Sending in the Zombies
Conscription in the 21st Century
On November 24, 1944, a group of Canadian soldiers of the 15th Brigade seized weapons and took control of their barracks in Terrace British Colombia. They demonstrated in the streets with signs reading “DOWN WITH CONSCRIPTION” and “THE ZOMBIES FIGHT BACK.”
This was not a political or revolutionary act, but one of self-interest and self-defense. The troops were frustrated with garrison duty in Terrace British Colombia, and they didn’t want to be sent to the war in Europe either. The “Zombies” were conscripts who maintained their unwillingness to volunteer for the war. They were conscripted against their will, and they just wanted to go home. Nobody on either side wanted to escalate the crisis and it passed without violence.
The Mutiny was suppressed in the media, and most of the participants got what they wanted; freedom from garrison duty in British Colombia, and eventually, freedom from the Army. Few Canadian conscripts ended up in combat in Europe, and overall the conscription crisis became a footnote in the history of humanity’s bloodiest war. Terrace was far from unusual in the history of mandatory military service, except perhaps in its peaceful outcome.
Conscripts have existed almost as long as armed conflict and has existed under many names, be it they Roman Auxilia, Japanese Ashigaru, German Landsers.
Today, every single state that is at war with another state uses a form of mandatory military service. Israel is probably the most famous of these; the IDF was designed with conscription in mind, and today a large proportion of the population has passed through it’s ranks.
Ukraine and Russia both use conscription heavily. Both nations prior to the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2022 employed a draft conscription system, but Ukraine has since massively widened it, and Russia has broadened their program. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia use conscription.
In the build up to 1914, while the world awaited the spark that would set aflame the European continent (and the world), all of the soon-to-be active combatants but Britain, made enormous use of conscription. The French called it the “school of the nation,” and in a sense, they were right. It inextricably welded the cause of the nation with the cause of each individual in a way no potential exchange of colonies or loss of territorial integrity could.
Conscription places the war, whatever war it is, in the homes of the nation in a way no other can. Afghanistan, Iraq, these were conflicts that could be safely ignored by the body politic, a dirty affair left to the professionals, easily glossed over by the media.
Sure, professional soldiers die far away in foreign wars, but they volunteered, and many come from poor communities and marginalized groups that we sadly already know are easily ignored by society. Many are compelled to service out of economic necessity. Thus, they quickly become someone to think about at Remembrance Day and a name in the local paper.
Not so, when conscription brings the war is brought home to every community in the nation. Anxious homes, communities waiting for word from a son, daughter, lover, or husband1 taken from their home and sent far away. The war invades the consciousness long before the first shots ring out.
For most people in the early 21st Century, being compelled to serve in a war isn’t something worth concern. The American draft, while technically in existence, was made toxic by the opposition to the Vietnam War. Much of Western Europe likewise abolished their conscription systems, and those who still possess them generally use them to quite limited degrees to make up recruitment shortfalls.
Conscription has massive downsides, the greatest being the act itself. Compelling people to enlist in the military without their consent is inherently a violation of their autonomy. To ask that they be willing to kill and to risk death for the sake of the conflict at hand, regardless as to the cause, is something that many understandably find hard to swallow.
However one sees military service, honorable or despicable; recruiting someone against their will is an act of violence. Governments the world over are not opposed to acts of violence of course, that’s why they have soldiers and police, but there is another consideration.
Conscription is expensive.
When conscripts die or get hurt, they or their next of kin need caring for. When they are taken away from their jobs, that job loses an employee. Perhaps they come home injured, requiring long term care. Each conscript represents a person who was contributing to the economy at home until removed and placed in the government’s pay. From taxpayer to tax recipient. Israel has already need to stand down many of their conscripts in their genocidal war on Gaza owing to the massive cost of keeping them in uniform.
The effects can be profound. Conscription in World War I caused catastrophic economic damage in many of the combatant nations, damage they had not recovered from by World War II. The Austro-Hungarian Empire by 1918 was fighting famine caused by economic freefall, blockade, and significantly, the farmers being sent to war. Wars as late as the 19th Century would be dictated by the harvest times.
The World Wars showed in all their horrific detail, that industrial states, when they clash, will need far more soldiers than a volunteer army will generally provide. This knowledge was forgotten in the myriad insurgencies, occupations, revolutions and decolonial wars that marked the latter 20th Century and early 21st.
