Speech by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen at the Committee of Supply Debate 2012
Actions
Let me thank Members for their questions and comments. Over the years, MINDEF has been grateful to receive very strong support from Singaporeans and Members in this House. I think we all share this deep conviction that Singapore must be able to defend itself, to keep the right to determine our own future and protect our way of life. I find it also significant that MPs and NCMPs from all political parties as well as NMPs support our defence policies. That's important. But MINDEF is also mindful that this trust has been earned over the years through careful spending and the equitable implementation of all our policies, and I want to reassure this House that MINDEF will endeavour to maintain and deepen this trust, and it is in that spirit that I welcome the opportunity to respond to queries from honourable Members. I will although have to add a caveat. The questions are all encompassing and look way into the future. I think it will take many days to respond to all these questions, so with your indulgence, I will just touch on the main points, and then we can carry on with the clarifications.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked for an update on the regional security environment, and the US-China relationship. Sir, indeed, the US-China relationship remains central to the continued stability and security of this region.
The US has been and is a "resident power" - I'm using a term that former US Defense Secretary Robert Gates used - it has been a resident power in the Asia-Pacific for over half a century, whose presence has been a vital force for stability and prosperity. It has been long enough here in the Asia-Pacific for us to assess the contributions and the role of the US' presence. And I think, on balance, history will be kind to their presence here. To quote former Indonesian Defence Minister Dr Juwono Sudarsono, "America's 'forward presence'... provided vital 'strategic assurance', guaranteeing regional and financial growth. America's dominance over the global commons was the critical pillar enabling all East Asia export-based strategies, augmenting Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China to develop their trade, finance, investment and banking reach." This is a quote from the former Indonesian Defence Minister. Malaysian PM Dato' Sri Najib Razak, as the keynote speaker at the Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD) 2011, said, "The United States has long been a modernising and moderating force within our region, supporting democratic institutions, improving governance and fostering respect for human rights."
However, China's recent rise has also presented tremendous economic opportunities for countries within and beyond the region. China is now the top trading partner of ASEAN, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Australia. By virtue of its geography and growing influence, China will play a critical role in regional security and stability.
This interplay of relations between the US, a resident power, and China, a rising power, how they accommodate each other's interests and relate with other countries in the region, will inevitably affect relationships with and between ASEAN countries. And we recognise that there is bound to be competition between the US and China, but also urge both sides to expand the common grounds to cooperate, to develop a relationship based on mutual trust and common understanding. So we were therefore heartened that during Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping's recent visit to the US, it was announced that both sides would hold the fourth round of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue and the second round of the Strategic Security Dialogue in China this May.
There are also traditional potential flashpoints in Asia such as the Korean Peninsula and the South China Sea as many Members noted including Dr Lim and Ms Ellen Lee. In the South China Sea, activities by states to assert their claims could cause tensions, and as Members rightly pointed out, non-traditional security challenges continue to confront us. The Mumbai attacks in 2008, and the Jakarta hotel bombings in 2009, remind us that terrorism remains a persistent threat to all nations. Our intelligence assessment for terrorism is that Singapore continues to be a target of terrorists. Piracy is another challenge. As a maritime trading nation, we have a vested interest in ensuring that sea routes continue to be safe and open.
I have briefly described the common security challenges that countries within this region must respond to. Dr Lim, Ms Ellen Lee, Mr Ong Teng Koon, Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Alvin Yeo have rightly pointed out that the SAF will now have to deal with a wider theatre of operations that includes non-traditional threats related to terrorism, maritime security, piracy and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR). They also asked if MINDEF and the SAF were responding adequately to these new scenarios. At the same time, Members have raised questions about our defence spending. In addressing these questions - how much we need to spend, why and what for - I would like all of us to bear in mind what we are up against and what we need to protect. I think that's the first starting point.
