Conscription Military service National service Conscription crisis Conscientious objection Conscription by country: Australia Germany Greece Israel Malaysia New Zealand Russia Singapore Turkey United States

Conscription is a general term for involuntary labor demanded by some established authority, but it is most often used in the specific sense of government policies that require citizens (often just males) to serve in their armed forces. It is known by various names — for example, the most recent conscription program in the United States was known colloquially as "the draft". Many nations do not maintain conscription forces, instead relying on a volunteer or professional military most of the time, although many of these countries still reserve the possibility of conscription for wartime and "crises" of supply.

"Conscription" has also sometimes been used as a general term for non-military involuntary labour demanded by some established authority; for example, some translators of Old Testament commentaries use the term to describe the levies of labour used to build the Temple of Solomon. In Japan during World War II, Japanese women and children were conscripted to work in factories.

Referring to forced service in the armed forces, the term "conscription" has two main meanings:

• forced service, usually of young men of a given age, e.g. 17 – 18, for a set period of time, commonly 1 – 2 years. In the United Kingdom and Singapore this was commonly known as "national service"; in New Zealand, at first compulsory military training and later national service; in Norway, Safeguard Duty / 1st time service.
• forced service, for an indefinite period of time, in the context of a widespread mobilisation of forces for fighting war, including on the home territory, usually imposed on men in a much wider age group (e.g. 18 – 45). (In the United Kingdom this was commonly known as "call-up").

The term "conscription" refers only to the mandatory service; thus, those undergoing conscription are known as "conscripts" or "selectee" in the United States (from the Selective Service System or the Selective Service Initiative announced in 2004).

In the U.S. the term "enlisted" is often used to refer only to those who have volunteered for service in roles other than as commissioned officers.

History

Premodern developments

One of the earliest known large-scale usages of conscription dates back to the time of Darius I of Persia.

Invention of modern conscription

Modern conscription was invented during the French Revolution, allowing the Republic to defend itself from European monarchies' attacks. Deputy Jean-Baptiste Jourdan gave its name to the September 5, 1798 Act, whose first article stated: "Any Frenchman is a soldier and owes himself to the defense of the nation." It enabled the creation of the Grande Armée, what Napoleon Bonaparte called "the nation in arms", which successfully battled European professional armies.

Conscription was introduced in the Union Army during the American Civil War. The 1863 Enrollment Act permitted draftees to hire paid substitutes to fight in their place. This, and the bounty system, led to widespread dislike of conscription by the public at large; the New York Draft Riots were one symptom. In addition, draftees were viewed with disdain by volunteer soldiers and their officers. In the end, the draft provided only 6% of the Union Army's manpower. Conscription was not employed again in the U.S. until 1917.^[1]

According to philosopher Michel Foucault, conscription is one of the forms taken by "disciplinary institutions", along with hospitals, schools and prisons. Louis Althusser has also underlined how Machiavelli was one of the first modern theorists to think the relationship between conscription and the creation of a nation, or successfully bolstering patriotism. Machiavelli despised the use of mercenaries and professional armies, which at this time were ravaging the divided Italian states.

When the conscripts are being sent to foreign wars that do not directly affect the security of the nation, has historically been highly politically contentious in democracies. For instance, during World War I, bitter disputes broke out in Canada (see Conscription Crisis of 1917), Australia and New Zealand (See Compulsory Military Training) over conscription. Canada also had a political dispute over conscription during World War II (see Conscription Crisis of 1944). Similarly, mass protests against conscription to fight the Vietnam War occurred in several countries in the late 1960s. (See also: Conscription Crisis)

In the United States, the increasing emphasis on technological firepower and the sheer unlikelihood of a conventional military assault, as well as memories of the contentiousness of the Vietnam War experience, make mass conscription unlikely in the foreseeable future. Also, the United States have a considerable nuclear weapons arsenal, and rely on nuclear deterrent. Several developed nations, however, do not rely on nuclear deterrent and maintain conscription.

Gender issue

Some countries that draft women include Cuba, Israel, North Korea, Libya, and Eritrea. In 2002, Sweden's government asked the army to consider mandatory military service for women. Some have considered the practice of excluding women from the draft unfair, because they feel it goes against principles of equality. Some simply argue that women can be militarily useful, and that excluding them places an unnecessary limit on resources. During World War II, women were drafted into the armed forces of the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union. The United States came close to drafting women into the Nurse Corps in preparation for a planned invasion of Japan; the Japanese surrender made this unnecessary.

