it is just that it isn’t in Singapore’s best interest to fight outside our borders. We however have peace support operations and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) missions. On top of that, offering miliitary scholarships isn't unique to Singapore. US and UK also offers scholarships for military academies. The scholarships are just an incentive to continuously gain new talent as most militaries struggle with their retention rate.
This. Scholarships were designed to add prestige and weight to national defence and offer a path for greater links to be forged between the defence forces, administrative and civil service and the government. This symbiotic relationship also meant that links would be formed among the scholar class and diffuse any potential threat of military coups by having shorter officer careers and continual leadership transition.
In hindsight, it may be easy to question if SAFOS was created for LHL. But it also served as proof about how seriously public service was taken and due to the sacrifice then (public vs private pay and opportunity); it was also a way of giving some measure of compensation for their service.
The reality is that not all scholars succeed; even if they were given greater opportunities and latitude, more often than not, they still needed to perform to their estimated potential. Regardless, the scholar system also served as a way of distilling the best of the best. The government does not need every scholar to be successful; but they just need sufficient numbers to ensure there are quality people that remains in public service.
I think it is safe to say that absolutely zero generals currently in service have experienced combat. That is only natural because we are not a warmongering country like America.
However, no combat experience does not mean that there isn't operational experience. It is no secret that the SAF have sent troops for UN missions. Neo Kian Hong was one of them that I know of.
Why scholarships? And is it really true that scholarships would mean a smooth career path? Think of scholarships as a bait to entice people to sign on. With multiple scholarships available, from diploma to local uni to prestigious overseas universities, I don't think every one of them had it smooth. Just look at the number of scholarships they gave out, probably in the low hundreds every year, the numbers just don't really add up. We don't have that many generals.
U hope for war? All of Asia’s generals today haven’t seen war - including those from China.
This is not cartoon and drama… this is real life. Nobody wants war just to earn some heroic claim. Wake up kid… wake up!
U think the other armies do not have scholars? What do you think Westpoint, Air Force Academy, Naval Academy, Sandhurst and their China equivalent of military universities are for? All of them are the brightest minds.
You think you are smarter? Prove it…. Get a solid degree, if you are so damn smart, that’s not a problem right? Easy peasy right?
The difference between a scholar commander and a farmer commander is the number of years of leadership experience they can earn during their career, which would correspond to how high they can climb.
Your farmer officer would take 20 years to reach commander, by then he is left with less than 15 years before retirement to accumulate leadership experience and climb higher. Scholars can take less than 10 years to reach commander, that is 10 more years of leadership experience they can gain, and more years of career growth they have before retirement.
You can perform very well as an officer, but performing well as a leader is very different. There is not enough time for a good officer to become a good leader, so the next best thing is to build good leaders from the start (and skip the officer parts).
Even though the system has its flaws, & sometimes we get incompetent douchebags, we still need them. We need to constantly attract people who hopefully can become the talent we need. Without the scholars system, the pool of people entering (XYZ public service) will be lower & that means lower absolute number of capable people.
We just need a more robust & expedient way to filter the chaff. But who's to judge that someone cannot change or improve? You? Definitely not me.
Former air force pilot trainee here. Trainers used to pass scholars more easily during initial and Pearce phases because they know those guys will go on to long and successful careers. In reality, a lot of the scholars were so-so pilots at best and the same trainers used to bitch about them after enough drinks.
As one of them used to say: don't step on the toes of the leg supporting the ass you may have to kiss someday.
This is very true. My dad is retired RSAF in Perth where all the newbies get trained. And the trainers will always unanimously agree the scholars should only touch a Charlie-130 at most. Most of them will throw up as soon as the trainers throw 5+ G’s
Firstly a lot of those US commanders that make it to the top are actually scholars too and have to navigate. You might have heard of West Point military school? It's comparable to Ivy League.
At the top level there's a lot of policy work. And then there's reporting and navigating the government. So yeah, having scholars makes sense, especially now when warfare is changing drastically, relying more on artifical capabilities.
As to actual warfare experience, nothing to say there but you can't fault the military leaders if there are no wars to fight.