For Singapore, the harsh reality is that our defence needs are also determined, or more accurately, compounded by our geography and limited natural resources. Nothing will change the fact that we are a small island of just over 700 square kilometres. We are also one of most densely-populated countries in the world with no strategic depth. What does that mean? It means that we lack any hinterland to buffer our people and infrastructure against attacks. The sea is at our backs. With an economy that is highly dependent on global trade to survive, we need to ensure the continuity of our lines of communication and trade through air, sea and land. Many of you here, if not all of you, will remember SARS in 2003. SARS provided a bitter foretaste of what would happen if the flows of people and goods were disrupted, and that was only for a few weeks. Trade came down, confidence was lost, and businesses bombed. There were severe impacts. These constraints are immutable and have been recognised since Independence.
Dr Goh Keng Swee, who played a seminal role in building the SAF from scratch understood clearly the almost insurmountable difficulties and inherent challenges. He also understood the imperative. If you look at our archives, it is a treasure trove of information. He had two pieces of sagely advice. First, in 1973, when Singapore was still relatively poor and undeveloped, Dr Goh said, "The curious thing about Singaporeans in general is that they are very optimistic that war will never occur in Singapore. This attitude of the general public is all right for the economic progress of Singapore but it should never be that of the policy makers in the public sector. We have to think of such eventualities and make preparation well in advance." Let me give you a second quote. This was one in 1984, when our nation was on a much firmer footing, Dr Goh added, "The most dependable guarantee of our Independence is a strong SAF. A strong SAF in turn depends on the political will to make the effort and pay the price." His advice therefore: prepare for unthinkable eventualities well in advance and maintain the political will for a strong defence. This is why we invest considerable amounts each year on defence. But more than that, as Mrs Lina Chiam, Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Pritam Singh said, we require each Singaporean male to commit himself to many years of National Service. Can we keep up that political will? We have many opportunity costs, divergent needs, individual aspirations. Can we keep up that political will which Dr Goh quite presciently pointed out that we needed to do? We must.
Because, to paraphrase a famous statesman, we dare not tempt others with our weakness. Who said that? The then US President John F Kennedy. How much more so this reality, for a small country like ours. We dare not tempt others with our weakness, because as a "jewel of Asia", we dare not tempt others because we certainly have more to protect today. Sir, this is not a theoretical threat, only relevant in the distant past. In 1990, it took only one day for Iraqi forces to seize control of Kuwait, considered a small rich country but really is 25 times the size of Singapore. Just last month, Defence Minister of the Philippines, Voltaire Gazmin, said, "Without a deterrent force, we can be easily pushed around, our territories will be violated." Without a deterrent force, we can be easily pushed around, our territories will be violated.
Defence Expenditure and the 3rd Generation SAF
No one, no country, wants to be violated. Dr Lim rightly pointed out that we remain vulnerable. He and Mr Pritam Singh have asked the right questions. How does Singapore, a small country with little natural resources, defend itself against traditional and non-traditional threats? What kind of SAF do we need? How will we know when we have achieved it? Sir, these immutable constraints force us to leverage on technology, innovation and unflinching human will to overcome our limitations. Translated to stark military terms, we have to know more, see first, and respond sharply and decisively to disable, if not destroy, would-be aggressors. That kind of capability is hard to come by, even if we are willing to pay for it. But we have made considerable progress over the years. The questions that you today asked indicate that we have made considerable progress. How are we changing our SAF? Can we afford to relax a little? Can we now reduce NS commitments? The very fact that you are asking this is a reflection that we have succeeded. Today, the SAF is widely acknowledged to be a highly capable and professional military force, able to execute missions across the spectrum of security challenges. We have achieved real-time situational awareness of our airspace and sea lanes, and we owe a great debt to the pioneers and successive cohorts of SAF soldiers and commanders who built it up through their blood, sweat and tears.
Sir, the SAF takes its primary mission seriously - to deter, and if deterrence fails, swiftly defeat, any potential threats to our sovereignty and security. We could only have achieved and maintained these capabilities by an unwavering commitment to invest considerable resources over a prolonged period.