The non-egalitarian policy practiced by some countries of drafting men and not women has often been a flash point and source of conflict. This policy is often cited by some masculists as an example of an unfair policy, which benefits women over men. Gender egalitarians point out that, in the long run, such a policy supports social thinking about women as weaker and less able beings, and is therefore not really an overall benefit to women - more of a double edged sword (or golden chain). Apprehension about the possible conscription of women was a key factor that led to the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment in the United States.

In 1981 in the United States, several men filed lawsuit in the case Rostker v. Goldberg, alleging that the Military Selective Service Act violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by requiring that men only and not also women register with the SSS. The Supreme Court eventually upheld the Act, stating that "the argument for registering women was based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need, rather than 'equity.'"^[2]

Conscription certainly imposes on the freedom of the individual and although some conscripts feel that they benefited from the experience others feel that their time could have been spent more productively pursuing their chosen studies or career paths.^[3] Individual resentment may also be compounded by the typically low wages paid to conscripts, especially in countries such as Greece, Finland and Singapore.

Conscientious objection

Main articles: Conscientious objection, Antimilitarism, and Conscientious objection throughout the world

A conscientious objector is an individual whose personal beliefs are incompatible with military service, or sometimes with any role in the armed forces. In some countries, conscientious objectors have special legal status, which augments their conscription duties. For example, Sweden allows conscientious objectors to choose a service in the "weapons-free" branch, such as an airport fireman, nurse or telecommunications technician. Some may also refuse such service as they feel that they still are a part of the military complex. The reasons for refusing to serve are varied. Some conscientious objectors are so for religious reasons — notably, the members of the historic peace churches are pacifist by doctrine, and Jehovah's Witnesses, while not strictly speaking pacifists, refuse to participate in the armed services on the grounds that they believe Christians should be neutral in worldly conflicts.

Draft evaders

Not everyone who is conscripted is willing to go to war. In the United States, especially during the Vietnam Era, many young people used their family's political connections to ensure that they were placed well away from any potential harm. Those with political influence often joined the military and served in what was termed a Champagne unit.

Many would avoid military service altogether through college deferments, by becoming fathers, or serving in various exempt jobs (teaching was one possibility). Others used educational exemptions, became conscientious objectors or pretended to be conscientious objectors, although they might then be drafted for non-combat work, such as serving as a combat medic. It was also possible they could be asked to do similar civilian work, such as being a hospital orderly.

It was, in fact, quite easy for those with some knowledge of the system to avoid being drafted. A simple route, widely publicized, was to get a medical rejection. While a person could claim to have symptoms (or feign homosexuality), if enough physicians sent letters that a person had a problem, he might well be rejected. It often wasn't worth the Army's time to dispute this claim. Such an approach worked best in a larger city where there was no stigma to not serving, and the potential draftee was not known to those reviewing him.

For others, the most common method of avoiding the draft was to cross the border into another country. People who have been "called up" for military service and who attempted to avoid it in some way were known as "draft-dodgers". Particularly during the Vietnam War, U.S. draft-dodgers usually made their way to Canada, Mexico or Sweden.

Many people looked upon draft-dodgers with scorn as being "cowards", but some supported them in their efforts. In the late years of the war, objections against it and support for draft-dodgers was much more outspoken, because of the casualties suffered by American troops, and the actual cause and purpose of the war being heavily questioned.

Toward the end of the U.S. draft, an attempt was made to make the system somewhat fairer by turning it into a lottery, with each of the year's calendar dates randomly assigned a number. Men born on lower numbered dates were called up for review. For the reasons given above, this did not make the system any fairer, and the entire system ended in 1973. Today, American men 18-25 are required to register with the government, but there has not been a callup since the Vietnam Era.

Draft resisters

Main article: Antimilitarism

Historically, there has been resistance to conscription in almost every country and situation where it has been imposed. In the USA and some other countries, the Vietnam War saw new levels of opposition to conscription and the Selective Service System. Many people opposed to and facing conscription chose to either apply for classification and assignment to civilian alternative service or noncombatant service within the military as conscientious objectors, or to evade the draft by fleeing to a neutral country. A small proportion, like Muhammad Ali, chose to resist the draft by publicly and politically fighting conscription. Some people resist at the point of registration for the draft [1] . In the USA since 1980, for example, the draft resistance movement has focused on mandatory draft registration. [2] [3] Others resist at the point of induction, when they are ordered to put on a uniform, when they are ordered to carry or use a weapon, or when they are ordered into combat.

There are those who are immune to the draft. These people include anyone who works for the government (Teachers, police officers, lawmakers, etc), People who work for government contractors, and those who work in jobs essential to the operation of the country (waste management, power plants, etc). In the United Kingdom this is known as a Reserved occupation as it is deemed necessary to the survival of the nation.

