A Research Of The Benefits And Drawbacks Of The Mandatory Military Service

In this essay I will look at different countries around the globe and how they use mandatory military service. The countries I will look at are, South Korea, Israel, Finland and Switzerland. Each country has been chosen due to particular factors and reasons that may affect its choice of having a conscripted military service. I will evaluate the benefits and costs of the mandatory military service overall after looking at each country’s potential reasoning behind its decision. I was inspired to look at this argument after speaking to a friend currently serving mandatory military service in South Korea. Currently about 28 countries across the globe practice conscription, whether this be due to a lack of volunteers, a small population, or an outstanding threat. This conscription mostly includes a specific age range of men and women, usually starting at 18 and ending at around 35. However, women are rarely conscripted, with just 7 countries practicing this out of the 28. This argument seems to be prominent across the global web with many people joining the debate of the pros and cons of mandatory service. In this debate both sides have strong points in terms of costs and benefits. Some of the benefits argued are that conscription promotes national unity, provides training and skills that can be used later in life and is a cost-effective method of providing a defence force to the country’s requirements. However, in counter it is argued that a conscripted service will not be as good or as qualified a professional one and it is sometimes costly to run a conscript service when it is unnecessary. It can be argued that the country could be spending the money it spends on conscription on improving other aspects of its country. As well as this there is the idea that young people are being held back from their studies and are being almost forced into national compassion. It is then debatable whether this practice supports optional loyalty to the country or forces loyalty upon its citizens. The first country I will look at is Israel. The Israeli Defence Force (IDF) was founded in 1948 just two weeks after the establishment of the state of Israel and has been running ever since.

Conscription of citizens over 18 was begun the following year in 1949 as a bid to create a military for the newly established state, this practice has continued to the present day where male citizens must serve 2 years and 8 months in the force and women must serve 2 years. Israel is one of the seven countries that practices conscription, recruiting both men and women into the force. Women in fact provide a crucial part of the force heading up roles in commandment, artillery, communications and combat with 1500 female combat soldiers drafted every year. The women of the IDF have become somewhat of an inspiration to women across the globe promoting equality and showing the world what women can do. Presently and for the past 70 years, beginning with Israel’s recognition as a state, Israel has been in conflict with Palestine. Causing the two parties to possess their own separate territories. The Palestinians inhabit the Gaza strip and West Bank leaving the Israelis to the segment of land in the middle. The conflict is primarily caused because the Palestinians believe all of the contested territories should belong to them. With Israel countering that the 1949 armistice reads that the territory should be divided. This has led to unrest in the country for years meaning checkpoints, fences and armed military personnel are a common sight. This unrest has escalated more recently, with increasing protests and violence from the Palestinians as a result of some Israeli settlements on the fringes of the West Bank. One source even described these protests as a normal part of life. These settlements put pressure on water and electrical resources and make the Palestinians uneasy, further escalating the tensions.

The conditions this conflict causes creates a need for defence forces however does it warrant conscription? Israel is a relatively new state having only existed for 70 years, this means that at the time of creation it did probably need to draft its citizens to protect its new weaker image and status in the area. Israel is also still in conflict meaning that a higher number of military personnel is needed in comparison to if the state was at peace. It could be argued that without conscription it may not have the needed manpower to cover all of the required positions. The amount of violence from the Palestinian people is a likely to be a rational reason for the need of extra military personnel via conscription as well as the standard tasks the military must partake in such as border security. It could be argued that conscription is almost necessary as it maintains a strong image of high military power in the face of the Palestinians too. The conscription of 18-year olds into the service is built heavily into the way of life in Israel almost forming a rite of passage. It is also a great way to unite people from different backgrounds allowing cultural and religious diversity. Native Israelis will serve with immigrants and secular Israelis will serve with orthodox Jews creating a melting pot of backgrounds. [4] It allows people with differences to learn about others, strengthening the country and possibly reducing racism and hate crime. The fact women are also drafted also promotes equality and respect for women as many are commanding officers managing co-ed battalions of 50 people or more. As well as the promotion of equality and culture the conscript service has also aided in Israel’s economy. Israel’s economy has grown faster than any other developed country since 1995 and the mandatory service could be a factor adding to this. The service teaches young people problem solving, leadership, the ability to work with different people and how to manage time, all skills that are needed in the working world. Although the service seems necessary there are arguments that Israel could now cope with a voluntary service. In fact, the IDF has considered this change and acknowledges that in the future it will at some point phase out conscription in favour of a voluntary military. This may be a result of the funds the service needs to maintain its workings. The IDF costs billions of dollars to keep it up to standard and this is due to the amount of conscript personnel it recruits every year for training. Every single recruit needs to be trainees, fed, housed and paid as well as the budget needing to cover normal military operations. In 2014 the defence budget was cut which likely led to the continuing thoughts of rethinking the scale of the conscript service.

