Lee Joon-seok and Yang Hyang-ja of the Grand Reform Party announce the 'mandatory military service for women civil servants' at a press conference at the National Assembly's communication center on the 29th. Park Min-kyu

Lee Jun-seok, the leader of the Reformist Party, announced his pledge on military service on January 29. He said he would “mandate military service for those who want to become new public servants in the police, fire departments, and correctional facilities regardless of gender." He added, "All citizens should serve the duty of national defense, but so far, only about half of them have done so," suggesting women contribute more to the country’s military service. In other words, women will be allowed to work as a public servant only if they fulfill military duty. It is a ridiculous idea that I cannot understand why military duty has something to do with the qualifications for becoming public servants.

Lee's pledge is tantamount to saying that if women want to be public servants, they should join the military, and if they don't, they should be disqualified. However, this pledge contradicts the constitutional spirit that "all citizens are not discriminated against by gender, religion, or social status." It is a discriminatory idea that limits freedom of choice without a reasonable reason. I would like to ask if the government will revive the "additional point system for serving military duty for civil servants," which was abolished in 1999 as it was ruled to be unconstitutional, and the system of “accepting only applicants who served their military duty for the police recruitment test," which disappeared in 2005 after being recommended to improve by the National Human Rights Commission of Korea.

Lee's pledge is based on the judgment that the current military service system is sexist. That is why he said that men and women must be obligated to serve in the military together in order to be an equal system. The duty of national defense is not only about “picking up a gun.” There are many ways to contribute to national and social security, and yet Lee said only "half of the people" serve military duty. Despite this, the gender conflict is severe among the younger generation in Korea. Experts say it is a result of late marriage and low birth rate. In such a situation, how can Lee’s pledge, which was created to win more votes from male voters in the general election, be called a reform?

"If the pledge is realized, we can secure additional human personnel resources for military service of 10,000 to 20,000 people a year," Lee said, adding that he would implement it as early as 2030 and expand it to other occupations. He explained that this is a measure to solve the problem of the decrease in the number of soldiers due to the population decline. However, mandatory military service for female civil servants is a populist panacea, not a true solution to the country’s declining birthrate. Nor is it the only way to deal with a shrinking number of soldiers. Instead, we need to scientifically advance and modernize weapons, improve the military service environment and human rights of professional and drafted soldiers, and establish a military service system based on gender equality. I hope Lee will abandon the pledge that fuels conflict and discrimination and find other effective alternatives.