There is a growing support for the proposed mandatory military training. A Pulse Asia Survey revealed that 69% of Filipinos favors the ROTC in Senior High School. This is amid reluctance of the Department of National Defense due to the budget requirement that could reach P61.2 billion.
We may need to answer several questions. Is mandatory military training our best option to inculcate patriotism in our young men and women? Can we afford it, given the pressing need to address the infrastructure and resource requirements of education? Is it necessary, given the state of the academic outcomes of our educational system? Should it be mandatory given that some countries imposing it are reconsidering their implementation?
This column has always committed to argue with evidences, and not opinions. While I am a son of a retired PNP Colonel that failed only one subject in my college education at UST, that is ROTC, I neither take value of the experience nor will my being Doctor of Education and of Humanities matter in this article.
Patriotism, redefined
Patriotism is the intended outcome of military training. To Schochet (2001)patriotism is about political allegiance (and, of course, loyalty), commitment, and dedication. In brief, it means love of country. To deny or renounce patriotism or to act contrary to what its proponents deem appropriate is to be disloyal.
Hopton (2021) notes that patriotism, as an emotion, would not even qualify as a reason for obedience because philosophy traditionally contrasts reason and emotion as opposites. However, despite these reservations, it might be worth remarking that love is an important moral feature of personal life and so it seems odd that love of country receives so little attention in connection with discussions about political obligation.
According to Staub (1997), there are two types of patriotisms—blind patriotism and constructive patriotism. Blind patriotism would accept and show loyalty towards the state without questioning its applications. Alternatively, in modern societies, reasonable people who embrace democracy usually are accepted as constructive patriots. The global patriot is beyond the two concepts. A global patriot is one who seeks the good of all humanity.
Daria Omelchenko (2014), in a paper Patriotic Education and Civic Culture of Youth in Russia: Sociological Perspective published by the Altai State University, opines that the true patriot is described rather through the categories of abstract love and respect, than through active and disinterested participation in the affairs of great and local ‘patria’. She notes that one of the consequences of federalism in Russia is that patriotism appears not a patriotism ‘in the whole’, based on the general civic identity, but a rather specific local patriotism, supposing identification with concrete ethnic group, nationality or a group of people, living in the concrete place.
Intended outcomes of military training
Grahlfs (2008) enumerates the most important things that military training inculcates as patriotism, obedience, loyalty to the group, and a willingness to employ violence in the resolution of disputes. As military training dwells upon the history and traditions of one’s nation, it instills pride in those traditions and emphasizes the necessity for upholding them. There is probably nothing more important to a military organization than absolute obedience. In the life-and-death situations which military personnel are often called upon to face, there is no room for questioning or thinking about an order.
In the military, staying alive frequently requires cooperation. Military leaders recognize this and emphasize it. This is the phenomenon known as esprit-de-corps. The highest honors in a military organization, moreover, are most often awarded to those who have subordinated their own interests to that of the group. Underlying everything else, the basic purpose of a military force is combat. In the military one must therefore be prepared for combat. Military personnel also have impressed upon them the idea that if they ever come face to face with an enemy it is a situation of “kill or be killed.”
All of these are important human traits. But are these only learned through military training?
Analysis of military training
IN a research conducted by Wansong Hu (2018) in China, it was concluded that the spiritual character of patriotism can be greatly strengthened and embodied in military training. Cultivating the quality of patriotism of contemporary college students is conducive to inspiring their patriotism and helping them to establish a correct political outlook and values. Through routine military practice training activities, students cannot only improve their self-help ability in the face of a disaster but also arouse their enthusiasm in military training, so as to establish their determination to protect their country and enhance the effect of military training in college students’ patriotism education.
However, the study recommends that contemporary college students not only need to receive military training, but also must actively devote themselves to military training ideologically, so as to establish a correct military training concept.
The paper published in the University of Economics and Law, Wuhan, Hubei, China, acknowledges that, at present, due to some obvious defects in the understanding of military training among some college students, a theory of useless military doctrine has emerged. In view of this phenomenon, it is very important that we strengthen the ideological guidance of university students in military training so as to help them establish a correct “military training concept.” Under the background of constructing the Chinese dream, only by establishing the patriotic feelings of contemporary college students and linking their personal future with the destiny of the country can their real value be realized.
The analysis recommends that the contemporary college students should put the knowledge of the army theory into practice based on the establishment of a correct ideological understanding, reinforce the military theoretical knowledge in practice, strengthen the ideological and political education, and cultivate the feelings of patriotism.
Jeffrey Robertson (2018) in the article Debating South Korea’s Mandatory Military Service published in The Interpreter of the Lowy Institute notes that the mandatory military service in South Korea 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. He, however, documented that for many South Koreans, its current form does not fully reflect either of these aims. Debate is claimed to be 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, and those of 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.
His study concludes that reforming South Korea’s military service system is a political can of worms with few clear options. Abandoning mandatory military service in favor 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.
Anvar Khanimkulov Rahimkulovich (2021), in his paper on the Development of Military Patriotic Training published in the European Journal Scholar, asserts that it is advisable to pay special attention to introducing military students to the heroes of our time, who are effective in the field of production and creativity, and to be active in this direction. It is necessary to create psychological and pedagogical conditions for adolescents not to put personal interests above the interests of society, to fully understand their human duties to society and the nation, to strive to work for the happiness of the people and the welfare of the country.
We had all these military programs for our young people in the past. There were stories of horror and of triumphs. But mostly, for compliance of the requirements. It may have awakened the heroes in others as much as villains for some. It amplified who the person really is. In the face of the war we are currently talking about—nuclear and biological, even trade and economic —our proposed military training must prepare our young to fight for us. Level up on their competence in Mobile Legend, Valorant, and other gamified wars and fight scenes. Yes, young Filipinos will fight until it is game over.
For feedback, please send e-mail to drcarlbalita@yahoo.com.