Will Boot Camp work out for Juvenile Delinquents?

After watching the cyber wars against Ah Lians and Ah Bengs at HWZ recently, I just start to wonder if the ALs and ABs know what they are doing in their life. They glorify under-aged smoking/drinking, take pride that they belong in gangs and electronic tags end up as a form of battle trophy. Many psychology theories agree that the adolescent period is the period of identity confusion where teenagers are doing their best to search for a place where they belong (regardless of whether it’s good or bad).

The main issue that got me worried was that these at-risk kids are getting a lot younger (ranging around 12 years old) and they openly glorify their actions of stealing bikes, smoking, belonging to gangs, etc in their blogs. Although I understand that there are many reasons why many adolescents turn delinquent, I have to say that most of the rehab programs lack the resources to deal with each juvenile delinquent on the individual level. Most of the rehab programs like probation, Girls' Home, Boys' Home, etc seem to be unsuitable for many delinquents because they seem determined to glorify in their “badness”. Like one professor once said to me, they probably gave up being the best of the best, so they decided to be the best of the worst because that’s the only thing they can hope to achieve.

Many juvenile delinquents (JD) are typically from low SES, broken/dysfunctional families and are overly represented in the NT population. Most of the time, they are the by-products of ill-discipline and poor opportunity. Personally, I think the growing rates of JD are due to the maturing of the “spoilt generation” of Singaporeans. This is a generation that I notice to be very spoilt- their parents give them everything they want except close parental monitoring. In fact, it has reached a stage where many parents use extremely large amounts of pocket money as a form of compensation for the lack of time spent interacting with their kids. In my day, pocket money would be sufficient for my meals only. MacDonalds and trips to the cinema were a privilege, not a routine. Many parents today don’t even know their children’s timetables or what their kids are doing in their spare time.

You can read an academic paper about factors affecting JD in Singapore here.
Although there has been a slight drop in JDs arrested over the years, I question if it is because less of them get caught, or are there actually less JDs around. In my biased opinion, I suspect the former is probably true. Given the Flynn effect, is it that hard to believe that JDs may have found a way to outsmart the criminal justice system? It’s quite possible. With the help of the internet, many people are learning and doing illegal stuff. Did you know that Youtube has a video on how to pick locks?

So the big question is how to deal with these kids? Personally, I’m in for the break and re-mould concept of shaping them again. What I propose is a lot more radical than the Boys' or Girls' home and let me clarify. What I have in mind is for the extreme JDs, the type that probably have conduct disorder, no respect for authority, no self respect and a conscience that probably went into coma a long time ago. I tend to favor discipline as the cause and solution to all of life’s problems. Boot Camp would be the best place to teach them that. Many psychologists are of the opinion that placing a group of JD together would only make things worse because they learn more deviant behavior from each other. Personally, I agree but I think the context matters. I propose an environment of mentoring and encouragement through discipline, teaching them life skills and learn that they are respected as individuals. So this is my idea of boot camp:

Duration: 1 Year

Admission Criteria: Beyond Parental Control children. They may only join the program if the teachers, counsellor, judge and parents deem it necessary.

Intake: 60 at a time. 30 male; 30 female. Divided into 3 platoons that train, eat and live together (divided by gender of course)

Entry point: No overnight bags needed. Report in as dressed. Cadet’s personal items will be removed and they will be issued a set of essential items- plastic glasses, toiletries, towel, underwear, uniform, PT kit, running shoes, boots and led to their bunkers. Male and female cadets will be shaved bald and all forms of personal adornment (i.e. rings, ear rings, necklaces) will be removed. This is to deprive all of them of a sense of identity and make them easier to train.

Program:

1. Briefing about the rules. One 5min phone-call allowed each month. Both parents and cadets are strongly encouraged to write letters. Cadets must make their own bed, clean their bunks and wash their toilets.

2. Briefing about how to wear the uniform, how to tie the boots, who is who is the camp.

3. Basic footdrills will be conducted

4. Basic combat drills, live firing and hand grenade to teach them the value of life.

5. Obstacle course to inculcate respect for others, not just authority, but peers too. Group dynamics would be a focus in these courses to reinforce the need to respect themselves and those around them.

6. Inculcate anger management skills by offering incentives for obedience and punishment for insubordination.

7. Inculcate communication skills and focus on how to express themselves in a healthy manner.

8. Have regular sessions with counsellor and psychologist to help them understand their own behavior and how to improve themselves.

9. Engage in gardening and animal husbandry to teach them the value of how to nurture.

10. Cadets will be given a pig/rabbit to take care off when they first arrive and they'll be asked to shoot their pig/rabbit 6months down the row for food. Cadets will not be forced into slaughtering their pet. It is an exercise to help them understand how their parents feel about bring up their children only to see them grow wild and face the decision of "terminating" them.

After the 3months of isolation for intensive training, they will be allowed to have a day or two off per week just like the normal NS men. If they mess that up, they forfeit that freedom.

Resources required: 1 cook, 1 on-site psychologist, 1 on-site counselor, 6 training instructors (3 of each gender) and 1 medical officer.

After the 1 year of training, a support team of psychologists and counsellors that will still keep in touch with them for up to 5 years. They will be offered a slot in skill training courses to make them more elligable for the work force. In addition to that, I propose that they be awarded with a certificate of recommendation if their instructors, psychologist and counsellor all agree that he/she is worthy of it. After this boot camp stint, I'm pretty sure they'll start to appreciate home and family a lot more.

