Disservice, or third time’s the charm?

MENTION “national service” and it conjures the image of drafting able-bodied young men – and women in some nations – into the military to be trained as war-ready soldiers to defend their country.

It’s nothing new as it is the most common method used to fill the ranks in the armed forces. This method of recruitment varies from country to country and some 85 countries, according to worldpopulationreview.com, have some sort of mandatory military service.

But in Malaysia, the National Service Training Programme (NS) introduced in December 2003 was not for the purpose of army recruitment but to encourage friendship between youths from different races who were becoming increasingly segregated from one another because of racial polarisation pervading our educational institutions.

After a dozen years, it was halted in 2015, reintroduced the following year as NS 2.0 and finally scrapped in 2018 by the Pakatan Harapan government on the basis that it was misused for “misguided indoctrination”.

Many governments have abolished mandatory national service for various reasons but none, as far as I can ascertain, for “misguided indoctrination.”

But then only in Malaysia would national service be used to try to fix a racial problem. I think the public’s reaction to it being scrapped was one of relief because of the increasing criticisms against the high cost – at RM600mil a year for an intake 85,000 to 95,000 trainees – which led to suspicions of corruption and nepotism; the poor maintenance and conditions of many of the camps; and whether the programme achieved the stated aim of improving race relations or the other objectives of instilling patriotism, volunteerism, good values, intelligence and confidence in the trainees.

But what could we expect from a mere three-month stint of putting teenagers together after they had spent their formative years in racial silos? While there was anecdotal evidence of positive experiences in the camps, after more than 12 years of existence, NS still could not fix the larger and still deeply embedded racial polarisation in institutions of learning and more.

So now we have NS3.0 as announced by Defence Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan, but with a different training approach and implemented in two phases with a third voluntary component.

Phase one will be conducted in schools for Form Four students, focusing on strengthening existing uniformed body programmes. They go on to phase two after sitting for their SPM exam: they will be sent to army and police camps for 45 days with 90% military-style training.

Mohamad acknowledged that the previous NS was more like fun summer camps with no continuity after the three months ended. This time, there is a proposed third part which is vaguely described as “the trainees will be welcomed by agencies”.

Apparently, phases one and two are to, according to CNA, prepare trained youths with strong character and a deep love for their country that will “equip them for future employment in crucial government agencies such as the police, the Fire and Rescue Department and the Civil Defence Force”.

This at last sounds more like what national service in other countries is about: recruiting young people into the ranks of the uniformed corps.

Could this be a genuine attempt to redress the racial imbalance in these agencies, which should include the armed forces?

Mohamad also addressed the issue of cost and gave the assurance that the annual bill would be a “mere” RM100mil.

Well and good for an initial announcement but there is still a dearth of details on the content, execution and cost-effectiveness, despite the lower price tag cited.

For example, since phase one is to involve uniformed bodies in secondary schools, which ones are these? Police cadets? Girl Guides? Boy Scouts? St John’s Ambulance? Red Crescent? Presumably there will be standardised modules for all these bodies to adopt and blend into their existing programmes. Will this be seamless or disruptive?

Proud to serve: National service trainees waving their flags at the Malaysian Armed Forces Open Day at the Integrated Recreational entre in Kuching.

If phases one and two are mandatory for all Malaysian teens, what about the ones who are home-schooled, studying in private, international or religious schools and do not take the SPM but other international exams like the IGCSE?

As for the 45-day military camp stint, will the trainees need three types of expensive uniforms like those in NS 1.0 and 2.0? How will the implementation of phases one and two be monitored and assessed? Can trainees fail the military boot camps? And how do people go on to the third phase? Is there automatic recruitment for promising, interested candidates?

Perhaps the third time could be the charm but to cynical, jaded Malaysians who have seen too many government initiatives blighted and derailed by corruption and poor management, NS 3.0 may be yet another waste of taxpayers’ money, benefiting certain quarters. As one person online sarcastically put it: “I reckon someone’s brother-in-law will get the cleaning/uniform/catering contract.”

That’s why I share the views of concerned educationists like Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Assoc Prof Hasnah Toran who told the New Straits Times that the RM100mil would be better spent on tackling the many pressing issues affecting schools, like improving infrastructure.

It’s great that education indeed got the lion’s share of Budget 2024: RM58.7bil for the Education Ministry and RM16.3bil for the Higher Education Ministry, making it a total of RM75bil, or 19% of the whole budget of RM393.8bil. But I would fully support adding that RM100mil a year to developing innovative and world class school syllabi taught by highly trained, dedicated and well-paid teachers using well designed and factually correct school books and other teaching aids that would bring better benefit to our children and nation-building.

Our education system should be our most powerful and effective tool to inculcate unity and patriotism but is unable to do so because it is deeply fractured, politicised and disturbingly divisive.

Our public schools are no longer touch points for our children to meet, mingle, and form friendships. Apart from Chinese and Tamil primary schools, in the last 20 years, private and international schools have proliferated. So too tahfiz and madrasah schools. There is also a growing trend of homeschooling. At university and college level, the majority of Malaysian Chinese students again opt for private sector institutions while Malay students go to public universities.

Hence, priority should be given to reboot our schools to make them the natural choice for Malaysian parents, regardless of their income level, ethnicity or religion.

We should get off our high horse and take a leaf from Singapore’s book as its education system is consistently ranked as one of the highest in the world by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The island republic’s national service may not be an apt model for Malaysia but its education system surely is.

It has been reported that one of the biggest factors behind Singapore’s educational success story is the quality of training that teachers receive. Only the top 5% of graduating students qualify to enter teaching. Once qualified, they are well paid, even better than their counterparts in Europe.

Naturally, that makes teaching a much respected profession.

That was how teachers, even without high pay, were treated in Malaysia decades ago. We can, no, we must, make it so again if Malaysia is to prosper in this ultra-competitive 21st century.

The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.