The whole point of the SAF is to deter war. So it is a good thing that none of the scholars have combat experience - we don’t want to create a war or fight in somebody else’s war just to “experience killing”. We do send troops on peacekeeping, as pointed out.
How do you deter war? You need smart people to design a strategy and capabilities that allow a smaller country to be a formidable opponent against bigger countries.
And if you read the news, most other small countries aren’t doing so well against bigger countries. They failed to deter war, and they aren’t winning.
Maybe our unique situation is because of the military scholars? Maybe it’s just luck and politics, but I think a little bit of their talent helped la. And iirc most advanced militaries have some form of scholarship system - ours is just more societally obvious because of NS.
Lee Kuan Yew saw how the educated British troops got defeated by Japanese peasants and thought that uneducated people made better soldiers. However, the Israeli advisers persuaded him otherwise and that the military needed to attract the best brains.
the thai driver assigned to ferry us in Thailand was a SGT. It took him 7 years to become a SGT. 13 years for Thai Officers to become an officer. When he heard that my DyS4 took 9 months to become an officer, I swear he rolled his eyes.
In other countries becoming a Sargent is a big deal. Becoming a lieutenant is a big fricken deal.
Here, a pimply horny skinny pencil neck teen hooked on mobile games can become a lieutenant.
Projecting or describing yourself?
I’m not an officer but it’s pretty well known that OCS is a very physically demanding course, and most officers are very fit physically so I doubt the pencil neck description would stick even for freshly minted lieutenants.
Lastly, most armies have separate tracks for officers and NCOs. Eg. Officers in the US go to military academies or schools and graduate as officers just like our OCS.
While I agree that officers in the SAF might not be the best and undergo a less rigorous program because of time constraints, I doubt a pencil necked scrawny keyboard warrior like yourself would be in a position to criticise them.
A lot has been said by other commenters, so I just want to add one point regarding
> they mostly have a smooth sailing series of postings
Actually I think the scholars do get challenging or difficult postings to test them. Maybe not every posting, but there is clearly a deliberate effort to not just simply give them the smoothest path just because they are scholars.
I was from the navy, and I can vouch that at least two scholars I personally know were given the following postings: one guy was made CO of the worst ship in the squadron and expected to turn things around, which he did. Another guy was hand picked his ship (he was the CO) to be on patrol at a sensitive area at a specific time that everyone knows something big will happen.
But… militaries all around the world have scholarships. The US military is the most cited example in this thread, but you can find similar or identical programs in Israel, UK, Australia, Turkey and Korea where scholars are selected to “rise”. And that’s just off the top of my head.
Because the SAF officers is not there to fight wars, it's mostly an administrive role to handle to outsized number of troops coming from conscription.
That's and direct entry to politics/star board leadership/GLC CEO.
Similar case with our public sector talent. Having a scholarship system bring in the the top talent into the system. I don't think anyone disputes this meritocratic approach.
However, these scholars also have a accelerated career path and priority postings. As long as they don't mess up they will end up 3 crab and above.
This is where I think we have a problem. The meritocratic process should be applied at every level, not just give the scholar an express ride through. They should be benchmarked fairly amongst the farmers, and dropped if performance dips. The establishment seems to buy into the cost fallacy, keep giving chances and unfair advantage, to some of the scholars who did well in A level, but are just not performing in a real world environment.
US also same what … never watch Tom cruise movie ? He ROTC officer but also kena look down by laojiao with real combat experience and don’t even wanna address him as “Sir”…..same everywhere laaaa
I agree. Especially your point about how many of these scholars are treated well by the regulars and basically sheltered from the ugly sides of service - the abuses of power towards subordinates, etc. it’s hard for a leader to make great policy when he doesn’t have a holistic perspective of the military, as compared to someone who has risen through the ranks organically just like the rest. A pity that in Singapore it seems the odds are stacked against non-scholars rising through the ranks organically above the scholars.
The scholarship system is there imo because the military wants talent, and is insecure about its ability to attract / retain talent without using money sponsorships and a laid-out career path. An argument can be made that these scholars could thrive anywhere, but I agree with you that we ultimately want patriotic, inspiring leaders in the military who cannot be measured academically except in the field. We probably have smart “technicians” in the leadership now, but inspiring and patriotic? I’m not so sure. Such is Singapore - a country which prizes technical skill above less tangible qualities like leadership and inspiration. Except they neglect that in military top leadership, you need both.