It also could be argued that the presence of a conscript service is perhaps exacerbating the problem with Palestine. It may make Palestinians feel more threatened and want to fight back. As well as this it may also introduce hate of Palestinians from a young age not allowing young people to form their own opinions as one is forced upon them. It can be said that the easiest way to unite people is to unite them over a common hate or belief, in this case although the conscript service unites Israeli people, in unites them against the Palestinians. As a result of this common feeling of hatred, being passed down from one generation to the next, it creates a conflict, that people are fighting in, possibly because of what they are told not because it’s what they truly believe. If Israel did not have the conscript service, then maybe some of these alternative beliefs would become more prevalent, potentially leading to a more peaceful relationship between Israel and Palestine. However, conflict within each of the states may then arise as a result of differing opinions. For now, however many Israeli citizens still believe it is necessary and a crucial part of Israel’s image. Finland is the second country I will review which practices a conscript military service. Unlike Israel, Finland is not presently in active conflict, neither is it a fairly recently established state. However, Finland is a large country (303,890 km²) with large expanses of untouched uninhabited land and a fairly small population of 5. 495 million (2016) this means that it has a very small population density (18. 803 people/km²) compared to the other countries I will look at. The draft began in Finland with the conscription act of 1878, however the draft that is used today first began under the Conscription Act of 1951. Finland became independent from Russia in 1917 and has been recognised as an independent state ever since despite the winter war (1939-1940) and continuation war (1941-1944) between itself and the Soviet Union.

It could be said that the introduction of the 1951 act was to prepare Finland for the possibility of another attack and even act as a deterrent. The Finnish defence forces (FDF) have an intense training regime for their recruits. Recruitment begins at the age of 18 with admission usually at age 20. Finland drafts all acceptable men between the ages of 18 to 29 although women can join voluntarily. Finland seems to have one of the most well-structured regimes with a service period of 165, 255 or 347 days for conscripts and 347 days for conscripts that are to be trained as NCO’s (non-commissioned officers) which is around 1 in 5 recruits. The conscripts are positioned where possible, into areas that relate to their skills or future career paths as well as social, financial and medical services being provided. There is also the option of paternity leave and weekends and evenings are left free for trainees to have leave; transport home is also provided free of charge. In terms of training all recruits will go through basic training and border guard training before they specialise in their fields. This basic training covers many situations and skills like terrorist attacks, border breaches, natural disasters as well as communications, leadership and teamwork. It is clear that the FDF train their conscripts to meet a variety of situations in their training but is this training and conscript practice needed? It can be pointed out quite clearly that Finland does not have a huge population, this means therefore that it probably would not have enough voluntary or career based military personnel to combat a threat if one arose. For this reason, it may need conscription to be able to be seen as a county not to be messed with. There is also the obvious threat of Russia which shares a border with Finland. This is possibly why all conscripts are trained to be a border guard at any time. The Russian and Finnish people have been at war before so there is always the possibility that it will happen again. Noticeably in recent years Russia has become more active, highlighting this threat. This has sparked other countries to take notice. For example, Sweden, who previously abolished its male draft in 2010 after a little more than 100 years, has now voted to bring it back. As of the 1st January 2018 over 4,000 men and women out of 100,000 will be drafted into its military, a decision that was made in September 2016. The Finnish Government states on the FDF website that “Conscription is a cost-effective way of generating a large and capable reserve. Our reservists possess skills acquired through military service and life in general that can be used to defend the country. ”

