SAF and IDF
Of IDF and SAF
Posted on 03. Jul, 2009 by Kelvin Teo in The B-Side
SINGAPORE – The ties between Israel and Singapore goes back a long way. When Singapore was a nascent state during its initial post-independence days, the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew looked to India for assistance in the development of Singapore’s Armed Forces. However, India wasn’t a willing party, and thus, Singapore subsequently turned to Israel.
More than 40 years later, Lee disclosed in his book From Third World to First: The Singapore Story 1965-2000 that it was in fact the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that helped establish our Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). The Israeli mission was headed by Colonel Yaakov Elazari. He was later promoted to Brigadier-General and remained a consultant to the SAF even after leaving the military. Our Israeli counterparts were very much involved in the drafting of SAF’s military doctrines with regards to combat, establishment of army bases, infantry, creation of a defense ministry and intelligence bodies, etc. The Israeli instructors helped to build up a cadre of local commanders and instructors. They conducted a course for new recruits, a platoon commanders course and an officers course based on their training blueprints and methods. About 200 commanders were trained.
Since its establishment, changes have occurred over the years, and it is tempting to point out a whole list of differences between SAF and IDF which is non-exhuastive, and hence this article will only look at one aspect – the background and origins of high fliers both in the military and subsequently, in civilian life.
In the case of IDF, the Sayaret Matkal is arguably the most illustrious unit with individuals going on to become high-fliers in the IDF and subsequently, in civilian life. The Sayaret Matkal is an elite special forces unit (elite commando unit) of IDF. It has participated in a series of high profile operations such as the Operation Isotope, Operation Spring of Youth, and most famously Operation Entebbe where they pulled off a daring rescue of 100 jewish airlines passengers in Uganda, a foreign territory. Fighters of the Sayaret Matkal unit enjoyed a high standing within the Israeli society. Three of its former members subsequently became IDF Chief of Staff – Ehud Barak, Shaul Mofaz and Moshe Yaalon. Ehud Barak would go on to become Israel’s prime minister, as did Benjamin Netanyahu who was also formerly from the Sayaret Matkal. Avi Dichter, another former member of the unit, was the former minister of internal security. Shaul Mofaz formerly served as the minister of defense and minister of transportation.
In the case of SAF, the ones who would go on to become high-fliers within the military and beyond hail from an exclusive group of officers who have won the SAF Overseas Scholarship (SAFOS). These scholars, who usually present excellent high school results, pursue further studies in selected overseas universities and subsequently return to serve their bonds in the SAF. Barring Winston Choo, the rest of the Chiefs of Defense were former SAFOS scholars, including the current one, Desmond Kuek. Former SAFOS scholars have a good representation in our current cabinet and they include our current prime minister Lee Hsien Loong, minister of defense Teo Chee Hean, minister in the prime minister’s office Lim Swee Say, minister for foreign affairs George Yeo, acting minister for information, communications and the arts Lui Tuck Yew and minister for trade and industry Lim Hng Kiang.
The excellent academic achievements of SAFOS scholars possibly demonstrated their academic prowess but the academic attainments of illustrious Sayaret Matkal figures are comparable too. Yonatan Netanyahu, brother of Benjamin Netanyahu who also served in the same unit was placed on the dean’s list at Harvard University after taking courses in mathematics and philosophy. Yonatan was subsequently killed in action during Operation Entebbe. Benjamin himself was an MIT graduate, while Ehud Barak did graduate studies at Stanford University. Another former Sayaret Matkal figure, Daniel M. Levin did his graduate studies at MIT in the field of computer science, coming up with innovative algorithms for optimizing Internet traffic. He founded Akamai Technologies and was to serve as its Chief Technical Officer. Levin was unfortunately killed on board the ill-fated American Airlines Flight 11 during the 9-11 attacks. Levin was believed to have been killed when he attempted to foil the hijacking on board.
An obvious observation is that unlike the IDF, none of SAF’s defense chiefs were ever from the commando unit, not to mention the Special Operations Force, the equivalent of IDF’s Sayeret Matkal. Will we see a Chief of Defense hailing from the commandos in future? Your guess is as good as mine.
27 Responses to “Of IDF and SAF”
Leave a Reply
Advertisement
Polls
Loading ...
Another issue is that most scholar-officer-minister are untested in combat operations. Yes, our PM Lee led the Cable Car rescue but mounting civilian rescue vs. commanding units during actual combat operations are a different kettle of fish. To be fair to the scholar-officer-ministers, most of their brethen in the regular and NS service in the Singapore Armed Forces also lack actual combat experience.