A government can also grant an exemption from conscription to a group of people based upon religious grounds. One instance is the Amish people in the United States who are immune from any military callup and do not have to register for selective service.

Deserters

Some conscripts who were registered for military service, nevertheless failed to arrive at induction and were listed as Absent Without Leave (AWOL). Others simply deserted while in uniform, or handed their weapons over to the enemy. During the Angolan War, the African National Congress (ANC) called for South African soldiers to desert.

Countries with and without mandatory military service

See: Military service

The following table lists information about several example countries. The table columns should be sortable by browsers with Javascript enabled.

Conscription by country — Examples

Country	Land area[a] (km²)	GDP (US$M)[b]	Per capita GDP (US$)[c]	Population[d]	Government[e][f]	Conscription[g]
Albania	27,398	$9,306	$2,584.63	3,600,523	democracy	Yes
Algeria	2,381,740	$90,000	$2,700.01	33,333,216	pseudo-democracy	Yes
Angola	1,246,700	$28,610	$2,332.92	12,263,596	transition	Yes
Argentina	2,736,690	$210,000	$5,210.67	40,301,927	federal democracy	Legal, not practiced
Australia	7,617,930	$644,700	$31,550.09	20,434,176	federal democracy	No (banned as enshrined by parliament in 1972[h])
Bahamas	10,070	$6,159	$20,150.17	305,655	democracy	No
Bangladesh	133,910	$69,340	$460.89	150,448,339	democracy	No
Belize	22,806	$1,141	$3,875.88	294,385	democracy	Legal, not practiced
Bhutan	47,000	$840.5	$361.06	2,327,849	absolute monarchy	Yes (selective)
Bolivia	1,084,390	$10,330	$1,132.78	9,119,152	democracy	Yes (only when there are few volunteers)
Bosnia and Herzegovina	51,129	$9,217	$2,024.74	4,552,198	confederal democracy	No
Brazil	8,456,510	$967,000	$5,089.19	190,010,647	democracy	Yes
Burma	657,740	$9,600	$202.64	47,373,958	dictatorship	Officially prohibited, de facto still practiced
China	9,326,410	$2,518,000	$1,904.90	1,321,851,888	dictatorship	Yes (selective)
Croatia	56,542	$37.420	$15,355	4,493,312	democracy	No
Cuba	110,860	$40,000	$3,510.61	11,394,043	dictatorship	Yes (both sexes)
Djibouti	22,980	$702	$1,414.26	496,374	pseudo-democracy	No
El Salvador	20,720	$15,160	$2,181.90	6,948,073	democracy	Legal, not practiced
Finland	304,473	$199,000,	$37,988.26	5,238,460	democracy	Yes
Gambia	10,000	$462.5	$273.94	1,688,359	pseudo-democracy	No
Germany	349,223	$2,872,000	$34,853.95	82,400,996	federal democracy	Yes
Greece	130,800	$256,300	$24,000	10,706,290	democracy	Yes
Grenada	344	$454	$5,046.07	89,971	democracy	No (no military service)
Hungary	93,030	$20,700	$11,369.91	10,064,000	democracy	No
Israel	20,330	$140,300	$21,830.87	6,426,679	democracy	Yes (both sexes)
Jamaica	10,831	$9,230	$3,319.99	2,780,132	democracy	No
Japan	374,744	$4,883,000	$38,318.03	127,433,494	democracy	No
Jordan	92,300	$300,000	$2,068.33	6,053,193	constitutional monarchy	No
Korea, North	120,410	$40,000[j]	$1,800[j]	23,301,725	dictatorship	Yes[i]
Korea, South	98,190	$897,400	$18,297.56	49,044,790	democracy	Yes
Kuwait	17,820	$60,720	$24,234.11	2,505,559	pseudo-democracy	Yes
Lebanon	10,230	$19,890	$5,066.87	3,925,502	pseudo-democracy[?]	No
Libya	1,759,540	$34,200	$5,665.15	6,036,914	dictatorship	Yes
Luxembourg	2,586	$34,530	$71,904.24	480,222	democracy	No
Macedonia	24,856	$6,225	$3,027.85	2,055,915	democracy	Yes
Malaysia	328,550	$132,300,	$5,330.10	24,821,286	federal pseudo-democracy	No
Maldives	300	$906	$2,455.08	369,031	democracy	No
Malta	316	$5,447,000	$13,553.80	401,880	democracy	No
Moldova	33,371	$2,574,000	$595.77	4,320,490	democracy	Yes
Netherlands	33,883	$612,700	$36,975.10	16,570,613	constitutional monarchy	Legal, not practiced
Qatar	11,437	$30,760	$33,905.44	907,229	absolute monarchy	No
Russia	16,995,800	$733,600	$5,188.94	141,377,752	federal democracy	Yes
Rwanda	24,948	$1,968	$198.64	9,907,509	transition	No
Saudi Arabia	2,149,690	$276,900	$10,032.23	27,601,038	absolute monarchy	No
Seychelles	455	$712	$8,694.06	81,895	democracy	Yes
Singapore	692	fill in	fill in	4,553,009	pseudo-democracy	Yes
Slovenia	20,151	$37,920	$18,872.76	2,009,245	democracy	No
Swaziland	17,203	$2,195	$1,937.22	1,133,066	absolute monarchy	No
Thailand	514,000	fill in	fill in	65,068,149	constitutional monarchy	Yes
Tonga	718	$244	$2,086.88	116,921	pseudo-democracy	No
Trinidad and Tobago	5,128	$14,900	$14,101.73	1,056,608	democracy	No
Turkey	780,580	$635,600	$9,000	71,158,647	democracy	Yes
United Kingdom	241,590	$2,346,000	$38,600.61	60,776,238	democracy	No
United States	9,161,923	$13,210,000	$43,866.65	301,139,947	federal democracy	No
Vanuatu	12,200	$341	$1,608.71	211,971	democracy	No

