In recent years there has been a trend, especially in the West, of replacing conscript armies formed of drafted soldiers with professional armies made of career soldiers. This is due to the perception that smaller, highly trained armies are more motivated and more competent to undertake modern warfare. They are also believed to be less expensive in the long run than conscript armies.
It is important to note here that professional does not necessarily mean voluntary. Voluntary means a person who volunteers to serve in his country’s armed forces so he can defend it or the values that it represents. A professional, on the other hand, is someone who chooses to serve in the armed forces as a career or job.
This is in no way meant to belittle professional soldiers or to cast doubt on their sincerity or valor; however, all professionals are volunteers but not all volunteers are professionals.
The merits of professional armies became established wisdom, especially in the US after the Vietnam War, where it suffered its greatest defeat, which many military thinkers blamed on the fact that the US armed forces at the time relied on a conscript army.
It is assumed by many that conscript armies have a lower morale and less commitment to military discipline than professional armies staffed by soldiers who choose the military as a way of life. They are regarded as being dedicated and have greater motivation and esprit de corps. After all, unlike the conscripts, they were not forced into the military.
The increasing complexity of military equipment as well as its cost means that longer and more complex training is required to ensure proper operation and maintenance of such equipment. Such training needs soldiers who stay in the military longer than conscripts normally do.
The dearth of young men in most Western countries due to their low birthrate makes small professional armies a must for many of them.
All of this looks very good on paper.
There is no evidence in real situations that an army’s efficiency improves if it is made up of professionals or that its efficiency deteriorates if it consists of conscripts. A lousy army will lose no matter what.
An example of this is the Israeli Army, which is made up largely of conscripts. It suffered its most serious defeat at the hands of the volunteer army of Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The US Army’s military efficiency and competence has not increased materially since it abandoned conscription in favor of a professional armed force, despite the propaganda.
The conscript US Army fought in Vietnam for ten years and suffered enormous casualties, both killed and wounded, before conceding defeat and withdrawing.
The professional army in Iraq, on the other hand, is already whining and moaning and is desperate to get out after only a few months and with only a small fraction of the discomfort endured by their conscripted brothers in Vietnam and other battlefields.
Conscription plays a valuable social role in that it is an institution that brings all members of a society of every class and social group together in an environment of brotherhood, self-sacrifice and service and acts as a melting pot for them.
Conscription spreads the burden and honor of defending the motherland equally among all young men of the country and prevents it from becoming the burden of the poor and disenfranchised, which it has in many rich countries.
- Arab News Opinion 7 September 2003