Only recently with the many humanitarian and medical/logistics support to UN peacekeeping and Afghanistan or anti-piracy navy patrols off Somalia coast is the SAF engaged in anything remotely close to combat operations.
Another angle is the political party. I'm not familiar with Israeli political developments but were their military officers-turned politician careers going through one party or through different political parties.
Over in Singapore Inc, there is only 1 ticket you can run on to move from wearing temasek/camouflage green to white shirts/pants.
Majullah Singapura.
I think you are comparing oranges and apples.
War heroes, not just in Israel, do go on to become politicians, eg Eisenhower after WWII. Gen McArthur obviously had political ambitions too, but it did not materialised, just like John McCain. We have no war heroes. There is nothing to compare.
It is not difficult to trust someone politically when you have already put your lives in his hands and have survived it.
And as a footnote, most peacetime Generals dont fare well as wartime Generals. Case study is the American Civil War. Most, if not all, generals at the start of the war got sacked. The generals that finished the war would probably never be generals if not for the war. The peacetime paper and political war is a very different war from the gore and death on a bloody battlefield, where your mistakes, as well as your correct decisions, are obvious for all – right down to the lowest private – to see, without need for wayang and words.
First, we have to analyse the underlying purpose of this article. Is the writer trying to tell us the following:
a. That the Sayaret Matkal is an elite special forces unit of the IDF that has participated in a series of high profile operations.
b. That IDF has had three Sayaret Matkal officers who became Chiefs of Staff.
c. That the SAF's CDFs were/are SAFOS scholars but non-commandos who were chosen based on their academic excellence.
d. Therefore, the SAF should consider choosing a commando as a CDF since commandos can be Stanford graduates too.
First, there is a perfectly good reason why the Sayaret Matkal has participated in a series of high profile operations. Simply because it is the elite special forces unit of the IDF.
Secondly, the writer fails to note that the IDF has had 19 Chiefs to date, and only of out these, three of them were from the Sayaret Matkal. The SAF has gone through only a handful of CDFs.
Third, the SAF's real operational experience is very limited (thank goodness, perhaps), and the SAF Commandos' operational is only slightly more than the rest of the SAF. There is no significant advantage in operational experience between Commando officers as compared to those of the rest of the SAF.
Lastly, it's hard to believe that scholarships in Singapore, especially the SAF, is handed out solely based on academic ability. I don't believe that one cannot lead a brigade, division, or the army with just honours degrees.
Dear BryanT:
You said:"That the Sayaret Matkal is an elite special forces unit of the IDF that has participated in a series of high profile operations. b. That IDF has had three Sayaret Matkal officers who became Chiefs of Staff. c. That the SAF's CDFs were/are SAFOS scholars but non-commandos who were chosen based on their academic excellence. d. Therefore, the SAF should consider choosing a commando as a CDF since commandos can be Stanford graduates too."
Those are your words, not mine. If you have read a segment of my article – "hence this article will only look at one aspect – the background and origins of high fliers both in the military and subsequently, in civilian life." The thrust of my article is just to look at the groups within IDF that produces individuals who would go on to be high fliers in the military and beyond, and also do the same for SAF. I am aware of the fact that the 3 IDF Chief of Staffs were from the Sayaret Matkal, but relativistically speaking as compared with other IDF units, the Sayaret Matkal is the most illustrious one, arguably. They not only produced Chiefs of Staff, but they also had Prime Ministers and Knesset members.
NOWHERE have I suggested that SAF should ever appoint a Commando officer to be the CDF. I do not claim knowledge on SAF's selection criteria of CDFs and what they entail in the most detailed form. Perhaps, those are restricted documents not meant for our perusal anyway. Thus, I was merely stating my observation that we never had a Commando CDF. Of course, whether we will ever see a commando or ex-SOF CDF in future, we will never know.
This article is more of an observation piece, which happens to deal with groups producing high-fliers. I think it would be wonderful if you could perhaps address the gist of the article. Don't think that speculating about other issues will be that productive.. I will never venture to write an article suggesting that SAF should choose its CDFs from Commandos. Even the 18 IDF chief of staffs were quite diverse.. Secondly, I do not know what is the selection criteria of a CDF and thus, I am in no position to suggest any changes, because that would require me to understand the current criteria.