Notes:

• ^a  Source: Nationmaster: Land area
• ^b  Source: Nationmaster: GDP
• ^c  Source: Nationmaster: Per capita GDP
• ^d  Source: Nationmaster: Population
• ^e  Source: Nationmaster: Government
• ^f  Source: Nationmaster: Conscription
• ^g  Definitions, for purposes of this table (Source: Nationmaster: Government):

: Democracy: state in which democratic structures provide for an alternance of power

: Pseudo-Democracy: state in which there are democratic structures but without a real chance for an alternance of power

: Transition State: a state with a transitional structure

: Absolute Monarchy: a one-party state, or a state governed by an absolute monarchy or dictatorship.

• ^h  Conscription was abolished by law in 1973. But the Defence Act 1903 as amended retained a provision that it could be reintroduced by proclamation of the Governor-General. Potentially all Australian residents between the ages of 18 and 60 could be called up in this way. However, the Defence Legislation Amendment Act 1992 further provided that any such proclamation is of no effect until it is approved by both Houses of Parliament. Though actual legislation is not required, the effect of this provision is to make the introduction of conscription impossible without the approval of both the Senate and the House of Representatives.^[4]
• ^h North Korea, Military Conscription and Terms of Service. Based on the Country Studies Series by Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress. Retrieved on 2007-08-12.
• ^j [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/kn.html Korea, North]. CIA World Factbook. Retrieved on 2007-08-12. (estimates based on 2006 data)

Arguments for conscription

Valuable training

Some communitarians argue that peacetime conscription is an ideal tool for teaching a population basic, important skills such as first aid, swimming, wilderness survival and so on. However, it can also be argued that these skills could better be taught in the public school system than during mandatory service.

Rite of passage

In many countries, conscription serves as a rite of passage. The prospective man is tested, to see whether or not he can endure the hardships of military training and earn the right to be called a man. Military service, in countries that have it, may then be seen as the test of manhood. Conscription may inspire camaraderie, unifying a people: all able-bodied males together as a union have had the same experience and are soldiers, and that may create unity and a national spirit. This idealism is often seen as sexist, militaristic or discriminating against conscientious objectors.

Draft as protection against democracy-destroying military coups

Some argue that conscription should be connected to democracy. A professional army can possibly become a dangerous state-within-a-state. Military virtues such as obedience to orders and respect for the chain of command can possibly be abused by aspiring dictators. Armed forces can attract — consciously or unconsciously — people who prefer authoritarian systems. The army can even become the only chance for a job and decent life in times of unemployment (this was crucial in the rise of Japanese militarism), or for despised minorities. Such people may come to regard the army as their home and elevate it above the state.

On the other hand, once in power dictators such as Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam Hussein have used conscription to drive their undemocratic ambitions. The most significant attempt on Hitler's life was from the professional component of his military.

Manpower

Small countries have several options to raise a sizeable army. One is to put every able-bodied man under arms. This is how Switzerland managed to stay independent despite repeated attacks throughout history. The Swiss militias were so successful that their fighting style and weapons (especially the halberd) were quickly adopted by their enemies. This in turn made the Swiss very popular as mercenaries; many rulers even raised Swiss Guards. The rich Flemish trade cities of the early 14th century raised huge militias that could even defeat armies of knights. The famous Battle of the Golden Spurs (1302) is a good example.

