A newly published National Security Strategy has raised questions about bringing back conscription in the UK, and now an expert has warned this measure could be ‘absolutely vital’
As an alarming government dossier warns that Brits “must actively prepare” for war, many have have been left wondering what modern day combat would really mean for the UK.
Now, an expert has revealed how conscription could work on home soil, explaining that a “well-trained resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread.”
According to the newly published National Security Strategy report, facing the danger of nuclear weapons will be “more complex than it was even in the Cold War” – a prospect that will no doubt send a shudder down the spine of those who lived through these uncertain times.
Some of the dossier’s references date back even further than the days of the Iron Curtain, harking back to the famed Blitz spirit of World War II.
READ MORE: Five crucial jobs that will not be conscripted in the UK if WW3 begins
Describing the nation as being in a period of “radical uncertainty”, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to spend five per cent of GDP on national security within a decade, in a bid to bring together civilian and military priorities “in a way not seen since 1945”.
Although national conscription was not mentioned in the document, Brits are now asking important questions as the threat to national security feels closer than ever.
Reflecting on this newly published strategy, Professor Anthony Glees, an expert on European affairs from The University of Buckingham, told the Mirror: “It’s revealing and depressing that the National Security Strategy outlines, correctly, the grave danger the UK now faces, but does not mention ‘conscription’ once. Not once.
“It tells us, correctly, that we ‘need to actually prepare for the UK Homeland coming under direct threat in a wartime scenario’. We need, it says, to ‘strengthen our approach to domestic security, restore security to our borders’.
“It describes the threat to us here in the UK posed by Russia and Iran in particular – and outlines our need to ‘gain the upper hand’ when confronting their frequent cyber attacks, their landgrabbing tactics in Europe and beyond, their intrusion into outer space, cyberspace (ie undersea data-carrying cables).”
“But one of the most important and cheapest ways we have of countering and addressing these myriad real threats to our way of life, increasing the size of our armed forces through some form of conscription, is totally ignored.”
For decades, the topic of National Service has been floated in public discussions; however, successive governments have repeatedly ruled out the possibility of military conscription, the main argument here being that armed forces are best staffed by those who have volunteered to put themselves forward to defend the country, with all the skills and training such a rigorous task.
However, in recent years, the security situation has changed significantly, and there are those who believe National Service is now “absolutely vital”. This includes Professor Glees, who expressed concerns that the government “self-evidently does not believe that increasing the size of our armed forces has anything to do with the stated aims of the Strategy.”
He warned: “This is totally reckless, particularly given the widely reported view of General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former NATO deputy supreme commander, Europe, just a few months ago, that we should immediately begin to conscript 30,000 young Brits each year to bring our army up to the crucial 100,000 mark.
“I’ve often said in the past that, as an academic, this seems absolutely vital to me. A well-trained, resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread, because as his attack on Ukraine shows, our nukes do not deter him, any more than his nukes deter Ukraine.”
But what would conscription actually look like in our modern age? And would all those participating be expected to fight?
Expressing his thoughts on how such a scheme could work in 21st-century Britain, the expert said: “I favour conscription for national service for everyone capable of it. Not everyone should undergo military training as in weapons training; cyber skills, for example, for offensive and defensive purposes, are a form of weapons training. But those who are up for proper military training should be given it.
“The EU, the UK and Norway have a population of 523m, more than times as large as Russia with 144m. Our joint GDP is $24tr compared with Russia’s $2tr.”
Highlighting some of the potential incentives such a scheme could introduce, amid a backdrop of rising living costs, he added: “We can afford to offer our young people fabulous inducements to commit to a year’s national service, for example, cheap loans for mortgages, free university and college places.
“In the National Security Strategy, the Prime Minister says we need to ‘unleash a defence dividend, to use national security to strengthen our country’. Exactly so. That dividend is not simply AI and IT; it is our young people who need to understand that their future liberty relies on their willingness to serve. That is where conscription comes in.”
While fears over the potential for nuclear warfare are rife, Professor Glees believes any future European War “will be fought with conventional means, not nukes”, which he emphasises “are last resort weapons”. In this regard, “a strong land army” will be far more important than a formidable nuclear arsenal.
He added: “Putin knows that if we were to use them to prevent him from taking over our country, we could destroy Russia in the bat of an eyelid. But he also knows that we would be committing suicide in doing so. That is why conventional strength is real strength.
“A future war in Europe (just like the current war in Ukraine or the war between Israel and Iran) will be fought with conventional means, not nukes. Nukes are last resort weapons, but leave plenty of space for conventional forces to go past them, like the Maginot Line, which was meant to defend France from the Germans, but they simply went over the top of it.
“Until recently, we’ve put just about all our defence eggs in our Vanguard-class Trident-carrying submarines. In fact, we need a strong land army to keep our shores safe, not least from the very things the Review outlines, which include the key demand that we properly protect our borders, which we are not doing at the moment.”
Brits first underwent conscription during what would later become known as World War I. Prior to this point, this sort of compulsion hadn’t been applied to regular army recruitment since the early 18th century, when vagrants and those in debt were briefly affected by an early form of conscription, as per the Official Public Record.
Then, the seismic events of the 20th century would change everything. Passed in January 1916, the Military Service Act 1916 imposed conscription on all single men aged between 18 and 41 unless they were exempt. This was extended to 50 in April 1918.
Two years later, in 1920, conscription would be abolished, but not for long. Those who celebrated their 18th birthday in 1945 will now be 98 years old. Those still living may well remember leaving their hometown behind to fight the Nazis, or waving goodbye to friends, family members and neighbours.
On September 3, 1939, the same day that Britain declared war on Germany, Parliament passed The National Service (Armed Forces) Act, which ordered that all men between the ages of 18 and 41 had to register for service.
Exemptions were afforded to those determined to be medically unfit, as well as those who worked in key sectors such as farming, engineering and medicine. Any conscientious objectors had to argue their case before a tribunal.
A second National Service Act was passed in December 1941, this time meaning that all unmarried women and childless widows between the ages of 20 and 30 were liable to be called up, while men under the age of 60 had to participate in some form of National Service. This included military service for men under the age of 51.
Even after the war ended in 1945, National Service continued in the UK right up until the 1960s, to address manpower shortages, with the last servicemen being discharged in 1963.
Do you have a story to share? Email me at [email protected]
READ MORE: Brits must ‘actively prepare’ for war on UK soil, chilling government strategy warns