Sincerely yours
No one here is implying that the SAF gives out scholarships solely on the basis of academic ability. The important question is, does the current system of career advancement unduly favour academic qualification? In other words, does a non-scholar officer, who has excellent management and military skills, have a fair chance of promotion to a senior rank? There are only a few SAFOS given out every year and hundreds of officers sign on every year. Yet all of our CDFs are SAFOS holders. Not only that, the Chief of Navy (or Army or Airforce) is always a SAFOS holder.
This is important even in peacetime because the SAF is a 300,000-strong organization. As the tax-paying public, we want the most capable people to be in the right positions.
SAF Scholarships require admission to OCS on top of academic excellence. Having been through BMT, I am not entirely convinced that our officer cadets are potential SAF scholars. Personally, I think it is pre-mature to recruit SAF scholars until they have completed National Service. Their leadership experience will speak for their candidacy for SAF Scholarship.
smallvice585, I detect a bit of soul-grape here.
Okok, just take it that the SAF does not produce a COA or CDF every year. Even among the SAFOS, I believe there are "casualties" who are dropped.
Kelvin,
It seems that this “daily” has become your personal blog where you write 1000-word GP essays after work. Nothing wrong with that, but name the website something else like “Kelvin’s common” and/or stop using the NUS affiliation.
And do you think anyone cares if a commando who saves people or a cook who serves thosai becomes Singapore’s prime minister? A bigger question is why so many of SAF’s generals become members of one political party, the PAP; it is totally unacceptable and makes a mockery of the nation’s institutions.
This website has almost zero news coverage, very little critical analysis, and hardly anything to do with current affairs at NUS or beyond. It’s graduation season, no coverage of what is going on, what aspirations graduates have in these trying times, what they feel about the economy, how they relate to the wider society, or anything worthy to showcase student vibrancy and activism.
I think this website has a long way to go before calling itself “an independent NUS students daily” like those of other universities’.
Dear NUS ALumnus:
Thanks for your comments. Actually, we have discussed this topic before at the following links:
You mentioned about this bigger question about SAF's generals becoming part of the elites:
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=2369
The Jobs Credit Scheme
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=290
And an issue that can be raised in Parliament
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=3810
Sincerely yours
I sort of knew you were going to say this when I commented.
Come on, it's yet another of your "playful" articles – wanting the reader to draw some conclusions from your article and then disclaiming that those were your points, essentially because you don't have enough facts to back them up.
When reader make those assumptions you want and comment according, you keep silent. But when people disagree, you will point out that those were not your points. Come on, grow up.
Dear BryanT:
I don't think there is any playfulness involved. Yes, when someone sees an article, one may be reminded of other issues, just as when I read an article about Nobel Prize, I am reminded of the King Faisal Prize. People do make associations, but I have clearly stated the gist of my article.
Look, I think you have to be realistic. One can write an article about any topic and the readers will make associations, no matter what the topic is. I can write an article about banana and people will talk about ice cream or banana split..
There is nothing to grow up about.
Sincerely yours
Kelvin, you are right, the article shouldn't be labelled playful. If it were not meant to mislead, and just some plain observation, then readers will just have to take it for all it's worth… meaningless drool.
If I may make a comparison, at least yours is more benign than the ironical spiele that Gopalan Nair engages in. But at least I get some laugh from reading his dross. (No offence, Mr Nair)
Anyway, tell us more about what you think and stand up for it rather then just make observations about bananas. Bananas attract flies after a while.
Dear Bryant:
Sure thing, no article can please all, and all readers are entitled to their opinions.
Secondly, you sound like you have a negative opinion of Gopalan. Maybe, you would like to show us why his write ups are ironical spiele, rather than sticking an ad hominen label to it. I am interested.
As for my views of on SAF, yes I think that further improvements can be made. I ran an article -> http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=2420
It is a policy change to allow our male graduates to enter the workforce early. But of course, there are weaknesses and negative points to it as well. I don't claim it is perfect.
Sincerely yours
Kelvin,
None of those postings make the cut for a website claiming to be a “daily”.
I suggest that you change the outlook/title of this website if you seem to be the only one invariably posting "articles" on random stuff. I have been following this website for a few months and I am beginning to think it’s your personal blog. So, the claim to be the “independent NUS students daily” is highly misleading and dishonest even.