Although this source is likely to be bias as it comes from the FDF itself it does echo some of the ideas mentioned previously. It may in fact be a cost-effective way to gain a military that Russia will think twice about attacking. Sometimes although a professional army may be more skilled there just isn’t enough man power to combat a much larger enemy if that is indeed the underlying reason for Finland’s conscript service. In fact, most of Finland’s population believe that the conscript service is a good thing as it acts as a deterrent to unpredictable Russia. Their war time strength is around 280,000 men and women with over 900,000 reservists in comparison to the 20,000-30,000 force it would possess if only a professional army was available. As with every debate there are arguments against Finland’s mandatory military service, one of the most prominent being the draft of only men. This means that women are able to carry on with their education whilst men are in enlisted allowing them to get a ‘head start’ on their male counterparts. Though this may not seem like much of an issue, in terms of gender equality it raises some issues with some of the Finnish people believing this head start is unfair and that women should serve too. The cost of the conscription is high as the military must provide food, housing, and training to its recruits. As well as this the FDF provide healthcare services, financial support services and social services to its conscripts. This increases the cost of each conscript going through training. However, the Finnish military states that it is a cost-effective method for their country, so it is possible in this case the need for the service outweighs the amount of money it costs, especially since the serving time is fairly short therefore bringing lower costs. Switzerland is one of the countries you would least expect to have a mandatory military service. It has maintained armed neutrality for the past 5 centuries, even though both world wars. They are a more recent addition to the UN only joining in 2002 however they now play a vital role, even housing a UN HQ. Apart from the UN Switzerland is not involved in any other defence pact or group that requires a use of Switzerland’s military, it is not even a part of the EU. So, there is a question to why they would need a military draft. Similarly to Finland, Switzerland only drafts men into its conscription program. Again, like Finland, the Swiss recruits also get a say in which areas they wish to be placed whist they are in the service. The recruits must fit into the 19-34 age bracket with a good health and fitness level to be accepted. The training period is 21 weeks long and the recruits are trained in peacetime and war time activities as well as some policing roles. Each conscript must return for 3 weeks of refresher courses each year and must be ready to be mobilised as a reserve at any time. Switzerland believes that a standing army will maintain neutrality, allowing enough people to be seen as a force to be reckoned with however having them on stand down to appear less of an offensive threat. Switzerland has an active force of 22,00 troops, in addition to this as a result of conscription they add 178,00 reserves to this number bringing its military capacity to 200,000 strong. Although this force is not permitted or supposed to be used in conflicts with other countries it does participate in global peacekeeping missions in conjunction with the UN as well as contributing to NATO’s Partnership of Peace program.

Another argued good aspect of the conscript service in Switzerland is the unification of their different cultures. Much like Israel, Switzerland has many different cultures and 4 different languages which could lead to separated communities. The service allows all cultures to serve side by side and learn about each other, this unifies the country and tries to extinguish the separation of communities into solid cultural groups; it creates a common ground and conversation point. Switzerland's crime rates are one of the lowest in the world, the conscript service could be recognised as having an impact on this figure as there are more military personnel available to manage issues and act as a visual deterrent to possible felons. As well as this the training provides a change of mindset and set of moral values to the young people of Switzerland also helping to reduce crime. Despite Switzerland's conscript service bringing positive attributes to the country it does have downsides, and one large one at that. One of the smaller issues is that the service can hinder the career of the men who serve in it whilst women can move forward with their education. This hindrance compared to Finland and South Korea however is minimal as Switzerland's 21 weeks is far less than their serving periods. It can probably be argued that it may even be beneficial to men as it provides them with a learning opportunity that many girls will not have if they chose not to volunteer. The one crucial error Switzerland has with its service however is its lack of a mobility strategy. Within 48 hours it has been predicted that only 1070 personnel would be available for dispatch. This number is not too bad when you consider the total capacity of 140,000 personnel the military has at its disposal. In the event of an attack or event these 1070 personnel would be able to secure 1 large installation like an airport or nuclear power plant or 2 to 3 smaller installations. Realistically this is quite good in comparison to the capabilities of an all professional army like the UK’s which would be able to dispatch potentially thousands in 48hrs if needed. The issue is the quality of these 1070 personnel, this consists of 100 military police, 170 professional soldiers and 800 conscripts in military refresher courses at that time. If the event requires a high skill level that only the professionals may possess there may be issues with communications and capabilities. If this number is not enough however, and more people are required, they need to be summoned which requires a mobilisation system, the issue with Switzerland's army is that it doesn’t actually have one. This conscript army that it has trained is effectively useless even if it is needed because there is no system in place to call it up. The swiss government seem to have realised this and in 2016 voted to over the next 4 years reduce the swiss army to a number of 100,000 personnel. It set the goal of having a well-trained force that can mobilise quickly, to achieve this goal funding was increased from CHF17. 6 billion to CHF20billion over 4 years despite the governments financial situation.