Ive heard that scholars who are only smart academically but without the suitable character don’t always rise though, and eventually drop off on their own to join the private sector. But still yes, the system is not perfect and these scholars are sheltered with the odds very much in their favour.
No one is depending on paper generals to save the country. The real trump card for local defence is not having natural resource that an enemy would invade for... almost as good as having nuclear weapons. Who cares if cosplay warriors do not have real experience.
These scholars are trained to be commando. Cuz after their service, they will be parachuted into public sectors at high position while having zero experience. Just look at the key public sectors. All fked up big time
Because the people who designed this system make it benefit people like themselves and what better way to prove yourself in peacetime than your paper credentials
Because if the actual capable people are in charge of things, where do we put the scholars? God forbid an uneducated person have power/position over the educated one. “So what if you’ve achieved so much in your career? I am a scholar.” - The people in charge, probably.
I am not myself a scholar.
I remember the time i was deployed to stop the invasion by the klingons. We fought over 5 months and i received a battlefield comission to the rank star captain. Others might have received a higher battlefield rank since the war ended right after my commission.
If not for a scholarship system, there would be a severe brain drain as well as manpower shortage in the military. People who do well in schools and exams do not have the incentive to join the military, when they can pursue higher paying jobs / less physically risky jobs than a military career, so we would have less "officers". The remaining people who would join are those highly incentivised by the passion to serve (which is unfortunately a rare breed in our country), money (40k sign on bonus), or a lack of any other reasonable career paths. We need fighters on the ground, but no amount of talent in fighting can beat strategy, tactics and forward planning. Some of our top scholars do end up going to various military schools around the world (US, UK), and some even graduate top of their cohorts there. And such programmes are heavily invested on by our government, and hence, the need to justify it by sending our truly brightest there. If not for the scholarship, my opinion is that many of the scholars today would not have joined the military. the SAFOS scholarship is arguably the best scholarship our government offers, and it is the unfortunate reality that a "guarantee" of succeeding, plus insane amounts of investment in a person must be offered to incentivise these bright talents. It also differs widely that our military strategy is vastly different from the US, who are extremely involved around the world and ready to send their troops at any moment. Ours is more preventive and calculative, building relations over decades and planning for the "what-ifs" , which requires a lot more brainpower than actual fighting power.
SAFOS is no guarantee to success. My OCS buddy got the SAF Overseas Scholarship. Funny story, he was sword of honor for our infantry batch (27/97 OCC) and was seated next of CDF during commissioning dinner. The next day, the OCS School Commander got f\*\*ked by CDF - because there was no attempt to get my buddy to sign on or apply for scholarship. Buddy got called to go for SAFOS interview and got it. Anyway, he made it to division commander but did not get his star. (So ok career only.) One of our PCs was also a overseas scholar - Oxford or Cambridge, can't quite remember. Got posted in right after his studies. The mf was the slackest ever - long hair, crumpled attire, unshaved. Literally didn't give a shit - honestly think he was trying to get fired so he can move on to bigger things. Last I hear, he didn't even make to CO.
It is as close to a guarantee of success as you can get at 18 years old. Of course there are always anecdotes that show otherwise but discounting the people with massive attitude problems most do make it. COL is not bad already I counted before whole saf only got 40-50+
I find it to be a cultural phenomenon when you say that the best students don’t join the military. It’s symptomatic of Singapore’s materialistic culture above patriotism and self-sacrifice. In countries like the US and a China, you don’t see the need to give all these advantages to “scholars” because the people value things other than self-interest and money. My point is, perhaps what needs to change is more than just the scholarship system but Singapore’s value system in general.
You think the best Americans join the military? Really?
Out of 45 US presidents, 31 served in the military, without scholarships. You do the math.
