Case Against Military Conscription - Essay Example

Case against Military Conscription Military conscription or draft remains one of the most contested issues in the American political environment. This is particularly in light of the decade long war on terror that led to the nation’s attack on Iraq. Even though some politicians and ordinary citizens advocate for the reinstatement of the military draft, the arguments supporting their campaign are insufficient. This paper provides an in depth analysis of the demerits of military conscription, such as decadence of the draft, technological evolution of modern warfare and economic constraints is poses to society. The demerits are shown to outweigh supposed pros, like enhancement of societal equity, reduced military recklessness and support of democracy, as revealed by further analysis. Case against Military Conscription Conscription or drafting for military service remains one of the most contentious issues not only in politics, but also in the management of military affairs. Draft constitutes a classic debate primarily due to the fact that it contravenes individual liberty and at the same time is justifiable since citizens of a nation have a patriotic duty to defend their society. Even though America has had a volunteer military defending its interests, there are times that the country resorted to draft as a way of replenishing its armies. The use of conscription was particularly evident during America’s biggest conflicts including the Civil War, as well as, the First and Second World Wars. The military draft was formally ceased in the year 1973, a move that did not resonate well with its proponents. Irrespective of this drawn-out period of neglect, debate over the necessity versus the infeasibility of conscription has not receded. Proponents of reinstatement of draft argue based on the notion that citizens have a patriotic responsibility, whereas opponents argue of the basis of economic and moral invalidity. This essay attempts to re-evaluate the country’s need for military conscription by examining its pros and cons. The main argument is that, while the draft was once deemed necessary to bolster the strength of the nation’s military, the contemporary volunteer armed forces have obviated the need for conscription. One of the principal arguments against draft is that it constitutes some form of involuntary servitude. This implies that, soldiers that join armed forces through conscription are forced to provide their services to the defense of the country without willingness to do so (Pfaffenzeller, 2010). This assertion is largely based on societal morals and values of allowing people to make their decisions in regard to the choices they make. This is especially in consideration of the fact that joining the army involves potential risk to one’s well-being and there is also a possibility that military service might cost one’s life. Therefore, drafting soldiers is no different from forcing people into slavery, with the knowledge that they might lose all that they hold dear in their lives. Further, when individuals are enrolled into service compulsorily, there is implied acknowledgement that the state is authoritative or it does no respect personal liberty ingrained in the constitution. In addition, conscription contravenes the principle of independence upon which America was built and that which soldiers risk their lives to defend. It is, therefore, illogical and immoral to demand that people sacrifice their lives or even take that of others at war, without giving them a chance to decide whether their conscience is at peace with such a decision. Under normal circumstances, when an individual is forced to execute a certain duty without voluntarily agreeing to it, the quality of output undoubtedly suffers immensely. This is because the person does not have any incentive to carry out the task effectively and achieve the best possible outcome. The same applies to military service, in the sense that, when people are forced to become soldiers, they refrain from attaining their optimal capacity. In addition, it is impossible to identify and develop the skills of forcefully enrolled soldiers. This is because such enlisted army men or women simply joined the armed forces out of state or federal obligation. A fighting force comprising of drafted soldiers is also highly likely to be ineffective, since the soldiers would be more interested in safeguarding their lives, as opposed to stopping the enemy and protecting the country’s liberties. In the event of war, it is imperative for soldiers to know that they are working in unison to defend their nation’s interests and boundaries. Therefore, if some people are in the army voluntarily to fulfill their patriotic duty they would, without doubt, lose motivation if they realize that others do not wield the same belief or sense of duty. For this reason, it is better and more rational to have a small, but entirely voluntary army, than have a large army comprising of forcefully enlisted soldiers. The former has a high likelihood of being stronger and more disciplined than the latter (Williams, 2005). The other issue that arises in the debate questioning the validity of draft is the evolution of war over the years. While soldiers were required in large numbers to prove the