In this reform it is unclear what the future of the swiss conscript program will be. South Korea is the fourth country I will look at. South Korea has practiced conscription for the past 60 years and recruits male citizens between the ages of 18 and 35. The training period is about 5 weeks long with a service period of 24 months for the army and marine corps and 28 months for the air force and navy. The basic training period is reportedly very intense and a shock to many recruits. It is often a hard time for the recruits as they are cut off from the outside world with little access to their phones and the internet. From there they are distributed to their battalions where the rest of their service will be carried out. [22] The training does not stop there however with hard hitting training events, 2-week long exercises and regular duties, although the lifestyle is more relaxed it is still a very different way of life compared from the outside world. The compulsory service is thought to be as a result of the ongoing distrust between the two Koreas. The armistice agreement was signed in 1953, technically this means that the north and south are still at war as a peace treaty has not been signed. The Korean war was the first military action of the cold war and took place in the years 1950-1953. A good number of foreign parties got involved including the UN, USA and UK as well as 16 other countries on the South Korean side in an attempt to manage the Soviet Union in that area. The Korean DMZ (de-militarised zone) was created between the two Koreas along the 38th parallel in an attempt to calm the clash. This could be one of the reasons the South Korean government feels the need to have a conscripted army. The threat of North Korea is granted to be one of the main reasons that South Korea feels the need for the conscript program, and perhaps in light of recent events it is right to be on edge. A man called Gene Kim, who served in the South Korean military for 2 years, states that in fact North Korea has tried to invade South Korea multiple times after the 1953 armistice. This is a legitimate reason for the need of the conscript service in South Korea and its level of importance. As well as this South Korea has a relatively large population compared to the other countries I have looked at, with a population density of 525. 805 people/km2 (2016) which is much higher again than the other countries. I could be argued that as a result of this high population density they need a strong military to protect the country as there is more threat to civilians in each area, compared to say Finland with a population density of only 18. 083 people/km2 (2016) whom also has large expanses of forest and natural landscapes. Border security is also a big issue for South Korea with a good amount of its military resources being focused there, it can be said that South Korea must put more manpower into protecting its 1 threatened border than a country which is not under an obvious threat. Because of this reason South Korea must be able to show military readiness in the face of the north who pride themselves on their military. Like the south the north also has conscription, with men and women reportedly being forced to serve up to 10 years. If the south did not have conscription it is an undoubted fact that they would probably not have enough people to combat the north, despite its strong relationship with America and the west. Looking at this idea of a possible lack of volunteers is conscription didn’t exist it is safe to say that south kore would most likely suffer and struggle to attain the needed people. South Koreas economy is huge and constantly increasing with a growth in business, international relationships, trading partners and technological advancement. This would mean many Koreans would prefer to join the job ladder as opposed to serving in the harsh military. For this reason too, it may be argued that the conscription service is needed. Similarly to Israel the idea of mandatory service is built into the culture with many citizens believing that it is a rite of passage for Korean men. As well as this despite the training being difficult and intense, most people believe it is a necessary evil needed to protect their country from the North Korean threat. They also say it taught them to work hard to achieve their best, coming out with the saying of ‘if you can’t make it work, make it work’, it instils a can-do attitude into the people.

