Georgetown Panel Highlights Differences in Foreign Military Service Requirements

Facing backlash from the anti-Vietnam War movement, the government of the United States ended the military draft in 1973. Scholars, policymakers, and the public continue to debate the consequences of this action, though recent polls suggest that the Americans, especially recent veterans, continue to strongly oppose the reinstatement of the draft. This has turned the U.S. army into a professional, all-volunteer force, in which only a small percentage of Americans shoulder the burden of the country’s defense, often turning the military into a family affair.

Yet in a number of nations, including several U.S. allies, the law continues to require military service, either solely for males or for individuals of all genders. The International Military Hoyas Event on November 4 included a number of military veterans from several countries who attended Georgetown University. This event displayed the variations of the role of service members and the relationship between the military and its nation. In some cases, such as those of Israel and South Korea, geopolitical concerns force the government’s hand, but in others, such as Finland, mandated military service plays a peacekeeping role on the world stage, though recent developments have altered this calculus.

South Korea maintains a military with full ranks due to mandatory military service. This compulsory service, which lasts around two years, applies only to males, although females can serve in some branches. Their neighbor to the north provides the impetus to maintain such a military makeup. Tensions between South and North Korea remain high several decades after the end of the Korean War. Officially, the two countries have never signed a peace agreement, only a ceasefire, and thus the two countries remain in a state of war.

Acts of aggression continue, usually as a result of North Korean action, including the placement of mines that claimed the lives of South Korean troops. The fear of the North Korean army, which is possibly far larger than the South Korean army, as well as a history of military dictatorship in the country, allows the military to justify considerable independence from the political apparatuses of the country. At times, this leads to abuse, including a tradition of beatings and excessive hazing that resulted in the creation of a human rights panel.

It also means that the military plays a considerable role in shaping the male population of South Korea. Service in the South Korean military acts as a “rite of passage” in the country, and those who avoid service, legitimately or otherwise, face considerable cultural backlash. Public opinion seems to be changing, with recent polls showing a notable majority favoring the creation of alternative forms of national service. For now, however, mandatory service will remain a vital component of the country’s defense and a substantial cultural force.

Like South Korea, Israeli policy centers around preparing for its defense in a hostile environment. Since it obtained its independence, Israel has fought a number of wars with its neighbors. Though it has faced similar conflict in recent years, Israel continues to take military action, including bombing a Syrian nuclear site and, more controversially, taking military action in Palestine.

Though the United States assists Israel with such national security endeavors, providing billions of dollars in aid for the Israeli military, Israel remains at risk. Like South Korea, Israel requires mandatory military service but extends this to individuals of all genders. In recent years, the Israeli army equalized the service time required of men and women, and transgender individuals receive considerable care and support, including the full funding of hormone treatments. The Israeli military plays a domestic role as well, including providing special services to new immigrants, providing teachers for development towns, and responding to civilian emergencies. As with South Korea, foregoing such service altogether leads to serious repercussions beyond a jail sentence. Those who refuse to serve remain subject to police raids, social vilification, and similar consequences. Considering the continued public support within Israel for the military, such a reality will remain for those in Israel.

Finland’s situation starkly contrasts that of South Korea and Israel. Finland requires mandatory service for males, although Finnish citizens can choose a longer period of non-military civil service as a replacement. This conscription acts as a key source of defense for Finland, which at the present remains outside of any formal military alliances. However, the military does not receive the same level of support from its government as the militaries of the previously mentioned countries.

As recently as 2015, the Finnish government slashed the military budget and has ignored calls to increase the budget this year as a result of Finland’s geopolitical position. While having Russia as its closest powerful neighbor remains in the minds of policymakers, the Finnish military mainly plays a peacekeeping role. As organizations and institutions within the country emphasize, Finnish troops support around 20 peacekeeping missions, both EU- and UN-led, throughout the world. Though this creates some pride in the country, it has not led to a prioritization of the domestic military, a far cry from the prevalent place in society enjoyed by the South Korean and Israeli militaries.

This, however, may soon change. Due to Russian aggression in Ukraine and Syria, Finland has met with the United States to discuss a security deal. Although an outright membership in NATO does not have public support, the creation of such a deal would involve Finland in international affairs to a level not reached in decades, which may alter the nature of the military and the relationship between the military and the citizenry.

The three examples noted above show a lack of uniformity in international conscription policy. The role of the military—and its relationship with the public—devolves from the geopolitical positioning of a country, as shown by the differences between South Korea, Israel, and Finland. Though these foreign militaries may seem far from the Hilltop, they directly affect a number of our fellow Hoyas. Understanding their perspectives and the historical origins that created them will enhance our community, while also providing an opportunity to reflect on our country’s relationship with conscription and our ideas of what such mandatory service requirements entail.