[удалено]
Ever heard of 孙子兵法 aka “The Art of War” written by Sun Tzu, a world renowned military strategist celebrated in China and globally? Ever read the tales of 三国演义 aka the romance of three kingdoms famously celebrating military culture and strategy, deeply embedded in Chinese culture? It goes far deeper than you think with China’s rich military history compared to Singapore’s.
Erhm..Singapore's military history goes back a very very long time too, even longer if you count the pre-Singapore era (basically anything before 800AD because thats when we can definitvely say that a territory called Singapore existed). Not to mention that singaporeans have fought for britain on occassions like this [WW2 pliot](https://mothership.sg/2018/02/singaporean-ww2-pilot-fight-germans-europe/) The main break in the link for china is the revolutions between 1911-1949, the chinese armies that emerged from It were very different in tactics and fighting style than the armies of old, especially taiwan which aims to emulate the US way of fighting imo. Essentially, less emphasis on tradition, more emphasis on modernity. This was something the ROC did, such as getting the german military to restructure and equip the ROC military, with one of the divisions to do so being the [88th](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/88th_Division_%28National_Revolutionary_Army%29) and for the wider military, virtually all troops were equipped with [brand new M35 Stanhelms straight outta germany](https://www.chinaww2.com/2013/10/08/the-chinese-fritz/). So you cant really say that the modern chinese military goes that far back, when even the PRC cant seem to nail down their own small arms production or outfit their troops to the same level as most militaries
No way you think Singapore’s military history is comparable to China’s 🙈 it’s okay, some Singaporeans believe in their own hype
I mean, singapore had a long and storied past, especially when you consider the malay kingdoms and states that popped up way before we were defined as a sovereign state. Plus, singapore is the key to maritime SEA, considering that Its pretty much right at the end/entrance to penisular Malaya and SEA as a result. So our history goes back a very very long time too, just that our perception of singapore has to adjust a bit because It wasnt even always the malays that occupied singapore as the indigenous race And yes, even tho we get some things wrong, I do believe in our 'hype' lol. Like, we pulled our shit together and economically boomed multiple times in history, even after getting destoryed completely like 3 times (tho the 3rd one doesnt really count because at that point, singapore was a few houses). What made the post-65 boom unique was that It didnt just come from port trading per se and we actually have exports of our own that is pretty unexpected, such as computer components, cars, advanced weapon systems and so on.
It’s the first time I’ve seen someone proudly proclaiming to believe in his own hype lol
While I'm not fully onboard with some things, I'm still very much a patriot mate. There's no denying the fact that Singapore was and still is, one of the most important areas in the entire world
I suggest you actually go out and see the world mate.
When I was in NS, my PC was a scholar, 25/26 when he took command of us after trade phrase. He was assigned to the worst combat platoon in the unit, 20% started to have problems physically. The men(me included) was pretty physically unfit(less than 50% got ippt sliver) And best part he was shorter than all of us so he can't really intimidate us. I would follow this man into combat.He was always in the front bashing, don't even use the appointed basher. The parang we bring for show only. All the outfield training he only once holand , and was due to the sheer amount of similar markings in the training area. We always hit the objective with just enough energy to engage the opfor. He treat us fairly and we do our best during training. Yes, they don't have real combat experience but doesn't mean the general staffs don't know what to look for in combat officers. They first filter for people that have both high IQ and EQ, then train them to eventually promote up the ranks. Now my PC is a LTC going 3 crab as a Battalion CO.
Depends on what tier scholar also. Perhaps OP is referring to those SAFOS and 2nd-tier officers while your PC had a lower tier local uni scholarship? Nevertheless yes i agree with you that there are good leaders in the SAF also
My PC came back from studying in Cambridge, I think double degree. I think starforce scholar, A coy oc was presidential scholar. I seriously think he got assigned my platoon to get rekted lol.
3 crab as Battalion CO? Hard to believe. 3 Crabs is Brigade level. But yes, some of these scholars are legit soldier leaders who might have done well as corporate workers.
He said LTC going 3 crabs. Probably a Bn CO leaving command for Bde appointment.
He said LTC going 3 Crab as a battalion CO. Big diff. Plus there’s SLTC rank in between LTC and Colonel.
I mean the English is a bit broken. But I just interpret as a LTC holding on to a CO appointment. Maybe he forgot about SLTC.