Other options for national defense include membership in a military alliance like NATO, as is the case for countries like Belgium and Luxembourg. Switzerland started out as a military alliance between independent cantons. However, the membership in such alliance decreases the independence of a country, making it dependent on its stronger allies. Several NATO members maintain conscription, so an alliance is not mutually exclusive with conscription.

Also, a wealthy small country could hire a professional mercenary army. This approach does, however, require wealth and men who are willing to hire on. Moreover, it required some means to control the mercenaries if they became unruly.

However, conscription creates numbers but not quality. Niccolò Machiavelli's attempts to raise a conscript army in Milan ended in catastrophe; the conscripts did not have adequate training or experience, and were awkward to perform drill and maneuver. If the conscript army is trained only during the crisis, the limits on time and resources on training enable only rudimentary training; anything else is to be learnt on the battlefield. However, this can be avoided by peace-time conscription to train a large reserve usable in a crisis. The quality of the reserve must be maintained by steady refresher exercises. In several countries where conscription is in use, the length (and quality) of the training is virtually similar to that of professional armies.

The losses to conscript armies on the battlefield are often large, but waste of manpower is limited by the fact that the supply of able-bodied males in a nation is not inexhaustible. In addition, any government waging a prolonged war with conscripts will risk losing popular support and following loss of power. For a democratic government, this limits the use of conscript forces for wars that are fights for existence. Pursuing national interests or expeditionary wars may still necessitate a large professional army.

Personnel diversity

Perhaps the kind of people who most strongly want to be in the military are not always the only kind of people who are needed in it. Conscripts come from various backgrounds and might have differing opinions and views. A diverse group is arguably more likely to succeed at any task. Still, the frequently lower morale and experience of conscripts may make them less useful in combat. This has been witnessed in the Vietnam War and Soviet-Afghan War.

Personnel diversity might be bad for armies in some ways, by inhibiting communication and increasing social tension, but it also helps different people come together and realize the true nature of an all-inclusive society. For example, it helps them understand the problems of other classes, professions, cultures, and educational levels. Similar arguments have been presented in favor of desegregation in schools. However, in countries that already have desegregated schools (i.e. most of the western world) it is not clear why the armed forces would be more important in bringing different people together than the school system, or could accomplish this in ways in which the school system could not.

Conscript quality

The manpower quality of a conscript force is considered poor in many countries and conversely, governments are reluctant to invest in professional-quality training of conscripts, giving poor-quality forces. However, in some countries with conscription, the personnel diversity of the conscript force is considered its greatest strength. Admittedly, there are persons who would not be employed by a professional force, but these are a minority and can be discharged for medical reasons in extreme cases.

However, the conscript force may also receive the best of the youth, who would never join a professional army. Many conscripts are from such social strata that they would have much more lucrative employment or would be studying, were they not obliged to serve. These persons provide talented manpower that can easily be trained for technical and leadership duties. As junior NCO and commissioned officer positions are filled with leadership-trained conscripts, the size and cost of the professional cadre is much smaller. As these ex-conscripts, as reservists, mature and lose their fighting fitness, they can be subsequently retrained and given emergency positions corresponding their civilian expertise. For example, a transport manager who is a reserve officer might serve as a battalion logistics chief during wartime.^[5][6] The leadership-trained conscripts can also be recruited to the regular forces. The Israeli Defence Forces are based on conscription and its excellent performance is often explained by the quality of the manpower. However, as the tour of duty is three years, and as the nation lives in continuous threat of war, the military training is very thorough and can well be compared to that of the all-volunteer professional armies.

The worst problem is that the training must be designed by the physical fitness and the learning ability of the least able of the youth. However, this can be at least partly avoided by differentiating the conscript training. Even the least able can usually fulfill important roles in relatively easy logistics duties, while the most able can be trained quite well as specialists.^[7] In many cases the conscript servicemates may have social or societal problems, they may be criminals, bullies or drug abusers, or they may even be sociopaths. Allowing such persons to serve is problematic. They may corrode the capability of the unit, even endangering the safety of the others. Some countries have recognized this problem, and attempt to exclude the potential troublemakers even before they get to serve, using medical discharges, for example.^[8] On the other hand, in some countries (like in Russia) the problems with this issue are extremely dire (see dedovschina). There is also the argument that if the problem can be classified as juvenile delinquency, then the military functions as a "men's school". By giving responsibility, youth development is induced, and adolescent-typical criminal behavior ceases. The problem is that the coercion type environment of conscription armies encourage avoidance of responsibility, rather than accepting it, being more likely to promote such antisocial behaviour than to discourage it.

Political and moral motives

Jean Jacques Rousseau argued vehemently against professional armies, feeling it was the right and privilege of every citizen to participate to the defense of the whole society and a mark of moral decline to leave this business to professionals. He based this view on the development of the Roman republic, which came to an end at the same time as the Roman army changed from a conscript to professional force. The change to a professional force itself was a result of economic forces that Rousseau did not consider.