Dr Lim, Mr Ong and Mr Pritam Singh have asked how MINDEF plans its defence budget. Dr Lim said how do we get value for money? Let me provide details. We have said previously that the Government is prepared to spend up to 6% of GDP on defence, but MINDEF only asks for what we need each year. Our overall approach is to maintain a stable defence budget that grows gradually in absolute terms, and to manage that prudently. So over the last five years, defence expenditure has grown steadily by about 4% annually on average. It was $10.7 billion in 2008 and as Members pointed out, it is $12.3 billion this year. Such steady spending is a critical enabler. It has allowed MINDEF to take a long-term view and obtain the best value for our defence investments. It allows the SAF to steadily build up its capabilities, exploit nascent technologies - so in other words, we can actually spot the technology that will come on the market even before it has and exploit it - minimise disruptions, and effectively network its various Services so that the combined capability is more powerful than its individual parts.
I want to assure MPs that MINDEF is mindful of our responsibility to spend carefully and wisely. We are acutely aware that we are a major share of the government budget. We buy only what we need, scrutinise available options for the most cost-effective solution. Our first instinct is to upgrade existing platforms to extend their lifespan, instead of purchasing new ones. So for example, the Navy's corvettes - some of you may have served on it - are 21 years old, but instead of being replaced immediately, will be upgraded to add many more years of operations. Our two Archer-class submarines were bought second-hand and upgraded to be stealthier, with longer endurance, and extended reach. Our Leopard tanks were also bought second-hand and upgraded to meet our operational needs.
We only acquire new platforms when the capabilities they provide are considered critical - for example, our F-15SG fighters, our High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and the S-70B naval helicopters. These new platforms allow the SAF to keep its fighting edge sharp. When it is more cost-effective to do so, we build our own, as we did for the Terrex Infantry Carrier Vehicle, which provides our Infantry troops with more protection, mobility and firepower.
Associate Professor Fatimah Lateef asked for an update on efforts to transform the SAF into a 3rd Generation fighting force, and we have made significant advances. But I thought it would be better to show Members a video which illustrates the SAF's current capabilities. Military forces all over know that one of the hardest missions is to conduct is what we call an "integrated strike", i.e. one that requires close cross-coordination between different elements to neutralise a moving target, and we can easily understand why this is so difficult. It requires all your platforms and units to talk to each other in real-time, in the midst of a fast-moving and almost chaotic environment. This video which you are about to see shows our "sensors", command post and "shooters" tightly linked, allowing us to strike targets with a swifter and deadlier punch. Let's take a look.
The SAF today has brought the sense-to-strike cycle down to a matter of minutes, a quantum leap in our capabilities. The Commanding General of the US' Fort Sill army base, Major-General David Halverson, said after witnessing one of these integrated live-firing exercises, "It is apparent that the SAF has tremendous attack and defence capabilities... I witnessed a world-class effort earlier with the complex coordination of the various land and air assets." It's a major achievement. If you talk to the pioneers of the SAF, they know what we are up against, how difficult it was even to have a joint command. For them to see these capabilities today, they know that we have made major progress.
Having attained these capabilities, some MPs have asked if Singapore can afford to reduce our defence posture and preparations. It's a fair question. I think Mr Pritam Singh asked that, Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked that. It's a fair question, but difficult for anyone to know what the right answer is. 9/11 caught many countries off guard. Many European countries planned to enjoy the peace dividend after the Cold War, So when I meet defence ministers today in Europe, they tell me exactly that. They were planning to downsize after the Cold War, but after 9/11 found themselves stretched and hurried to respond adequately. Canada was reducing and replacing some of its tanks. And then 9/11 occurred. It then had to hurriedly acquire new tanks for their troops in Afghanistan. Once a particular capability is lost, it will take many years to recover even if spending is ramped up later. Worse still, it can cause the loss of lives later. In the late 1970s, the Royal Navy failed to replace its airborne early warning capability in its ageing fleet. So in the unanticipated Falklands War of 1982, this led directly to the loss of a number of ships and deaths of many servicemen and civilians. Mr Ong Teng Koon talked about this when he mentioned "unknown unknowns". But even for known threats, any military force will also tell you that there are always ways to further strengthen defences, if more resources are allocated. I think, on balance, all of us would feel safer if we continue to maintain a potent SAF through steady and prudent investments.