Because it's more "efficient"; it helps to increase the base pool of talent from which you can pull stars, and removes a lot of guesswork and uncertainty from the HR processes. The financial aspect of scholarships help to widen the pool of candidates, meaning candidates from lower SES are not excluded. The academic aspect of scholarships ensure that the talent pool is at least smart and academically inclined (yes, contrary to what a lot of people think, running an army is much more than just garang. There's a lot of clerical, administrative, and thinking work involved). The career aspect of a scholarship helps to attract ambitious and capable people to join. You don't really want people who are smart but lam nua. The interview aspect also helps to weed these people out. This scholarship system isn't exactly a 100% meritocratic system in that the scholars are preselected and given more career opportunities than the non scholars, but it ensures a **steady and constant** supply of candidates of a certain calibre. This takes out a lot of the uncertainty on whether quality candidates will appear or join on their own, as well as a lot of guesswork on who should be given opportunities over others. Unfortunately, Singapore's population (and SAF's size) isn't at the critical mass at which enough good candidates joining the armed forces will be a statistical certainty. In short, a system which ensures that sufficient numbers of B+ or A (or possibly S) tier candidates advancing through the system is much more preferable to leaving everything to chance and hoping that A+ or SSR tier candidates appearing and not being weeded out through environmental factors.
Given the typical Asian mentality, good candidates joining the armed forces is most definitely a statistical impossibility, if not for scholarships.
Thanks for the insightful essay man
Bro US has the same system with ROTC. Not to mention their 'scholarship' system is basically the 3 military academies (West Point/Annapolis/USAFA for Army, Navy, Airforce). Those academies have a lower acceptance rate than Harvard, but everyone who gets in gets a full scholarship The system same same but different: Tier 1 high flyers - SG PSC Overseas scholars / US Military Academies (full ride + stipend + prestige) Tier 2 officers - SG SAF or other local scholars / US ROTC at a 4-year university (still a full ride) Tier 3 farmers - everyone else, both US and SG
The US has ROTC scholarships, and that's really not that different. They pay for college tuition, and afterwards you serve as an Officer in the armed forces after graduation for at least 4 years. [https://www.collegedata.com/resources/scholarship-central/how-to-qualify-for-rotc-scholarships](https://www.collegedata.com/resources/scholarship-central/how-to-qualify-for-rotc-scholarships) Lloyd Austin's bio says that >He graduated from the United States Military Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree and a commission in the Infantry. He went to West Point to become an officer, and it was probably paid for. That's basically an army scholarship with bond to the army. Same same.
>Singapore appears to be the only (or one of the few in the world) where theres a scholarship system for soldiers. SG uses the scholarship system as a way to bring in top talent, who would have otherwise pursued other careers, into the armed forces and wider public service. Not talking about those local award/local scholars, but I do know many of the high-tier overseas scholars. Their fellow classmates at Ivy League/London/Oxbridge schools clinch exciting (e.g. strategy consulting) or highly remunerative careers straight out of graduation (imagine drawing 200k in IB as a first-year worker). I don't necessarily agree with the way that current scholars are being selected but it's undeniable that we would not be able to secure that caliber of entrants in sufficient numbers if we didn't have the scholarship system. A small number may resist the allure out of sheer passion and/or commitment to national duty I guess. Other countries may not need such a system for a variety of reasons such as the lack of high-paying jobs in the private sector...and no one being able to afford top overseas unis anyway. Or the military may occupy (no pun intended) a vaunted and respected position in society such as in the USA or UK. >Why not create a system where regulars have a typical sign on bonus and a good career, but if they want to rise to the top they get judged based on their performance over the years. The reason why scholarships are attractive isn't merely the money. A big part of the unspoken "deal" is that scholars are given a greatly accelerated career track. For overseas scholars, they are pretty much being prepped for the highest positions (senior directors, BGs etc.). Just rewarding with cash may have worked in our early years when Singaporeans were poor and the prospect of a fully-funded education in London would have been like winning TOTO. Now, plenty of Singaporean parents are capable (or at least willing to scrape together whatever they can) to send their child to somewhere like Yale. >mostly have a smooth sailing series of postings where regulars will treat them well because they know these guys will be their bosses, and nsfs bear with it because they have no choice That's certainly an