Some ideologies and cultures,, and those based on collectivism or statism, value the society and common good above the life of an individual. Those ideologies and world-views justify the state to force its members to protect itself and risk their lives for the common good. In states based on society-centered ideologies, world-views and religions, conscription is the natural way of raising the army.

In the era of total war, the conscription is the only alternative for a small nation to build an army of credible strength without depending on alliances. This is particularly the case when the opposing state is significantly larger. In such a case, a voluntary force could not, regardless of its quality, stand against the sheer numbers of the opposing force.

The right of the state to conscript its citizens can be founded on utilitarianist principles. Utilitarianism states that the army must never be used for a war of aggression but only to preserve the state. It also states that the occupation by a foreign country would include unbearable conditions, such as genocide or destruction of the local way of life. If these two requirements are fulfilled, the greatest good to the greatest number of people may be achieved by sacrificing a number of people and these people should be willing to make this sacrifice out of altruism. This view again assumes the individuals exist for the state and not that the state exists for its citizens' sake.

Conscription can give the conscripts a lasting patriotic view and readiness to die for the good of the whole. Such readiness should, according to many world-views, be present in a virtuous citizen at all times, but through training, the readiness becomes a grim reality, not rhetoric. This may decrease the admiration of the military, but may also promote militarism and lead into readiness to use violence in everyday life to solve marital problems. On the other hand, the fact that every person understands that a war — any war — means that they themselves, friends, and relatives will be dying or at the least, facing mortal danger, decreases the willingness to enter an armed conflict. In practice, engaging a conscript force in an aggressive war for a prolonged period results in morale degradation both at home and on the front, testified by Afghanistan and Vietnam Wars. On the other hand, a professional army is usually composed mainly of the members of lower classes, making prolonged offensive wars easier.

Economics

In a very large war, (such as World War II) raising a large enough volunteer military would require dramatic increases in taxes or budget deficits. In such cases conscription can have lower negative impact than the impact of these higher taxes and possibly be more equitable (higher taxes would penalize those out of service much more than those in service). Research into fiscal impacts of conscription in World War II suggest a volunteer army raised to the same size would have had worse economic impact in terms of economic growth.

It is estimated by the British military^[9] that in a professional military, one company deployed for active duty in peacekeeping corresponds to three inactive companies at home. Salaries for each are paid from the military budget. In contrast, volunteers from a trained reserve are in their civilian jobs when they are not deployed.

Arguments against conscription

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Many arguments opposed to conscription, or opposed to gender-discriminated conscription, arise from its violation of the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations. In particular:

• Art.1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. (…)
• Art.2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as (…) sex (…)
• Art.3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
• Art.4: No one shall be held in (…) servitude (…)
• Art.13: (1)Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
• Art.20: (…) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
• Art.23: Everyone has the right (…) to free choice of employment (…)

In addition, many Constitutions do provide similar rights in Countries where there is or has been some form of conscription after World War II or that maintain a possibility of conscription in time of war.

Slavery

Conscription subjects individual personalities to militarism. It is a form of servitude. That nations routinely tolerate it, is just one more proof of its debilitating influence

— Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and Thomas Mann in Against Conscription and the Military Training of Youth — 1930

Some groups, such as libertarians, say that the draft constitutes slavery, since it is mandatory work[4]. Under the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, slavery or other involuntary servitude is not allowed unless it is part of punishment for a crime. They therefore see the draft as unconstitutional (at least in the U.S.) and immoral. In 1918, the Supreme Court ruled that the World War I draft did not violate the United States Constitution. Arver v. United States, 245 U.S. 366 (1918)). The Court detailed its conclusion that the limited powers of the federal government included conscription. Its only statement on the Thirteenth Amendment issue reads thus:

Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.

In the USSR, most of the conscripts received only very basic training and were used for forced labor unrelated to actual military service — usually digging up potatoes in the field with zero wage cost. This contributed to the lack of incentives for the Soviet planned economy system to produce better combined harvesting machines and Soviet agriculture remained low-tech.

In Soviet-bloc Hungary, more than half of pre-1989 conscripts received a mere few weeks of rifle training and were swiftly assigned to "working squadrons," which usually hand-built rail tracks "for free", and in very poor quality. At the same time, railway tracks in Western Europe were being built to high-quality standards by semi-automatic, rail-rolling factories operated by a professional workforce.