As previously mentioned, speaking to my friends and people who have served military service in South Korea it surprised me to see how many people hated their experience in the military so strongly, however most accept it is necessary despite their dislike because of North Korea. One person I spoke to described the service as a “barbaric, inhumane service from all angles”, he is 26 years old and like many in their 20’s has already completed his service. As well as this he told me that “many guys will be entering the job market at least 2 years later than women. It means we get a competitive disadvantage from the start” this highlights the issues that men who are due to be conscripted worry about before they join. Looking at an opinion from another person he expressed that he thinks more women should step up to the plate as well as his understanding that the service is somewhat necessary. An interview done by a YouTube channel called AsianBoss asked Korean men on the street about the service, a couple of the men brought to light the idea of horror stories they are told by people who have already experienced service as well as the fact they must give 2 years of their youth to their country. These opinions bring into question the overall running of the conscript service which seems to have issues with its treatment of recruits and the pressure they are put under. A story about a man named Sergeant Lim brought to light the darker side of the conscript program in South Korea. Lim went on a rampage after coming off daily duty killing 5 colleagues and injuring 7. His mental state was assessed 15 months earlier and he was said to be suicidal and at risk of causing an incident, however nothing was done. This suicidal mental state is not uncommon amongst conscripts and bullying is also a normality. Many men have lost their lives through suicide, the number is countless as the military is believed to have covered up many as accidents. The government given number is 82. 2 suicides in the military on average per year between 2009 and 2013, an increase from the value of 72. 6 in 2004-2008. For a conscript service to be a part of the culture and society of the people it needs to be managed well in all areas, and by the sounds of things it could do with some modifications in certain areas. Having discussed each of the countries in turn I will now assess some of the recurring reasons that have come to light in terms of the need for a mandatory military service. Threat seems to be the most prominent issue which influences the countries’ decision to have a conscript service. Israel, Finland and South Korea all have neighbouring countries that are unpredictable and that do or could provide a legitimate threat to them. In the face of a threat these countries need to be ready to face their challengers as well as providing a force that will be seen as a strong opposition to deter interaction or be perceived as a strong country. In this case just voluntary members may not be enough to meet the criteria therefore a form of conscription may be used to supplement the militaries numbers. The use of conscription may be the case also if the country is large with a relatively small population, again a voluntary service may not be sufficient to support the country and deter/oppose threats. On the other hand, economically the service must be viable to the country, not costing too much of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) annually and being useful as a service. It could be argued that if too much is spent on the military other areas of the country may be lacking. The values for the countries I have reviewed are as follows for 2016; Israel - 5. 7%; Finland - 1. 4%; Switzerland - 0. 7%; and South Korea - 2. 6%. Naturally countries in conflict spend more on their military than those who aren’t, however it could be debateable that a country like Switzerland could reduce its 0. 7% to even less as its conscription service in my opinion is not crucial at this time to the country. This money could be used in other areas for example the renewable energy market or its issues with offshore tax evasion.

The idea of gender equality has also come to light with male citizens of countries who do not practice conscription of both sexes feeling left behind in the job and education ladder, however they did also feel that women may struggle with the physical challenges of the military. Alternatively in Israel where both sexes are conscripted it appeared to give women a sense of empowerment and respect amongst the men giving them a leading role in society. From these observations it could be said that in fact male only conscription could exacerbate the gender disparity in a country. As well as the viability of the service there is also its operation, for it to be a positive contribution to society it must work well. Finland has services set up for its conscripts which works well but South Korea has faced issues in not providing enough for its conscripts. If the conscripts are ill provided for then this impacts the viability of the service as mentally or physically damaged recruits are more likely to be a hazard as opposed to an asset. For some countries the service is genuinely needed as they are at probable risk of or are in conflict with an opposing force, however for some it may not be as necessary, and it can be debated whether there is relevant legitimate need for the service. In debate of whether mandatory military service is a good idea or not it really has to be considered on a country to country basis. Each country practices mandatory military service for various reasons usually primarily when it is under threat from, or in conflict with neighbouring countries. For some countries it may be a necessary evil due to its circumstances, still, for some it is just a matter of precaution or a deterrent symbol of power, the list could go on as everyone will have their own reasons truthful or not. For those countries that feel it is necessary it can be a good idea in certain situations as long as the practice is executed in a thoughtful and effective way. Although mandatory conscription is a commitment many countries make it can be necessary to some, they are sometimes required in an effort to keep international peace or to deter threats and protect its citizens.