Posted on 09/27/2018 9:26:00 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
By now, most people in South Korea know the national team’s victory over Japan in the Asian Games football tournament secured not just the gold medal, but also an exemption from military service for Tottenham Hotspur’s Son Heung-min. The win also brought global attention to a simmering social and political issue in South Korea.
All male South Koreans aged 18 to 35 undertake mandatory military service. Most start in their early 20s, disrupting tertiary education or postponing career entry. For most, mandatory military service includes five weeks of boot camp, and around two years of mind-numbing battalion boredom, indoctrination, and short bouts of intense training. Understandably, few want to do military service.
South Korea is a country going through momentous social change. What commenced with economic development in the 1980s, and continued with political development in the 1990s, continued into the 2000s with social change. But since the 2010s, youth unemployment, economic instability, gender inequality, corruption and social immobility has led to growing social dissatisfaction with the pace of this change.
Mandatory military service is an ever-recurring source of social dissatisfaction. Controversies include corruption, easier service conditions for celebrities, dual national service obligations, bullying, and an outdated criteria for exemptions.
Exemptions to military service are the latest controversy. There are currently no exemptions for conscientious objection, something the government is looking into after a June 2018 Constitutional Court decision required the government to provide alternatives forms of national service. Exemptions for having excessive tattoos, being overweight, underweight, having certain medical conditions, holding foreign citizenship and/or residency, being of non-Korean ethnicity, and studying in fields deemed of national importance, have all been restricted.
Exemptions are given to high-achieving sports figures, artists, classical musicians and dancers, but controversially, not to high-achieving pop culture stars, actors or film-makers.
Mandatory military service historically serves two broad aims: national security and nation building. It can act as an important force multiplier in periods of national emergency, and can equally act as an important social equalizer, reinforcing the individual’s connection to the nation and society. For many South Koreans, its current form does not fully reflect either of these aims. Debate is emotional and muddied by nationalist rhetoric and political ideology.
On one side are those who see mandatory military service as a bulwark. It is seen as essential in the context of North Korean contingencies, ranging from invasion to collapse. Equally, it is seen as essential in the context of the fraught geopolitical situation amid US interests, Japan, China and Russia.
Some also see mandatory military service as a bulwark supporting South Korean traditions and society. It encourages social connection, conformity, hierarchy, and a shared sense of national pride. Among those having completed their service, popular sentiment has it that the experience “makes boys into men” – even arguing that it’s essential to understand and survive South Korea’s work and corporate culture.
On the other side are those who believe that the current mandatory military service is an obstruction. It is seen as outdated and ineffective in the context of national security. Countries facing similarly fraught geopolitical situations do not restrict service to just one half of the population and allow exemptions for conscientious objection. All Israeli citizens undertake mandatory military service, with females serving around two years, and there are stipulated exemptions for religious students.
Critics argue South Korea’s mandatory military service system is more likely to train recruits in make-up and skin care than it is to prepare them to defend the country. Others see mandatory military service as an obstacle to transforming South Korean society. It discourages diversity and inclusion, further marginalizes the socially estranged, and above all, buttresses entrenched gender inequality.
Reforming South Korea’s military service system is a political can of worms with few clear options. Abandoning mandatory military service in favour of an expanded volunteer professional service would serve national security aims, but at the same time, would not serve nation building aims. Restructuring military service into a non-compulsory, better-paid, reserve service would serve both national security and nation building aims, but would potentially reinforce social and economic inequalities. Restructuring mandatory military service into a modern institution to strengthen diversity and push gender equality would serve nation building aims, but would potentially neglect national security aims.
The Moon Jae-in administration currently plans to reduce mandatory military service to 18 months. In face of recent events, it’s also promised to review the military service exemption system. Both plans are already attracting controversy, and there’s little political will to push for further reform.
With declining birth rates; an ever-present, albeit momentarily reduced North Korean threat; and smoldering social dissatisfaction regarding its management; mandatory military service will remain a simmering social and political issue for South Korea – but not for Tottenham Hotspur or Son Heung-min.
I agree, but the military brass don’t seem to like the idea.
Too many malcontents, I suppose.
We have it here. It’s called Americorps. Turns young folks into permanent Democrats. Just like the Peace Corps.
I would think that the emphasis should be taken away from 4-year degrees in Gender Studies. Perhaps a 15 month volunteer enlistment where one goes directly into the infantry after basic. He/she gets out and gets a 2 year community college technical education condensed into another 15 months with weekend time in the reserves. Get rid of ALL other assistance for HS grads. Employable by age 21.
Overweight? Can’t pass the drug test? Good luck getting a good chance on the outside. University is just a place to ‘park’ one’s butt for 4 years while waiting to figure what to do in life. Waste of time. 15 months could be extended to 2 years for volunteers. Anybody thinking they can enlist without a minimal effort once in can get his/her exit
benefits cut.
