The protest by Yeonpyeong hero’s widow

Ms. Kim Hanna, the wife of the late Staff Sergeant Han Sang-kook—a hero of the Second Battle of Yeonpyeong—has begun a solitary protest in front of the National Assembly. Her goal is to reinstate military service incentives. Twenty-six years ago, these incentives were ruled unconstitutional for civil service and public enterprise employment exams, as they were deemed to violate the principle of gender equality. Women and men who did not serve in the military and are taking these highly competitive exams may feel that way. However, that does not mean abolishing military service incentives is any less discriminatory or irresponsible.

First of all, military incentives are intended for those who completed military service—not just men. If men predominantly received the benefit, the military could have used women more in its workforce. If military incentives for civil service exams are considered problematic, military service could instead be recognized as a form of social experience. There are alternative approaches, such as acknowledging various individual characteristics rather than applying a one-size-fits-all incentive system. Additionally, a culture needs to be fostered in which schools and companies can grant compensation points for military service based on individual characteristics.

These kinds of attempts could once again raise questions about fairness. Our society is mired in a distorted logic of fairness—a logic of collectivity and homogenization that turns small, surface-level differences into deeper, invisible forms of discrimination.

The specifics of reinstating military service credit would require specialized research. Still, I’m trying to make the point that its removal has contributed to a growing culture of disrespect toward military service. Increasingly, young people are comparing military service to forced slavery, and the elimination of extra credit has visibly fueled this perception. While compensatory measures are in place, a more visible recognition system is also necessary. Moreover, there has been a lack of bold and concrete efforts to challenge the mentality that regards military service as forced slavery.

Soldiers sacrifice themselves to protect the lives and livelihoods of their fellow citizens. Raising their salaries and improving their welfare cannot truly compensate for the time they devote to national defense during critical periods. They are also sons of mothers. How, then, is the argument that the state should compensate military service a matter of gender or discrimination?