This is my idea. I tried presenting it to someone and receive the feedback that it is too idealistic and I should get off my moral high horse. Perhaps I am on a moral high horse, but than again, its just a radical idea isn't it? I don't feel a compulsion to help these "poor souls" afterall, the fall of each one means that I stand higher in life! But the thing is, I think they deserve better and why not offer them a last chance to improve their life? I view this as the last ditch effort to save these delinquents from a permanent career as criminals or poorly paid individuals.

This camp is what I would describe as a make or break. I've met enough "retired" delinquents and career criminals (aka gang members) who regret their hey-days and spend out the rest of their lives working for peanuts at low-skill jobs. They would tell me stories of how they had many chances to live a better life but they messed up everything in their desperate efforts to become rich and powerful the fast and easy way. I will always remember their one and only advice to me: "Don't end up like me".

If you thought I'm radical, watch this boot camp for problem kids in China.

When Hardware isn’t Everything

Today I’ll do a military post. I was inspired by the recent vote cast by the US Senate against the acquisition of an additional seven F-22 raptor fighter jets as part of a defence authorisation bill.

This was in support of President Obama’s desire to reduce wastage in defence spending, and focusing on fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan rather than military hardware.

In his words:

“At a time when we’re fighting two wars and facing a serious deficit, this would have been an inexcusable waste of money”

“I reject the notion that we have to waste billions of taxpayer dollars on outdated and unnecessary defence projects…”

Just for your knowledge, the F-22 raptor looks like this:



And the US Air Force (USAF) already has 187 of these, the most advanced jet fighter in the world.

Personally, I commend President Obama and the US Senate for their decision. But there are three main issues I’ll like to explore as a response to this issue, and from there, talk about the whole notion of defence spending in general.

First, the effectiveness of the F-22.
Second, the military-industrial complex.
Third, the emphasis on hardware.


The F-22 was designed as an air-superiority fighter, meaning it was designed to take out enemy fighters. For that purpose, it was designed to have stealth features, the ability to “supercruise” (travel at supersonic speed without afterburner), and thrust vectoring for extra manoeuvrability.

But the problem is, given the current nature of military operations in the world today, is such a category of military hardware still relevant? In the post-cold war world, terrorism has superseded conventional militaries as the primary threat to national security. Given this context, wouldn’t it be wiser to spend on counter-insurgency?

Besides, the complexities of such military hardware create huge costs for governments, due to maintenance costs, and the need for specialised support equipment and services. The specialist role of the F-22 also implies other planes have to be bought to fulfil other roles, such as the ground attack role.

This is why some people argue that the alternative, the multi-role F-35 Lightning II, better known as the Joint Strike Fighter, is a better choice:



The second issue is that of the military-industrial complex. Supporters of the acquisition argue that F-22 production provides 25,000 jobs, and indirectly support 70,000 jobs. The defence industry forms an integral part of the US economy, in what is called the military-industrial complex, coined by former US President Dwight Eisenhower.

In a nutshell, it defines the politico-economic relationship between the state, the military and the defence industries.

To illustrate how it works:

A militaristic government wants to use military action to fulfill some strategic or political objective, and sends the military for these operations. Since the military needs hardware and support services to carry out these wars, it has to purchase them from the defence industries, which therefore are supported by and profits from the state. In return, the defence industries sponsor the government, bringing its politicians back into power. The government is then free to continue its militaristic policies, continuing the cycle.

So what is the problem here?

First, the government is trapped in the vicious cycle of militarism. Governments become dependent on the support of the defence industries for their legitimacy, and the defence industries push them towards aggressive foreign policies. Therefore, governments can become corrupted by this relationship, since defence industries hold so much leverage.

Second, it affects other sectors of the economy. The primacy of the defence industry means that other industries are not given the same level of attention and development.

The increasing weakness of US manufacturing industry, with the exception of the defence industry is evidence of the advent of the military-industrial complex.


Third, why all that emphasis on hardware?

As I have mentioned above, the current nature of military action has changed since the times of the Cold War. Of course, there are emerging powers such as China, and re-emerging powers such as Russia, that are still aggressively pursuing policies of modernisation within their militaries.

But there are two things to consider. First, the advent of diplomacy within the international community. The international community has been united by the common threats of international terrorism and rogue states. Their relative military strengths have been channelled towards the containment of these two threats.

Second, given the weak global economy, isn’t it wiser to spend money on more constructive purposes, rather than “destructive” ones?

Actually, come to think of it, the same thing is happening to Singapore too. Over recent years, the Singapore Armed Forces have acquired a whole array of military hardware as part of its project of modernisation. F-15 fighters, Formidable - class stealth frigates, Leopard 2 main battle tanks...
But it begs the question: does it fulfil the true needs of our military? It does, if one considers the age of the equipment these new hardware were designated to replace, but on the other hand, how is “improvement” on our defence capability measured?

It’s certainly not a game of numbers, nor is it a matter of “who’s got the latest hardware”.

And what about the average soldier? Has his life as a soldier improved?

To end off this post on a lighter note, I think the F-22 issue could come to a better conclusion if only they got their hands on this particular F-22:



Yeah. Starscream.

The only question left would be: Will we control him, or will we end up controlled by him?