Ultimately, however, it is our people - our NSFs, NSmen and regulars - who form the SAF fighting force. And I share Mr Pritam Singh's concern. He mentioned that there were perceptions of how Singaporeans feel that they contribute more to Singapore, because of NS , and that others reap the benefits. I share that concern. We have to show Singaporeans that we value their contributions and that is what we are trying to do. Whether it is through education, pre-school education, special education, health, housing, retirement, even the SAF itself, it is all for Singaporeans. Some of you may not have been struck by the slide that the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister showed in terms of - in economic terms - how much taxes the median, average worker pays, versus how much he or she would get over a lifetime. And it was quite an interesting fact that if you don't own a car, you actually get back more than what you pay. But translated to day-to-day experiences, I hope that Singaporeans recognise that all that we are doing to build Singapore up - the base systems, the social support - is for Singaporeans.
We will have to do more, recognising NS contributions to show that citizens count for more, while also recognising that foreigners complement and help us build this place. I'm not sure that's enough, but I think we also have to bear in mind that Singaporeans on the other hand have received also from others. Many Singaporeans go overseas, to the UK, to Canada, to the US. When I was studying in the US - I was doing my fellowship in cancer surgery at the MD Anderson Cancer Centre - it was during the first Iraq war. And there were lectures, scheduled surgeries that I had to attend, and I was there on a government scholarship. Surgeons from this top cancer centre were called up to volunteer. A top surgeon was called up; lectures were cancelled because he went to serve. I was there, he was protecting his country's interests. I am continuing to study, while he is giving up opportunities. So the shoe can be on the other foot, and we have to explain to Singaporeans, that in the longer term, this is for your country and your children, and I hope that this will remind them that they are valued.
We want to bring out the best in each NSman, because with falling fertility rates, as many of you have pointed out, each NSman must shoulder more responsibility. We must bring out the best in our people, MOS Wong will elaborate on our learning and training initiatives when he speaks later.
This principle that we must get the best from each NSman applies to all Singaporeans, of all races. I was glad to hear Mr Zaqy Mohamad ask, and point out that the contributions of Malay servicemen have indeed risen in the SAF, and he is right. Because we operate on this principle - as long as a serviceman is committed to Singapore, dedicated to the SAF and capable of doing the job, his appointment and advancement in the SAF will be based on qualifications and merit. Qualifications and merit. And in tandem with rising educational standards, as Mr Zaqy Mohamad has observed, more Malays have been appointed to higher and more demanding roles across the SAF, including the Commandos, Engineers, Artillery and Signals, and as Pilots and Sea Soldiers. Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Zaqy talked about SPF and SCDF. As a matter of fact, the SAF has always taken in the bulk of the Malay enlistees. In other words, it takes in more Malay enlistees than the SPF and SCDF combined. The SAF is a big organisation, so I can understand the perception. But the facts show that this is so. More Malay regular servicemen have also risen to hold senior Command and Staff appointments within the SAF.
Sir, a number of Members - Dr Lim, Mr Alex Yam, Mrs Lina Chiam - raised pertinent questions on NS. They asked, can we shorten it, for example.
The primary consideration is that our NSmen are not the second line of defence. When there's a need, they are the first responders to protect Singapore when our survival is threatened. So in that eventuality, we have to have sufficient numbers, and we have to train them. We need to have adequate time to train and prepare NSmen for their roles effectively. In 2004, because of our 3rd Generation transformation efforts and technological improvements, the NS duration was reduced from 2.5 years to 2 years, and in 2006, the duration of Operationally Ready NS (ORNS) from 13 years to 10 years.