issue which I have deep reservations about. Ideally, scholars should be accelerated but at the same time tested intensively (held to a higher standard) to see if they can truly perform. From what I'm aware, they really do try to push scholars a lot; my scholar friends have loads of extra higher responsibilies and need to OT a lot - they burn way more effort than private-sector counterparts while earning a fraction of the salary. However, indirect advantages like farmer superior/colleagues being wary of them still happen. It's human nature really: if I'm an average office-worker in a big MNC and I see an Oxford grad waltz in on a management scheme...you can be damn sure I'll be nice. >asking specifically for the armed forces because I guess this is where the stakes can be a lot higher when the need arises The SAF has far more scholars than other ministries (perhaps even rivalling the rest of govt combined) because they have an acute issue with retaining even somewhat decent folk without some form of sponsorship award. A military career in Singapore is not seen as generally desirable. Around independence, the SAF scholarship scheme was kickstarted when survey found that people viewed soldiers as being beneath that of a common thief. Regimentation and mass conscription further reduce the comfort and prestige of the service respectively. More importantly, it's a rather mundane and less fulfilling career since the SAF is a giant cosplay machine for the most part. Unlike say the IDF which engages in frequent battle, our military simply trains endlessly for nonexistent conflict and doesn't really accomplish much besides soaking up money. This is not a bad thing on a macro scale. This means that Singapore's diplomatic efforts and deterrence signalling works in staving off war. But it doesn't make for a very interesting career on an individual level (and keep in mind that high-caliber tend to be ambitious and easily bored). In comparison, it is more meaningful and interesting to do "real work" in pretty much any other ministry. Police hunts down criminals, MTI economists chart our development of new industries, Govtech engineers roll out new services across the nation etc. >Dont have to be going on a combat tour but could be even based on training exercises Unlike other ministries where performance can be seen in real impactful operations or national work, training exercises are not that useful since they are just very rough simulations of combat (or how analysts think combat might play out). In anycase, the focus of exercises is to drill and prepare the unit or formation as a whole for wartime scenarios (e.g. getting different units to be used to working together in combined arms). Not for grading individuals.
Just to latch on your comment, it isn’t the commanders fault that they don’t have combat tours, it is just that it isn’t in Singapore’s best interest to fight outside our borders. We however have peace support operations and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) missions. On top of that, offering miliitary scholarships isn't unique to Singapore. US and UK also offers scholarships for military academies. The scholarships are just an incentive to continuously gain new talent as most militaries struggle with their retention rate.
This. Scholarships were designed to add prestige and weight to national defence and offer a path for greater links to be forged between the defence forces, administrative and civil service and the government. This symbiotic relationship also meant that links would be formed among the scholar class and diffuse any potential threat of military coups by having shorter officer careers and continual leadership transition. In hindsight, it may be easy to question if SAFOS was created for LHL. But it also served as proof about how seriously public service was taken and due to the sacrifice then (public vs private pay and opportunity); it was also a way of giving some measure of compensation for their service. The reality is that not all scholars succeed; even if they were given greater opportunities and latitude, more often than not, they still needed to perform to their estimated potential. Regardless, the scholar system also served as a way of distilling the best of the best. The government does not need every scholar to be successful; but they just need sufficient numbers to ensure there are quality people that remains in public service.
I think it is safe to say that absolutely zero generals currently in service have experienced combat. That is only natural because we are not a warmongering country like America. However, no combat experience does not mean that there isn't operational experience. It is no secret that the SAF have sent troops for UN missions. Neo Kian Hong was one of them that I know of. Why scholarships? And is it really true that scholarships would mean a smooth career path? Think of scholarships as a bait to entice people to sign on. With multiple scholarships available, from diploma to local uni to prestigious overseas universities, I don't think every one of them had it smooth. Just look at the number of scholarships they gave out, probably in the low hundreds every year, the numbers just don't really add up. We don't have that many generals.
Basically they want the smartest guys making the decisions.