Dear NUS Alumnus:
I think if it is a blog, the writing will be diary-style, with a personal conservative tone, but it is not. Articles are written by NUS alumni and current students, just that some of our other writers are away or busy. I have been trying to manage as well outside my professional life.
The Upfront section of KRC is a team effort, especially the design and the framing of some of the questions.
The articles that I appended in the previous comments, one of which has been shown to an NMP for consideration.
I am sorry if we fail to live up to your standards of a "Daily". The best we can do is to improve. But we hope you enjoy your stay here.
Sincerely yours
Hi Kelvin,
I suspect you have envious detractors from either The Ridge or The Campus Observer trying to destroy their competitor. Ignore and don't pick up their flame bait.
NUS alumnus,
I think you better go and read up your history books. The student journalist of the past era were concerned with national developments, yes I am referring to the Tan Wah Piow era and before. There was an incident in which these student journalists were prosecuted, and the university chancellor had to post bail for them. Who is to say that a university publication or an independent one for that matter cannot address national developments? You? LOL!
And the Kent Ridge Common, which I do read occasionally has come up with thought-provoking articles such as having LGBT societies on campuses. And its first few articles discussed the review of our examinations policy and how to improve an undergraduate research. You will never see such articles at NUSSU The Ridge and The Campus Observer…
So what if it is just one person reporting or writing articles? I agree with Kelvin that he has not written his articles in a blogging style.
It is not really one person writing at KRC. It only appears so due to exam season.
I wouldn't give so much credit to the IDF, and their commanders who've gone on in politics… they've failed terribly. Why? Even after all their spectacular victories, and yet there is still no peace in the middle east. I think the two sides have gotten so bloodthirsty that they just can't stop fighting.
After our experience with terrorism in the Malayan Emergency, most people around here have switched back to their ordinary civilian lives. But still singapore feels small, so she has to bring in big gangsters from halfway around the world. It's easy to be arrogant when we hide behind them and play with their newest military toys. (Did we learn how to do that from the IDF?) Of course these gangsters aren't doing it for free…
The dynamics of Israeli politics are much complicated and diverse than Singapore's as they have proportional representation which unfortunately tends to favour fringe right-wing parties who oppose land concessions to the Palestinians. It's not really about the personal competence of the politicians unless you believe that our politicians are the chose ones.
Anyway, the real winners are those who spend the least on military related stuff. We spend USD7.86 billion on defence. In terms of spending we're next to Pakistan, which spent USD7.80 billion and they have nuclear weapons… Switzerland spent USD2.54 billion… scrolling down the list of undeveloped countries something interesting pops up. Iceland barely spent USD 28 million (yes, million, not billion) on defence… so I think they win. We should learn from them.
Dear Choonway:
You have a point there. After it is old man who wage wars, but it is young men who die…
Sincerely yours
I will like to make a few observations:
1. In the United States Army, passing the Ranger course, which is regarded as the premier leadership course and is official, is considered de rigeur for advancement in the senior ranks even for officers who are not from the infantry arm. All Chief of Staff officers from Eric Shinseki onwards underwent through the Ranger training even though not all of them are from the infantry.
The SAF offers a similar course. How many of our Chief of Army officers have actually gone through it? I think none. This suggests that leadership selection in the SAF does not accord much weight to military-type 'academic' qualifications. This also makes it difficult for non-scholar officers to advance by compensating for their lack of academic qualification with military qualifications.
Come to think of it, does anyone know how well they did in courses run by the Command & Staff College?
2. It is possible to advance up the ranks in the US Army without having any actual warfighting experience. General Patraeus, who earned a PhD from Princeton, was promoted to major general after 26 years in the army despite having never fought a war until Iraq.
3. Senior officers in the SAF have a very short career compared to their US counterparts. Most of CDF's received their promotion before they reached the age of 45. This highly compressed career cycle might explain that qualifications like the Rangers course are regarded as extraneous. It is of higher priority to earn that masters degree from the Kennedy School of Government to prepare them for their second career in the GLCs.
I like to add that in the SAF, like any organization, management skills and experience are extremely important. Leaving aside the question of military skills, I am highly skeptical that our generals can acquire that sort of experience in the 20 years to run a 300,000-strong organization. The US military doesn't believe that; then why should the SAF? Even Wesley Clark, a valedictorian of West Point and a Rhodes scholar, took more than 20 years to reach the rank of BG.
Hmm… actually, the current Chief of Army Neo Kian Hong is holds the distinction of being the first COA who is Ranger-qualified.