And that reduction, whether it's in 2004 or 2006, in NS duration corresponded with the surge in NS intake from 2006 to 2015. In other words, we are seeing that surge now. But from 2016, our cohort size will fall. There's a demographic echo. So from 2016, the cohort size, the absolute numbers will fall. Therefore, until further review, we should maintain the 2 years needed for full-time NS, and 10 years for ORNS, because we need this to bring our soldiers and units up to the level of operational readiness.
Even as we call upon each NSman to do his part, we must regularly look for ways to recognise their contributions. I think this was a point brought up by Mr Pritam Singh. I am pleased to announce that the rank allowance for all servicemen in the SAF, SPF and SCDF will be increased across all ranks, and MOS Wong will elaborate on this.
Dr Lim and Ms Ellen Lee asked about our bilateral defence relations with our neighbours, the major powers and key partners. Ms Ellen Lee is correct - no country can do it alone. We have built up an extensive network.
Let me start with our neighbours. Our defence ties with Malaysia are broad-based and long-standing. My counterpart, Dato' Seri Zahid Hamidi, and I exchanged introductory visits last year. I am happy to report to this House that since last May, both our Air Forces resumed fighter aircraft stopovers and refuelling at each other's air bases. So we started doing that. We also have a close relationship with Indonesia, with regular professional exchanges and bilateral exercises. Last year the SAF and TNI co-hosted the first ASEAN military exercise, a table-top exercise on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations. I think Dr Ellen Lee and Mr Lim Wee Kiak asked about the ADMM.
We have a long-standing relationship with the US. The US remains one of our strongest and closest defence partners. The US' presence has brought about stability in the region. We have therefore allowed US military aircraft and vessels the use of our facilities since the signing of a MOU in 1990. And in 2005, PM Lee and then-US President George W. Bush signed the Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA), to look for ways where we can facilitate the US' continued presence in the region. The deployment to Singapore of the US Navy's Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) is a manifestation of that cooperation.
In line with our 1990 MOU and 2005 SFA, Singapore is working with our US counterparts for one or two LCS to use our facilities after tests and trials on these new ships are completed. We have been informed by the US that this is possibly from 2013, when they will start to deploy these ships. While there may have been some preliminary staff level discussions on increasing this to four by 2016, we will only evaluate it when we receive a formal request from the US. Let me give you some information on the LCS. It is similar in size to our frigates, with about 75 crew members. Like all other US ships and planes that use our facilities, the LCS are not based in Singapore, and the crew members will live on board the LCS throughout the duration of their deployment. While deployed here, the LCS will make port calls around the region to engage other navies through activities in the region.
Our long-standing relationship with the US also affords us access to valuable technology and training opportunities to maintain our superior fighting edge. We currently maintain four Air Force training detachments in the US. At the end of last year, we also held one of our largest integrated live-firing exercises - you saw some of this in the video, whether it's here or in Australia - Exercise Forging Sabre, in Arizona, involved some 450 SAF airmen and soldiers. And the area where it was conducted was 19 times the size of Singapore. It is these realistic conditions that allows us to hone our capabilities and test our doctrines .
With China, we signed the Agreement on Defence Exchanges and Security Cooperation in 2008, and as a result, we have more high-level visits, exercises, professional exchanges, and mutual naval ship visits. Our relationship with China has grown, and we encourage China to play a constructive role in this region. They have responded with their Defence Minister participating in the SLD last year, as well as the ADMM-Plus.
We also continue to deepen ties with countries such as France, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Brunei and Thailand. Australia has been particularly generous in allowing us to train in their training areas, like the Shoalwater Bay Training Area in Queensland. Exercise Wallaby will be in its 22nd year. For France, we have extended our advanced jet training there, and extended the Defence Cooperation and Status of Forces Agreement last year to facilitate this. As Mr Ong Teng Koon rightly pointed out, this allows us to overcome our space constraints.
Regional Security Architecture
Dr Lim and Ms Lee asked about our regional security architecture. We promote one that is open and inclusive, with ASEAN in a central position, and you rightly pointed out, in the ADMM-Plus. Our Experts' Working Groups are also indeed working hard. Dr Lim asked whether one day we can have an ASEAN military force. I don't know, possibly. Let us work hard at forging cooperation and mutual confidence first.
