Conscription, both civil and military, has long been viewed as an outdated relic of a bygone era. When I started researching this topic in 2018, most of the political scientists and philosophers I spoke to responded with scepticism. However, Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine had already prompted several European countries to reinstate or maintain conscription policies. The current European security environment, along with the precarious state of public health and social care systems, makes a reconsideration of civil and military conscription all the more urgent. My article adopts a broad perspective, examining normative, military, social, civic, political, and economic aspects, and argues that conscription remains a policy with significant potential.
Normative Foundations: Liberty, Duties, and Equality
At the heart of conscription lies a normative tension involving negative liberty, civic duty, and civic equality. Critics often frame conscription as an unjust infringement on personal freedom. Yet this stance routinely overlooks the question of whether citizens may have moral duties to defend their political community, duties that could be enforced through conscription. Independent of this duty argument, universal national service – encompassing both civil and military conscription – can be justified from an equality perspective. It offers a fairer way to share societal burdens than currently predominant institutions, addressing existing inequalities in who bears the costs of national defense and public services. Rather than focusing solely on negative liberty, this article proposes a more nuanced normative perspective that acknowledges the value conflicts inherent in this policy.
The Military Rationale
But would military conscription even make sense from a military point of view? The article identifies three relevant dimensions in this regard: the current security environment in Europe, developments in military technology and warfare, and the effectiveness of conscript forces. I argue that there is no definite case against military conscription in any of these areas. Rather, the policy may bring both quantitative and qualitative benefits, especially in hybrid models. The institution would be particularly useful in a future mass war or massive grey-zone aggressions, i.e., hostility below the threshold of conventional warfare. In light of Europe’s current security environment, these scenarios cannot be easily dismissed.
Civil Conscription: Strengthening Care and Cohesion
What’s the point of civil conscription? The article argues that it can address pressing social challenges by supporting public health and social care systems. In many European democracies, neoliberal retrenchments have weakened these sectors. By directly involving citizens in caregiving or public works, civil conscription supports these sectors and may also help address care injustices. Furthermore, civil (and military) conscription can promote civic education and social cohesion, offering rare opportunities for citizens from diverse backgrounds to interact and cooperate in fragmented and politically polarised societies. The article also argues that critics overstate the motivational problems with conscripted labour and that alternative policies are often less politically feasible or produce less predictable outcomes.
Civil-Military Relations
There’s another important and long-standing consideration for military conscription: it may foster stronger civilian oversight of the military. All-volunteer forces risk becoming isolated and detached from both politics and society. In contrast, conscription, by drawing widely from the population, can help bridge the military-civilian gap and may have long-term positive effects on the internal workings, composition, and culture of the armed forces. Beyond this internal dimension, conscription could also foster greater societal awareness of warfare and serve as a society-based check on foreign and military policy. The article argues that critics of conscription often overlook these diverse potential effects.
Is Conscription Economically Viable?
Finally, consider the economic and fiscal implications of civil and military conscription – arguably the most difficult terrain on which to defend these institutions. Critics often highlight high costs, labour market distortions, and lost productivity. Still, a closer look reveals a more complex picture: conscription not only cuts recruitment and marketing expenses and delivers cost-effective public services but also constitutes an investment in a range of public goods. How one evaluates its economic impact also depends on broader assumptions about public investment and the state’s role, which remain contested across different economic schools of thought.
Conclusions
I conclude by arguing that, if implemented prudently, conscription could strengthen European military defence and reinforce public health and social care systems. This is especially relevant given that the neoliberal restructuring of many democratic states has significantly weakened these sectors. Conscription can be best appreciated from a range of normative convictions, which sometimes shape how its potential benefits are perceived. It may serve as a strategic reinvestment in the public sector and a step toward rebalancing the relationship between individual and community, market and state. Given current uncertainties around international conflict, public health, social care, and social cohesion, this seems a prudent course of action.
Authors
Sven Altenburger
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/730738