Ageism

Conscription is usually limited to young people, and the burden of conscription is almost never spread equally across all age groups. The youngest people considered qualified are usually conscripted first. Opponents of ageism, and advocates of youth liberation, argue that age-based military conscription is the most severe disparity on the basis of age of any government mandate on individuals. This argument is epitomized by the Phil Ochs song, "I Ain't Marching Any More": "It's always the old who lead us to the war; it's always the young who fall." Even in countries with elected governments, conscripts are often too young to be allowed to vote or participate in decisions on whether to go to war or to impose or set policies for conscription. The Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which lowered the voting age to 18, was proposed and approved largely in response to criticism of conscription based on the unfairness of drafting men too young to be allowed to vote. But draft-age voters in the USA are still overwhelmingly outnumbered by voters considered to be too old to be conscripted.

Sexism

Traditionally conscription has been limited to the male population. Women and non-able-bodied males have been exempted from conscription. Many societies have traditionally considered conscription as a test of manhood and a rite of passage from boyhood into manhood. Since young men spend several months or perhaps years in service while young women can at the same time study, work, found families and find their niche in society, conscription is more and more considered unfair and sexist.

Discipline problems

No military can operate effectively without personnel discipline. Discipline can either be taught from esprit de corps, already-acquired motivation of the personnel or be fundamentally embedded into the troops through guidance from leadership. One can speculate that volunteers manifest less undisciplined behavior, however citizens conscripted might have little motivation to serve. As motivation is based on coercion, the corrected action imposed upon undisciplined conscriptees is often harsh. Capital punishment, usually by firing squad, was used almost universally to maintain discipline in conscript militaries during wartime. Antony Beevor has estimated the executions covered some 1% to 5% of all conscript losses in World War II. This can be best summarized by a statement from Leon Trotsky:

An army cannot be built without reprisals. Masses of men cannot be led to death unless the command has the death penalty in its arsenal. So long as those malicious tailless apes that are so proud of their technical achievements — the animals that we call men — will build armies and wage wars, the command will always be obliged to place the soldiers between the possible death in the front and the inevitable one in the rear.

Consequently, conscript armies are more likely to mutiny than all-volunteer forces, and can in extreme cases turn against their own.

Discipline problems become much worse when the ablest of the youth are forced to serve against their will under the authority of people they consider less intelligent, untalented, or simply because of unquestioned authority. This was seldom a problem in the period of Industrialism when only the upper classes had access to higher education, but proved problematic in the Vietnam War, when college students were conscripted to fight under non-commissioned officers, many of whom had not finished high school and few of whom had any higher education.

Nationalism and promoting militarism

The military draft is predicated on the assumption that nations have rights that supersede those of the individual. In the words of Einstein and Gandhi's Anti-Conscription Manifesto, "The State which thinks itself entitled to force its citizens to go to war will never pay proper regard to the value and happiness of their lives in peace." The building of large conscript armies coincided with the rise of virulent nationalism in the 19th and 20th centuries, culminating in World War II.

In peacetime, conscription can create an atmosphere of militarism and bigotry in society. Many young men in countries with compulsory conscription develop a cynical stance about militarism because the mandatory nature of conscription creates low morale amongst soldiers. This is especially true in countries where nationalist feelings are weak to begin with, such as Austria, Germany and Sweden, or where conditions are brutal, such as in Russia.

Men who have had military training can also be more ready to use violence to solve conflicts than those who have not. Conscription also may create an atmosphere of chauvinism, sexism and discrimination against those men who haven't served in the armed forces.

Justification for attacks on civilians

Conscription is a component of total war, and can also be used as an example of established policy to justify a government's demand that other sacrifices be required of civilians. Once a draft is allowed, Justice Louis Brandeis argued, "all bets are off". Arguably this results in a blurring of the moral distinction between civilians and the military as legitimate military targets, leading to attacks on civilians. Examples would include the indiscriminate bombing of cities conducted by both sides during World War II, the My Lai Massacre, and the assertion by terrorist groups that civilians are legitimate targets (as currently occurs in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). It has been popular recently to call civilian deaths "collateral damage" although their deaths are highly predictable. In fact, during the last century, civilian deaths have grown compared to military deaths in conflict.

Quality

One of the objections raised is that a conscript force would be of lower quality than a volunteer army. First, short periods of service do not allow for much skill building. Second, there is a possibility of a morale drop in units with conscripts, leading to a reduction in quality as officers and NCOs work to alleviate those problems.

The biggest problem is that the pace of training has to be adjusted to the level of the lowest quality candidate. Combined with the short tour of duty, this renders the skills of the conscripts very low. Therefore the elite units of all armies which have conscription, are composed entirely of selected volunteers, such as Parachute Rangers in the Finnish army.