Not as long as they are thrown into wars of convenience, and the leadership is enamored with the idea of drag queens on navy ships at sea, trannies, lesbos running the Air Force academy, homos everywhere, and women in the infantry.
No family should be forced to send a kid into that sicko environment. This is not the military of the Reagan era.
Yet those same families pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to send their children to colleges that are 20X worse than anything in the military. The armed forces can be cleaned up with a pen and a phone, it’ll take generations to reform academia.
“The armed forces can be cleaned up with a pen and a phone, ”
/
/
Think of what happened to FBI/CIA.
When Obama had the pen and the Phone.
The news: Military boots man from hurricane task force over ‘white power’ hand gesture
The anti-war riots and demonstrations disappeared overnight once the draft petered out. Nobody cared about “war” or “peace”. The motivation that put those crowds in the streets and on campuses in the late 60s and early 70s was self-interest. Too many of our young adults would rather take it easy than go to Fort Riley. The draft will not work for a sinking society. Draft dodgers have too many “outs” from heavy drug to sudden conscientious objector syndrome.
Let’s just try to get back to a point where we can keep flaming faggots and trannies out of the Army and the Navy.
This has always been the standard argument in any discussion, as if that settles it. Think about it though - it’s not as if anybody in civilian leadership cares what the brass thinks, particularly in recent decades. They do what they are told, right?
I’d sure be interested in hearing a few examples of the author’s countries that are in similar geopolitical situations. I was stationed there, and as I recall there were some alternative forms of service but it wasn’t much better. It was just something people had to do. Favoritism for celebrities, that’s a tough one. Hm.
Yeah. I can think of some great reasons for the draft. The President should mention bringing back the draft, just to hear the howls of protest from the usual suspects alone would be worth it.
With a draft, it can be argued, in a representative government “wars of convenience” aren’t politically possible. The conscripted army has a natural feedback mechanism to the national government. Mothers and Fathers, sisters and brothers, etc. That’s probably why it was deleted at one level.
You are summing up my point quite well.
IMO there are parallels to our current sandbox wars to Vietnam. One is they are never ending. Two if we pull out all together the war is lost.
In Vietnam we had a negotiated peace. Our part of the deal was to pull out. Then the North reinvaded, we chose not to support the South and the rest is history.
My point is, the only real difference between today’s wars and Vietnam is the draft. No one cares if our men and women go to war, fight, get mutilated, die or come home with mental and physical diseases as long as it is not the chicken libs doing the fighting.
Your statement: “The motivation that put those crowds in the streets and on campuses in the late 60s and early 70s was self-interest.” is so correct!
The country has a lot of turning around to do before we can have a successful draft. Trump is just the beginning.
I have said this for decades now.
All morally, physically and mentally qualified men (able to meet recruitment standards, that is) must elect any services modified basic training course and successfully complete it. Then, be affiliated with the reserve component for eight years with a brief annual training requirement of basic skills refresher. Women may choose the same or complete similar obligations in the civil sector.
This initial training must be completed post HS credentials(traditional or nontraditional) again meeting recruitment standards. Men who do not meet basic enlistment criteria are ineligible for said fed benefits, with exceptions of medical/mental, then those may seek alternate venues like the women, but all must serve; moral/legal ineligibles are SOL.
If men or women refuse, then they are banned from ever enjoying any federal educational benefits, and maybe more.
Exemptions are limited only to issues that disqualify from recruitment standards, every swinging Richard and singing Sally get to play.
Those who choose regular enlistment or are appointed to Service Academy are the only exemptions. Sr ROTC is treated much the same as today, but with a formal service basic training up front to wash out the lame lazy and unworthy/not serious to begin with ( our ROTC program is super wasteful for the officers it produces- some 25% of 4 year scholarship awardees commission at astronomical program cost).
Once the basic service requirement is completed successfully, then and only then do any and all federal benefit program become active.
NG an Reserve training centers can swell to provide the basic training modules in a summer- needs to be only 10 weeks for all services to get them to basic “integrate into a unit proficiency level”. Upon national emergency, we have a pool of reasonably well trained manpower to augment .
True, but you have the option to send them to some of the decent clean christian patriotic schools. There are still a few.
That may be, but with the qualified pool of qualified potential volunteer recruits currently shrinking, it’s tough enough as it is to fill critical billets.
What I would envision would be greatly lowered standards to accommodate the influx of the mentally/physically/morally and ethically deficient. Then, diversion of leadership cadre, resources and funding to find something relevant for the snowflakes to do...perhaps forest-fire fighting, or manning sensor checkpoints along the borders to free up Regulars to focus on warfighting...just a thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.