Since 1967, National Service (NS) has stood as a rite of passage for generations of Singaporean men, strengthening our defense, uniting our diverse society and instilling discipline and resilience among the population. It is a legacy that commands deep respect, forged in a time of uncertainty when our nation’s very survival hung in the balance.
But nearly 60 years on, as the threats facing Singapore have evolved beyond the need for a large conventional army, a growing number of Singaporeans rightly believe we must not blindly enshrine the two-year duration as an untouchable tradition. To do so is to risk hindering not only our young men at a pivotal stage of their lives, but also the nation’s broader potential.
Two developments make such a reduction possible. Firstly, as the meteoric advancement of Operations Technology (Ops-Tech) facilitated a six-month shortening of NS in 2004, our contemporary access to devices that were then considered fanciful science fiction should likewise warrant a second contraction.
At the forefront of this revolution are next-generation training tools, such as multimodal interaction interfaces powered by deep and convolutional neural networks. Already deployed in numerous developed militaries, these systems simulate realistic combat scenarios and deliver immediate, data-driven feedback more precisely than a human officer could, dramatically accelerating the learning curves of recruits.
For Singapore, with a paltry 72 square kilometres allocated for defence, this technology would be particularly instrumental for streamlining training. Battalions would no longer have to wait their turn to use local practice grounds or rely as heavily on utilising far-flung bases in Brunei or the United States.
In fact, efforts are already underway to combine these simulations with live-fire exercises in SAFTI City and Australia, showcasing how flexibly this technology can be integrated to prepare our conscripts.
The rise of digitization, notably through robotic process automation, also creates opportunities to shorten the duration of NS by taking over menial administrative tasks, from distributing supplies to clerical work.
While these are mainly taken up by men who score lower on the Physical Employment Standards, manpower shortages have currently forced several combat-fit soldiers to take up these roles, whereas automating these duties will free them to focus on honing essential soldiering skills.
In fact, the implementation of similar technologies in the American military has already led over 75% of personnel to report higher morale, improving learning and camaraderie.
Technology’s transformation of the battlefield itself, as shown by the swarms of drones, unmanned surface vessels and quadrupedal ground vehicles increasingly populating Singapore’s training grounds, will also enable further cuts.
While soldiers must still be trained to operate and manage these logistics and reconnaissance systems, their deployment can significantly reduce the physical strain traditionally associated with such missions.
This directly addresses the concerns of proponents of a two-year NS, such as Singapore National Service expert Ho Shu Huang, as conscripts will now have more time to master military techniques instead of “decompressing”, significantly shortening training cycles without compromising operational readiness.
Secondly, the changing nature of the threats facing Singapore allows us to pivot to alternative, yet equally effective, defence measures that would justify a shortening of NS.
As SG101, a government platform detailing Singapore’s defense priorities, states itself, our primary threats to national security today stem from terrorism and cyberattacks, which is evidenced by incidents ranging from bomb threats on Air India flights to ransomware attacks on DBS and SingHealth.
This reality does not align with the outsized zeal we devote to building ground combat capabilities, and instead calls for a greater prioritization of the Singapore Police Force and Digital and Intelligence Service, whether by incentivizing more personnel to join these branches full-time or encouraging conscripts to serve within the police, which currently increases 5% of all National Servicemen.
Such a shift would place more emphasis on acquiring technological expertise rather than the lengthier processes of maximising physical fitness and conducting overseas operations.
Whilst focusing less on our conventional defence capabilities may seem imprudent given the proliferation of conflicts worldwide, compounded with our small population and limited strategic depth, Singapore’s geopolitical position diverges substantially from that of countries that have imposed, or are considering reintroducing, conscription.
For instance, while Israel’s recruits may benefit from more advanced military technologies than Singapore’s, its encirclement by hostile militant groups make national service a strategic necessity.
Likewise, European states such as Latvia and Romania lie perilously close to a revanchist military superpower, while Germany’s role at the vanguard of NATO both commits it to Europe’s defense and has makes it a consistent target of the Kremlin’s threats and espionage operations.
As Sudhir Vadaketh, a senior editor with the Economist Intelligence Unit, bluntly (and rightly) observes, Singapore’s Minister of Defense Ng Eng Hen’s invocation of these examples to rationalize maintaining a two-year NS is “lazy.”
Even when cloaked in his oddly self-aggrandizing references to Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, they do little to resurrect the outdated narrative of Singapore as a vulnerable island encircled by Muslim-majority nations poised to pounce.
Granted, Singapore’s long-time Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew had good reason to treat regional hostility seriously when Singapore was founded. But our past threats have now become some of our most important trade partners, illustrating the success of our “Economic Defense” pillar.
With the advent of ASEAN, Malaysia and Indonesia have grown heavily reliant on us for semiconductor and pharmaceutical imports, collaborated with us on major infrastructure projects, and jointly operate Special Economic Zones in Johor, Batam, Bintan, and Karimun.
The notion that either would risk immense financial and diplomatic fallout by launching an invasion is about as plausible as Italy attacking France over grievances from the Second World War. And yet, Singapore’s conscription periods remain several months longer than those of many European countries, or even those in Asian countries located near potential flashpoints for war, such as South Korea and Taiwan.
Additionally, Minister Ng’s nebulous reasoning that Singapore should prepare for a potential US-China war ignores our uniquely painstaking strategy of non-alignment, an approach that has fostered strong relations with both superpowers.
