Conscription is harming Taiwan

Some time ago, the media reported on would-be conscripts scrambling to grab a place in the "alternative service" to military conscription. There is now an uproar over President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) future son-in-law, who escaped doing his term of military service because he had gout. The issue of military service has again struck a sensitive chord in Taiwan's society.

Why do so many people feel disgruntled?

This writer has always advocated a volunteer military recruitment system. But this seems to be a politically incorrect view in a country that faces external threats. The difficulty of getting enough recruits and the increased burden that would be imposed on government coffers are the usual reasons given against a volunteer system. I find these reasons totally incomprehensible.

Military recruitment is a public policy matter. It needs to undergo an analysis for cost-effectiveness. Why do we have "reserve officers" and "alternative service" systems?

We have them precisely so that skilled people can be more valuable for the country if they are pulled out from the ranks to serve as platoon leaders or as cheap labor for high-tech companies. Once this point is clear, then the alternative service system will seem quite strange. Someone with a PhD in electrical engineering would be working in a high-tech company anyway if he were not doing alternative service. The only difference is that he would be getting a reasonable salary for his work. The conscription system forces conscripts to provide the same service for less pay. By comparison, an outstanding female with a PhD in electrical engineering can get paid according to her market value because she does not have to do military service. Why should we use a conscription system to provide cheap labor to corporations?

Moreover, society as a whole has paid an enormous invisible price for the conscription system. Friends of mine waited almost a year to be conscripted -- doing nothing (of course, two years of military service are also spent doing nothing). Still more people see their lifetime plans interrupted. They waste the most creative time of their lives writing military reports that do not help the nation's economy or the people's livelihood.

How many people have left the country before conscription age just to evade those two years, and come back only after they are too old for conscription? How many people have cut their fingers, damaged their eyesight, or otherwise harmed their bodies? How can it be beneficial to the country? How many mutinies have we had in the armed forces?

Our president, who can carry his wife to and from her wheelchair every day, did not have to do military service because of a problem with his "hands." And the president's future son-in-law is busy running in and out of the National Taiwan University Hospital every day and yet does not meet the physical conditions to serve as a medical officer. These and countless other examples may all be legal, but when a question about "fairness" enters the public mind, a feeling of being exploited arises spontaneously.

I would also like to ask: Why can't I finish my studies before serving my country? Even if I have to serve two years as a conscript, I will be of far more use to the country providing legal services to ordinary citizens than just do drills and jogging. How much more of its human resources can Taiwan afford to waste?