Counter-Insurgency is a very different type of warfare, one in which small, highly motivated armies are far more effective than undermotivated conscript forces. As the French in Algeria, and the Americans in Vietnam discovered to their cost, conscripts do not perform well in battle against highly motivated revolutionaries.
The armies of the “War on Terrorism” were generally organizations very compositionally distinct from the Levée en masse of 1900-1950s. The societal distinction between officer and enlisted soldiers blurred. Where in the past class and professionalism differentiated officers from their soldiers, education alone became the primary demarcation between them. This too is fading, brushed aside by the ever-expanding technological requirements of war.
The armies of NATO in 2024 are thus highly technically proficient volunteer forces, have a small footprint in proportion to their cost,2 and they generally have a very limited reserve of human resources. This is completely at odds with the trend of armed conflict today.
The Ukrainian Government has imposed truly draconian measures in their search for more soldiers. Videos of press-gangs of soldiers dragging unwilling conscripts into vans and sending them to the army are legion. This spring that government announced a temporary ban on consular services for service-age Ukrainians abroad, a move designed to compel them to return, but described as “blatantly illegal” by opposition lawmakers.
Russia, significantly better off in terms of population, likewise has dealt with a crisis of willing manpower. Prisoners were mobilized, with some pretty mixed results. The Russian Army has made extensive use of foreign volunteers since the start of the war, as well as the infamous mercenaries of Wagner Group.
Israel, facing overlapping economic and diplomatic crises caused by their genocidal war, face a similar crisis. At full mobilization, the IDF land force is just over 500,0003 all ranks. Even if they could afford to remain fully mobilized indefinitely, in Gaza they face a situation in which they simply aren’t big enough to occupy the area they are targeting. This will become even more acute if they escalate further violence against Lebanon. All this in spite of a very large foreign volunteer program, one that illegally recruits in Canada.
The tactics the IDF have used, criminal and sadistic in their nature, are borne partially out of necessity4; no army of their size in 2024 can effectively occupy a place the size of Gaza, with a population of over 2 million.5
There is a disconnect here being laid bare in the ruins of Gaza and the trenches of Eastern Ukraine. The constant provocations of China, Iran, Russia, and other nations around the world by the America and its allies show that the NATO nations are currently far more bellicose than their means allow for. No amount of gross overspending on “defense” can make up for the shortfall of warm bodies to put into green outfits and boots.
Thus we arrive at a crossroads.
Western governments are actively provoking conflicts they cannot win without staffing their militaries. The militaries cannot staff themselves for the conflicts they could find themselves in. When Boris Johnson was sabotaging peace talks between Russia and Ukraine in 2022, the British Army had missed every one of its recruitment goals since 2010.
Every military in the world is looking right at Gaza and Ukraine right now. They see clearly that the wars they wish to fight, or at least insinuate they wish to fight, are unwinnable without massively increasing the size and depth of their manpower pool.
The rumblings are already starting in Europe. Germany and the UK have both discussed in government forms of “national service” already. Some still have it on the laws, and make use of it, like the newly invited Swedes and Finns. It is clear that compelled military service will come back before the current governments of the “West” pull back their rhetoric. The Military-Industrial-Complex will only willingly go forward, thus they’ll need someone to fill the ranks.
This is a crisis in the making for young people today. The generations safely insulated from the roar of the guns are placing the nations of the world in increasingly dangerous ground, without having the secure footing they’d need to see it through.
The young people will be the ones to suffer for it. They already are.
Ian, June 11, 2024
Thanks to the marvels of neoliberalism, conscription often now is something both sexes can enjoy, though nations with female conscription exempt mothers for reasons I hope are obvious.
I am not calling the US Army “small” but rather this is a measure reflected in the boots-on-the-ground capacity as compared to other forces like the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
It is possible this figure has changed since 07/10/23 but that remains to be seen.
Not an excuse. The entire IDF brass deserve the wall and a blindfold. Wouldn’t spare them a cigarette.
Pre-War number. The genocidal nature of this war as well as the tactics used means the final horrific toll will reduce this number, contrary to trends in many armed conflicts.
A new slant for me on the whole conscription question. More good journalism. The future impasse for Western nations is the clear contradiction between charter rights and freedoms, and compelled military service that governments would impose through conscription. Let me go out on a limb and say "It won't happen here."