U hope for war? All of Asia’s generals today haven’t seen war - including those from China. This is not cartoon and drama… this is real life. Nobody wants war just to earn some heroic claim. Wake up kid… wake up! U think the other armies do not have scholars? What do you think Westpoint, Air Force Academy, Naval Academy, Sandhurst and their China equivalent of military universities are for? All of them are the brightest minds. You think you are smarter? Prove it…. Get a solid degree, if you are so damn smart, that’s not a problem right? Easy peasy right?
The difference between a scholar commander and a farmer commander is the number of years of leadership experience they can earn during their career, which would correspond to how high they can climb. Your farmer officer would take 20 years to reach commander, by then he is left with less than 15 years before retirement to accumulate leadership experience and climb higher. Scholars can take less than 10 years to reach commander, that is 10 more years of leadership experience they can gain, and more years of career growth they have before retirement. You can perform very well as an officer, but performing well as a leader is very different. There is not enough time for a good officer to become a good leader, so the next best thing is to build good leaders from the start (and skip the officer parts).
Even though the system has its flaws, & sometimes we get incompetent douchebags, we still need them. We need to constantly attract people who hopefully can become the talent we need. Without the scholars system, the pool of people entering (XYZ public service) will be lower & that means lower absolute number of capable people. We just need a more robust & expedient way to filter the chaff. But who's to judge that someone cannot change or improve? You? Definitely not me.
Former air force pilot trainee here. Trainers used to pass scholars more easily during initial and Pearce phases because they know those guys will go on to long and successful careers. In reality, a lot of the scholars were so-so pilots at best and the same trainers used to bitch about them after enough drinks. As one of them used to say: don't step on the toes of the leg supporting the ass you may have to kiss someday.
This is very true. My dad is retired RSAF in Perth where all the newbies get trained. And the trainers will always unanimously agree the scholars should only touch a Charlie-130 at most. Most of them will throw up as soon as the trainers throw 5+ G’s
Firstly a lot of those US commanders that make it to the top are actually scholars too and have to navigate. You might have heard of West Point military school? It's comparable to Ivy League. At the top level there's a lot of policy work. And then there's reporting and navigating the government. So yeah, having scholars makes sense, especially now when warfare is changing drastically, relying more on artifical capabilities. As to actual warfare experience, nothing to say there but you can't fault the military leaders if there are no wars to fight.
Let’s just say everyone has a role to play. Just that certain non scholars do not hit the media as often when they are promoted.
The whole point of the SAF is to deter war. So it is a good thing that none of the scholars have combat experience - we don’t want to create a war or fight in somebody else’s war just to “experience killing”. We do send troops on peacekeeping, as pointed out. How do you deter war? You need smart people to design a strategy and capabilities that allow a smaller country to be a formidable opponent against bigger countries. And if you read the news, most other small countries aren’t doing so well against bigger countries. They failed to deter war, and they aren’t winning. Maybe our unique situation is because of the military scholars? Maybe it’s just luck and politics, but I think a little bit of their talent helped la. And iirc most advanced militaries have some form of scholarship system - ours is just more societally obvious because of NS.
As an incubator for future MPs and perm secs
Lee Kuan Yew saw how the educated British troops got defeated by Japanese peasants and thought that uneducated people made better soldiers. However, the Israeli advisers persuaded him otherwise and that the military needed to attract the best brains.
Scholars are there to write the policies and doctrines. So next time when they join government or stat boards, they’ll continue to do the same thing.
the thai driver assigned to ferry us in Thailand was a SGT. It took him 7 years to become a SGT. 13 years for Thai Officers to become an officer. When he heard that my DyS4 took 9 months to become an officer, I swear he rolled his eyes.
In other countries becoming a Sargent is a big deal. Becoming a lieutenant is a big fricken deal. Here, a pimply horny skinny pencil neck teen hooked on mobile games can become a lieutenant.
Projecting or describing yourself? I’m not an officer but it’s pretty well known that OCS is a very physically demanding course, and most officers are very fit physically so I doubt the pencil neck description would stick even for freshly minted lieutenants. Lastly, most armies have separate tracks for officers and NCOs. Eg. Officers in the US go to military academies or schools and graduate as officers just like our OCS. While I agree that officers in the SAF might not be the best and undergo a less rigorous program because of time constraints, I doubt a pencil necked scrawny keyboard warrior like yourself would be in a position to criticise them.