Likewise, the military training of the conscripts is almost universally very rudimentary. It seldom goes beyond drill, shooting practice, rudimentary specialization on one's service branch and weapons and basic battlefield training. Likewise, many nations have used conscripts simply as indentured, low-cost work force, organized as "work battalions" for agriculture and building infrastructure instead of decent military service.

Economics

It can be argued that in a cost to benefit ratio conscription during peace time is not worthwhile. Months or years of service amongst the most fit subtracts from the productivity of the economy; add to this the cost of training them, and in some countries paying them. Compared to these extensive costs, some would argue there is very little benefit, if there ever were war conscription and basic training could be completed quickly, and in most countries where conscription is compulsory there is little threat of war in any case.

The cost to particularly in times of military duress, such as the current U.S. conflict in Iraq, conscription serves as an instrument through which fresh soldiers may be readied when reserves and voluntary troops have been over utilized. These new troops ultimately provide more efficient use of U.S. economic resources since individuals plan for military involvement as a normal activity. Draft assignments, in contrast, disrupt everyday activity and lead to possibly greater economic shock.

The cost of conscription can be related to the parable of the broken window. Military service can be related to any work. The costs of work do not disappear anywhere even if no salary is paid. The work effort of the conscripts is effectively wasted; unwilling work force is extremely inefficient and the conscripts also lose their the costs of all-volunteer paid force. The impact is especially severe in wartime, when civilian professionals are forced to fight as amateur soldiers. Not only is the work effort of the conscripts wasted and productivity is lost, but professionally-skilled conscripts are also difficult to replace in the civilian work force. Every soldier conscripted in the army is taken away from his civilian work, and away from contributing to the economy which funds the military. This is not a problem in an agrarian or pre-industrialized state where the level of education is universally low, and where a worker is easily replaced by another. However, this proves extremely problematic in a post-industrial society where educational levels are high and where the work force is highly sophisticated and a replacement for a conscripted specialist is difficult to find. Even direr economic consequences result if the professional conscripted as an amateur soldier is killed or maimed for life; his work effort and productivity is irrevocably lost.

Draft as a tool to subjugate society

Another argument sees conscription as a tool for dictatorships to control and re-educate a population instead of being a means for an oppressed people to infiltrate the military as the power base for every dictatorship. Especially since the military is inherently based on giving and obeying orders, instead of democracy, it is argued that a draft is a far more effective tool to instill obedience and unconditional following into society than giving a democratic populace the opportunity to control the military. Supporting that argument is the fact, that Nazi Germany changed the Reichswehr from an all-volunteer army in 1934 into the conscription-based Wehrmacht. Also almost all contemporary dictatorships have a military draft (Syria, North Korea, Iran, as well as Iraq under Saddam Hussein). Virtually all former military dictatorships relied heavily on conscribing their entire adolescent male populations (with the military dictatorships of Pakistan and Burma being notable exceptions). The former military dictatorships of Turkey, Greece, Spain, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia and Libya maintained draft systems throughout their reigns as well as all formerly communist dictatorships and the Soviet Union itself.

See also

• Antimilitarism
• Arrière-ban
• Bevin Boys
• Conscientious objection
• Corvée
• Michel Foucault's theory of "disciplinary institutions"
• Impressment and the Quota System
• Indentured servant
• Involuntary servitude
• Levée en masse
• Machiavelli's thought on the superiority of conscription over mercenaries and professional armies.
• Military
• Military history
• Military service
• Military of Switzerland
• National Service
• Slavery
• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques
• Timeline of women's participation in warfare
• Military recruitment
• Economic conscription

References

External links

• War Resisters' International
• Refusing to bear arms: a survey around the world, conducted by "War Resisters' International" about conscription and conscientious objection to military service.
• Manifesto Against Conscription and the Military System, with an updated list of all signatories from 1993 to 2007.
• Albert Einstein and Mahatma Gandhi. Manifesto Against Conscription and the Military System.
• War Resisters League (USA)
• Resisters.info — the draft, draft registration, and draft resistance in the USA
• MedicalDraft.info — the medical draft ("Health Care Personnel Delivery System") in the USA
• Is Conscription Slavery?
• Campaign to Abolish Mandatory Military Service in Slovakia
• Rangel calls for mandatory military service
• The Association for Injured Officers And Soldiers of Mandatory Military Service, Republic of China
• The European Bureau for Conscientious Objection
• Campaign Against Conscription in Greece
• Canadian Newspaper Archives - Conscription
• Anti-Conscription Web Ring
• The History Guy:Issues: Military Draft/Conscription: Information and links on the military draft issue.
• Mothers Against the Draft - list of countries with conscription
• Shall We Have Universal Military Training? - World War II-era study