The SLD celebrated its 10th year last year, and we had 31 Ministerial-level delegates from 30 countries attending, including Secretary Gates, and Chinese Defence Minister GEN Liang Guanglie.
Last year also marked the FPDA's 40th anniversary. Dr Lim gave a very concise history update, and asked whether the FPDA is still relevant and effective. The FPDA Ministers agreed with you, and therefore we did a stock take for our anniversary and reaffirmed our commitment to improving jointness, interoperability, and people-to-people interaction through exercises. It has grown quite tremendously. The FPDA exercise last year, Bersama Lima, involved some 4,000 personnel from the five countries, 67 aircraft, 18 ships and two submarines.
Mr Alvin Yeo asked about the SAF's contributions to homeland security, including maritime security. Let me provide a brief update.
The SAF's Island Defence Task Force and Maritime Security Task Force work closely with other Homefront agencies. The NMSS - National Maritime Security System, an inter-agency effort, has become operational and was tested during the large-scale security and civil emergency exercise, Northstar VIII, in November last year.
Singapore continues to partner Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand to conduct coordinated maritime and combined air patrols, in the air and sea, in the Straits of Malacca, and we have the Navy's Information Fusion Centre, which is a maritime information-sharing hub, for maritime agencies.
Mr Alvin Yeo asked about the Gulf of Aden. The SAF took command of the multinational Combined Task Force 151 for the second time, and deployed a Landing Ship Tank with two Super Puma helicopters for the third time last year. We also deployed for the first time a Fokker 50 maritime patrol aircraft. Our contributions have been well-received, and therefore, we are deploying a fourth Task Group, comprising a frigate and a naval helicopter, later this year to the GoA.
Mr Yeo also asked about the SAF's deployments to Afghanistan. I visited our servicemen in Afghanistan last October and saw for myself the challenges and the risks they faced up close. We continue to help other militaries prevent terrorists from again using Afghanistan to export terrorism. I spoke to commanders from partner militaries there, the Australian Defence Force and the US Armed Forces. They tell me that our operations there have made a difference and that they value our contributions.
At the end of this year, the SAF will have completed five years of deployments to Afghanistan. We started in 2007 in Bamiyan province, with a five-man dental team and a five-man construction engineering team. I remember the dental team sending back a report, and they said that their presence was a welcome relief, literally and metaphorically. Queues of up to one to two hours of people, with decayed teeth. Our deployments peaked in 2010, with about 100 SAF personnel deployed as part of our Weapon Locating Radar detachment, our UAV Task Group, and our medical, surgical, Military Institutional Trainer and imagery analysis teams. At present, the SAF has deployed, in Kabul and Oruzgan, two teams of a total of 15 trainers and a team of six imagery analysts.
We will continue to support the International Security Assistance Force's (ISAF's) strategy to strengthen the capacity of the Afghan National Security Forces to assume responsibility for the security of Afghanistan by 2014. While we continue with our contributions in 2012, we are closely monitoring the transition efforts by ISAF and the SAF will work with our partners towards the future completion of our mission in Afghanistan.
Conclusion
Sir, I have sketched our security challenges and outlined Singapore's inherent limitations to explain what we must do to be able to defend ourselves. I have provided members an overview of our defence diplomacy and overseas operations. But the most important message is this: The SAF is fully aware of its primary responsibility to provide that strong defence so that all Singaporeans can enjoy peace and prosperity today and in the future. We are following Dr Goh's advice, we are preparing for all eventualities, well in advance. But as Dr Goh also noted, how strong the SAF is, depends on political will - i.e. the support it gets from the Government, MPs in this House and from all Singaporeans.
Mr Wong will now respond to Members' queries on ways to engender support from NSmen, including women and employers as pointed out by Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, the NS45 campaign, the professional development and training of our servicemen, and on the issue of safety. Dr Maliki will later address Members' questions on the Total Defence campaign, as well as MINDEF's efforts to better engage the different segments of Singapore society.