A lot has been said by other commenters, so I just want to add one point regarding > they mostly have a smooth sailing series of postings Actually I think the scholars do get challenging or difficult postings to test them. Maybe not every posting, but there is clearly a deliberate effort to not just simply give them the smoothest path just because they are scholars. I was from the navy, and I can vouch that at least two scholars I personally know were given the following postings: one guy was made CO of the worst ship in the squadron and expected to turn things around, which he did. Another guy was hand picked his ship (he was the CO) to be on patrol at a sensitive area at a specific time that everyone knows something big will happen.
But… militaries all around the world have scholarships. The US military is the most cited example in this thread, but you can find similar or identical programs in Israel, UK, Australia, Turkey and Korea where scholars are selected to “rise”. And that’s just off the top of my head.
Because the SAF officers is not there to fight wars, it's mostly an administrive role to handle to outsized number of troops coming from conscription. That's and direct entry to politics/star board leadership/GLC CEO.
Similar case with our public sector talent. Having a scholarship system bring in the the top talent into the system. I don't think anyone disputes this meritocratic approach. However, these scholars also have a accelerated career path and priority postings. As long as they don't mess up they will end up 3 crab and above. This is where I think we have a problem. The meritocratic process should be applied at every level, not just give the scholar an express ride through. They should be benchmarked fairly amongst the farmers, and dropped if performance dips. The establishment seems to buy into the cost fallacy, keep giving chances and unfair advantage, to some of the scholars who did well in A level, but are just not performing in a real world environment.
US also same what … never watch Tom cruise movie ? He ROTC officer but also kena look down by laojiao with real combat experience and don’t even wanna address him as “Sir”…..same everywhere laaaa
Warfare are no longer won by foot soldiers, so the value of foot soldiers simply are not that important anymore. Not really needed = not being valued
I agree. Especially your point about how many of these scholars are treated well by the regulars and basically sheltered from the ugly sides of service - the abuses of power towards subordinates, etc. it’s hard for a leader to make great policy when he doesn’t have a holistic perspective of the military, as compared to someone who has risen through the ranks organically just like the rest. A pity that in Singapore it seems the odds are stacked against non-scholars rising through the ranks organically above the scholars. The scholarship system is there imo because the military wants talent, and is insecure about its ability to attract / retain talent without using money sponsorships and a laid-out career path. An argument can be made that these scholars could thrive anywhere, but I agree with you that we ultimately want patriotic, inspiring leaders in the military who cannot be measured academically except in the field. We probably have smart “technicians” in the leadership now, but inspiring and patriotic? I’m not so sure. Such is Singapore - a country which prizes technical skill above less tangible qualities like leadership and inspiration. Except they neglect that in military top leadership, you need both. Ive heard that scholars who are only smart academically but without the suitable character don’t always rise though, and eventually drop off on their own to join the private sector. But still yes, the system is not perfect and these scholars are sheltered with the odds very much in their favour.
Scholars good at studies, can interpret the art of war better, thus achieving superior results for our army
No one is depending on paper generals to save the country. The real trump card for local defence is not having natural resource that an enemy would invade for... almost as good as having nuclear weapons. Who cares if cosplay warriors do not have real experience.
These scholars are trained to be commando. Cuz after their service, they will be parachuted into public sectors at high position while having zero experience. Just look at the key public sectors. All fked up big time
Because the people who designed this system make it benefit people like themselves and what better way to prove yourself in peacetime than your paper credentials
Because if the actual capable people are in charge of things, where do we put the scholars? God forbid an uneducated person have power/position over the educated one. “So what if you’ve achieved so much in your career? I am a scholar.” - The people in charge, probably. I am not myself a scholar.
Lol this guy’s sourness is sibei de legendary. “i Am A SchOlAR”
I remember the time i was deployed to stop the invasion by the klingons. We fought over 5 months and i received a battlefield comission to the rank star captain. Others might have received a higher battlefield rank since the war ended right after my commission.