strength of a country’s armed forces and guarantee dominance over enemy forces, this is no longer the case in the contemporary society. This is particularly the case, following the advent of technology and its numerous inventions, which continue to lower the need for the nation to sustain large military forces (Poutvaara & Wagener, 2011b). In the past, as is evident from the country’s most significant conflicts, many soldiers were necessary to effectively execute war strategies. For instance, soldiers had to be deployed in large numbers to the battle zone, with the principal aim of overpowering enemy soldiers. Soldiers also needed to be many in order to intimidate enemies and re-assert the superiority of America among nations. In the modern environment this is no longer the case, hence there is no need to forcefully enroll people into military service. This is because; technological inventions make it possible to sustain military superiority without requiring enlistment of large numbers of people. For instance, the modern armed forces in America currently have remote-controlled drones or unmanned military vehicles. These aircraft can be used to neutralize a threat posed to America’s freedoms, from a distance without requiring the presence of soldiers in the battle zone. The same applies to use of long-range weaponry that empowers the military to inflict as much, or even more damage on enemies, as that which can be imposed by an army unit. Even though such military equipment may be expensive to manufacture, it cannot compare to losing soldiers’ lives. Still in consideration of the economic aspect of maintaining armies, drafting is not a cheap venture. This is primarily attributable to the fact that conscription yields large armies. The latter are expensive to sustain, especially when one takes into account the expenses incurred during training, feeding, accommodating, equipping and transporting draftees. Therefore, the cost of sustaining many drafted soldiers can exert immense pressure on the country’s finances. Such expenses can also predispose the country to accruing debts, further accentuating the already looming debt crisis. Therefore, it makes more sense to invest in military technology than in drafting soldiers, since the cost of maintaining armies could be higher than that of adopting high-tech equipment (Poutvaara & Wagener, 2011a). Proponents of conscription usually argue that the economy can cope with opportunity costs of draft, since they can be counterbalanced by extra political, societal or military advantages. However, in depth analysis of the purported benefits indicates that they are impractical. For instance, one of the arguments used to support conscription is that, it guarantees equitable representation of the American society. However, this is not the case, as history reveals. In all drafts that have occurred in America soldiers represented less than half of the nation’s populace. This is because migrants, women, gays and even members of certain religions were not drafted. Another notion in support of a draft army is that it includes people from all sectors of society and therefore, the military cannot be deployed if there isn’t adequate support from the public (Poutvaara & Wagener, 2011b). Nonetheless this is not a guarantee, since draftees may adopt the idea that it is their patriotic obligation to kill for their home country. Other proponents believe that a draft has higher affinity to democracy than a volunteer army. Such an assertion is not empirically supported, especially considering the fact that army structures run based on command and order, and are essentially non-democratic (Vasquez, 2005). In conclusion, a military draft constitutes an ineffective way of enrolling soldiers in an army. In addition to the decadent nature of the draft, economic concerns largely negate the essence of a conscript army, and not just because of budgetary expenses, but also due to the substantial draft tax burden imposed upon citizens. In addition, volunteer armed forces deliver contemporary, high-tech defense capacity at a potentially lower, and more honest, as well as, dynamic cost than drafted armies. While it is virtually impossible to avoid political danger and turmoil, these risks can be significantly reduced with the use of a volunteer army, as much as they can, with a drafted one. Additionally, as shown in the discussion, the arguments in favor of the draft are not adequately developed. Therefore, the case against conscription or draft based enrolment of soldiers is undoubtedly overwhelming, and efficiently undermines the case for the same. References Pfaffenzeller, S. (2010). Conscription and Democracy: The Mythology of Civil-Military Relations. Armed Forces & Society 36, 481–506. Poutvaara, P., & Wagener, A. (2011a). The Political Economy of Conscription, in Coyne, C., & Mathers, R. eds., Handbook on the Political Economy of War, London: Edward Elgar, 154–175. Poutvaara, P., & Wagener, A. (2011b). Ending Military Conscription. CESifo DICE Report 2, 36-43 Vasquez, J. (2005). Shouldering the Soldiering: Democracy, Conscription, and Military Casualties. Journal of Conflict Resolution 49, 849–873. Williams, C. (2005). From Conscripts to Volunteers: NATO’s Transitions to All-Volunteer Forces. Naval War College Review 58, 35–62. Read More