Protecting the Constitution – the SAF Pledge
We, members of the Singapore Armed Forces, do solemnly and seriously pledge that we will always bear true faith and allegiance to the President and the Republic of Singapore.
WE WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION.
We will preserve and protect the honor and independence of our country with our lives.
Those of us who have been through National Service would be familiar with the SAF pledge. But being familiar is one thing. To be called to act upon it is another matter altogether. It is so often the case that we pledge what we do not understand or on something we have no intention of going all the way as pledged.
This very day, I have reasons to seriously believe that close to half of our National Servicemen would not risk their lives to protect the President as they pledge they would, more than risking them to protect Colonel Sanders and their favorite burgers and fried chicken. Anyway, how is one rifle going to be enough to protect him along with the duty to protect aliens?
On the flip side, I have serious reasons to believe that no national servicemen would shy away from protecting his country and his family, even if that inadvertently means saving the president and aliens along the way. That does not mean allegiance to the president even though the president is a symbol which represents every quarter of civil society – a physical manifestation of the constitution, that is.
And this is my main point.
If the president is a physical and symbolic manifestation of all that is the constitution, then protection, as expressed in the SAF pledge, is expected to be accorded to that symbol when doing national service. The problem is when the symbol itself becomes an accomplice to enemies of the state who have no regards for the importance of the constitution, and seek ways and means to reduce the constitution to one that enslaves the people by enhancing the power and authority to interpret the constitution to the advantage of the rulers of the state.
How does one protect such a constitution without having to first go against the symbol of that constitution, the president. Do we protect the constitution the way it is meant to represent the people, or do we go against it when the representative symbol of the constitution is a partner of those who seek to enhance power by amending the constitution to suit and empower themselves?
A case scenario to emphasize the point ….
If one day, the people are to rise against the government over some constitutional amendments with the president’s support and approval; and during the uprising the president declares that all SAF personnel are to be mobilized to protect the president and the state, now, what would you do if you are in the SAF? To protect the president who is now no longer a true representation of the constitution? To protect the State which is now being run by a government which is the cause of the uprising? Or to protect yourself, yours and your neighbors’ rights as accorded to you in the constitution?
I hope our army men and women have taken time to ponder over this seriously. Some of us can sense that the day is near. It is foreseeable that if the PAP government continues to ignore the people, to declare itself free from sin when the sin is as clear as day, to be deaf to the peoples’ cries, to push along lines which benefit it’s own; then that day is not too far off I fear.
So, to my fellow citizens in the army I ask, “have you made your decision yet?”.
The Alternative View
*Article first appeared on http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Alternative-View/358759327518739