Not only do we remain a key hub of investment for these hegemons, but we also share special cultural ties to China since its diaspora comprises most of our population. Meanwhile, we collaborate extensively with America in crucial fields such as civilian nuclear technology, cybersecurity and space equipment.
Our Switzerland-like neutrality has been underscored by our role in facilitating dialogue between China and Taiwan in 2015, a diplomatic privilege very few nations have enjoyed.
While Minister Ng correctly notes that such non-alignment obligates few, if any, nations to come to our aid if an invasion occurs, this strategy will also enable us to sit out of any regional conflicts unscathed.
Complacency towards the prospect of a land invasion would, of course, be a mistake, as Malaysia’s maritime encouragement in 2018 starkly warned us, but it would also be foolish to disproportionately weight its infinitesimal risk at the expense of more immediate security concerns.
Maintaining the current duration of NS will perpetuate burdens that exist both in principle and its eye-watering costs. While its total price tag remains undisclosed, the Ministry of Defense (MINDEF) currently pays 50,000 conscripts approximately S$1,000 (US$770) per month, and endures vast expenses from providing equipment, overseas logistics and basic necessities such as food and housing.
As a result, Singapore’s defence budget ballooned to a staggering S$20.25 billion in 2024, or 3% of the nation’s GDP, placing it among the top five countries globally in terms of defense spending per capita.
Yet, the financial burden of a two-year National Service is eclipsed by an even greater cost: the toll it takes on Singapore’s workforce. Whilst conscription does instill valuable soft skills in our young men, including teamwork, discipline and leadership, these benefits are considerably outweighed by the opportunity cost of forfeiting two years of field-specific experience.
Aside from a select few who serve in specialized roles such as cyber-security, the average conscript finds himself removed from any meaningful alignment with future career paths, a disconnect that MINDEF’s recently introduced career fairs and CV-building workshops can hardly make up for.
History offers sobering parallels. In the Netherlands, where national service continued until 1997, former conscripts earned 3-4% less over the 18 years following their discharges. Although part of this was attributed to lower university enrollment, a factor less pronounced in Singapore, the strong societal expectation of tertiary education, studies also concluded that education gaps alone could not explain the disparity.
Rather, it was the lost time in acquiring industry-specific skills that eroded long-term earning potential, a pattern similarly observed among American veterans after the Vietnam War and German men prior to the end of conscription in 2011.
Singapore’s dire demographic challenges make this predicament yet more acute. With the birth rate plummeting to a historic low of 0.97 in 2024, the economic toll of removing tens of thousands of young men from the workforce each year is set to become even more pronounced.
Moreover, by Defense Minister Ng’s own reasoning, women should not be drafted because doing so would “delay their entry into the workforce,” thereby “accentuating the decline in the size of our local workforce and reducing household incomes.” If this rationale is compelling enough to exempt women, it surely deserves equal scrutiny when applied to our men who must serve.
Advocates for maintaining NS at two years present two other misguided arguments to defend their position. The former involves their fear that shortening conscription by a few months would unravel Singapore’s delicate social fabric.
While it has been commendably effective in strengthening cohesion, we are no longer a country on the brink of disunity as we were 60 years ago, but one that ranks first globally in tolerance towards minorities.
Moreover, NS remains just one of many methods to encourage integration between groups from all walks of life. That effort already begins in childhood, with programs such as OneKidz and the Opportunity Fund enabling inclusion in schools for racially and financially disadvantaged students.
It extends into housing policies that include the Ethnic Integration Policy and Public Rental Program, and into the workplace through upskilling initiatives such as the SNEF’s Workplace Integration Program and Lifelong Learning. With such robust frameworks in place, it is implausible that shortening NS would send our social cohesion into freefall.
These critics are more persuasive when pointing out that shortening NS will provide insufficient time to whip recruits into shape. However, it would be far more effective to promote fitness before they enlist, so that they not only scrape through the individual Physical Proficiency Test (IPPT), but excel at it.
For example, the Singaporean government should make PE modules compulsory at polytechnics, where only 30% of male students passed the IPPT in 2014, compared to 70–80% at junior colleges and around 50% at Institutes of Technical Education, where PE is already mandatory.
The unshakeable popularity of char kway teow and bubble tea is also emblematic of our concerningly unhealthy diets, with nine in ten people consuming more salt than the recommended level, which may be remedied by raising indirect taxes on unhealthy foods and subsidizing healthier options at hawker centers.
Finally, while the Singaporean government has invested extensively into fitness centers, community programs and reward schemes to promote healthy lifestyles, participation remains lukewarm.
In the National Steps Challenge, for instance, a third of contestants would only claim their rewards after a month, and 7% would not claim them at all. These programs would gain more traction if they were promoted more actively through social media platforms and community-driven events, especially those tailored to younger audiences.
Our national motto, “Majulah Singapura” – Onward Singapore — exists for a reason: We must have the courage to assess whether our institutions still serve the needs of today, rather than justify the status quo based on outdated conditions.
Just as we revised National Service in 2004, so should we seize the opportunity to do so again, to harness the full potential of our youth and the country at large.
Sean Tan is a former King’s Scholar at Eton College and intern at the Center for International Governance Innovation. He has also written articles for St Antony’s International Review Oxford, Yale’s undergraduate US-China magazine ‘China Hands’, Oxford Political Review and several other notable publications.
