Mandatory Service in Canada (split fm Ukraine - Superthread)

[Colin Parkinson]

SWITZERLAND

Military service is compulsory for men - starting at the age of 20 - and voluntary for women in Switzerland. The basic military service lasts 21 weeks, but additional training programmes need to be attended through adulthood. When combined, the total service period is a little less than a year.

In 2013, Switzerland held a referendum which aimed to abolish conscription, but it failed with over 73% of the electorate putting their vote in favour of conscription of men. This was the third time the country had held such a referendum. But now, the discourse has changed to bolstering the military. In the wake of the Russia-Ukraine war, the country is now mulling making military service compulsory for women too by 2024.

SWEDEN

In 2017, Sweden decided to reintroduce military conscription amid Russia's military drills in the region which has now escalated to full blown war with Ukraine. Russia's annexation of Crimea and increased military activity in the region were cited as the reasons for bringing back conscription. The conscripts are expected to serve a period of nine to 12 months.

Unlike previously when only men were conscripted, compulsory military service is now applicable to both men and women. Sweden had suspended the conscription system in favour of a recruitment system on voluntary terms in 2010.

KOREAS

South Korea and North Korea have technically been at war for the past 72 years. The hostility has resulted in both countries bolstering their military. North Korea pursues a military-first policy also known as 'Songun,' under which all resources are first prioritised for the military. Typically, school graduates are made to join the service at the age of 17-18. In 2003, military service was reduced to 10 years from 13 for men, and seven from 10 for women. Military service was earlier voluntary for women but was reportedly made mandatory in 2015.

In the neighbouring South Korea, men are supposed to serve either in army (21 months), navy (23 months), or air force (24 months). Police force, coast guard and fire service are also an alternative. Successful sportsmen, such as those who win gold at Olympics or Asian Games, can avail an exemption from compulsory service.

From : 11 countries where military service is compulsory

 

[mariomike]

I like the way they used to do it in the states.

 

[Kirkhill]

1. What lump sum will be due for people who have escaped conscription by virtue of its absence to date, or payable by people who are exempted?

The same amount as they are required to pay in taxes not paid when taxes rise.

2. Opportunity cost. Government will have to fund this thing, which means at the expense of something else. And universal conscription isn't really filling a need - it's just pouring money down a hole, hoping that some kind of useful work might be done.

Just like Government funds additional years of schooling, additional statutory holidays and mandatory paid vacation and leaves. It reduces the number of people working and keeps them off the street. Consider it another year of education.

3 weeks of military training and applied service for the rest of the year.

3. Compensation for all the people displaced from paid work by conscripts doing "national service". Add that to the bill.

More things need done than there are people able and willing to do them. Otherwise we wouldn't need immigration.

And as my daughter can attest, work experience is hard to come by.

4. The burden imposed upon all the lifers baby-sitting temporary "national service" workers.

You mean they would actually have to train people.

This sh!t just won't die.

Nope. And there's a reason for that. It is a valid course of action.

 

[Ostrozac]

Conscription has a solid track record of building armies for geographically local missions — self-defence or invading your neighbour. It has a decidedly mixed record of building expeditionary armies for global entanglements. The French had an interesting mixed model for many years, with a conscript army for home defence and volunteer units that specialized in overseas conflict.

But it’s undoubtably a tough argument for Canada — we struggled to sell Canadians on conscription during both world wars, and it’s unlikely that their 21st century descendants will be enthusiastic.

But it would change our military culture. And build a more diverse force. So if those are the priorities…

Do we have a legal opinion on conscription? I suspect it would require the notwithstanding clause, which puts it on a 5 year clock, which would make peacetime conscription impossible in practice, but wartime conscription could still be an option.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The same amount as they are required to pay in taxes not paid when taxes rise.

That won't do. Imposing a cost on others that we have escaped is basically climbing the ladder and pulling part of it up behind us. Starting a career or advanced education earlier has compounding advantages over a lifetime.

"Opportunity cost" by definition means something was bought. It doesn't mean it was a wise purchase. Noting that something was paid for just affirms the definition.

Low value make-work (underemployment, misemployment) - even during periods of low unemployment - is a hindrance, not an advantage.

Canada doesn't have the luxury of pissing government revenue away on sub-optimal centrally-planned underemployment schemes that delay people from getting on with their lives. No amount of candy-stripers is going to help people facing delayed treatments for cancer.

 

[Kilted]

So my thoughts on the matter, as I have thought about this before. I don't really see the benefit of the short period of service, for example, 1 year. We also don't need to require everyone to do full-time service, when we already have the mechanisms in place to do longer periods of part-time service. For example, 3-5 years in the reserves depending on trade with four months every summer devoted to training. There would need to be significantly more job protection put into place, ut if everyone in said age bracket was involved, it wouldn't be as big of a deal. We could swear individuals in at about age 17 so that they could do their first summer before grade 12 and most people could finish their service by the time they are about 20. They would be given the option to stay on when they would be moved out of the conscript category, or they would simply be transferred into the sub-reserves for five years. Anyone who joined the reg force could complete their service that way, with the same five-year period in the sub reserves added on the end.


The reserves' terms of service would need to be updated with a few changes to the NDA to allow for conscripts to be charged for AWOL for missing a parade night.

 

[JLB50]

Mandatory service for immigrants would be opening a can of worms, much like conscription for Canadian citizens. Who would be eligible? Males only? Or would it also include women? If so, would it include only those immigrant women who feel that they could potentially fight?

Until the issues of conscription and whether both sexes are equally eligible for conscription are settled (most likely by the Supreme Court of Canada), I would be quite surprised if any government would suggest such a thing. Mind you, I’ve been wrong once or twice in my life…just ask my dear wife. Or not.

 

[Ostrozac]

Until the issues of conscription and whether both sexes are equally eligible for conscription are settled (most likely by the Supreme Court of Canada),

The gender question is probably already settled — section 28 of the charter guarantees equality between male and female persons, and section 28 isn’t subject to the notwithstanding clause. So any theoretical Canadian conscription needs to be gender neutral.

 

[Kilted]

The gender question is probably already settled — section 28 of the charter guarantees equality between male and female persons, and section 28 isn’t subject to the notwithstanding clause. So any theoretical Canadian conscription needs to be gender neutral.

s. 15(b) would be a possible way to keep women out of conscription, women's only gyms are legal somehow, so there are exceptions to s. 28. That being said, if women were excluded under 15(b), that could considerably open the flood gates to every possible type of minority being excluded.

 

[Ostrozac]

s. 15(b) would be a possible way to keep women out of conscription, women's only gyms are legal somehow, so there are exceptions to s. 28. That being said, if women were excluded under 15(b), that could considerably open the flood gates to every possible type of minority being excluded.

That’s an interesting analysis. Actually, by extension, women-only conscription might be legal, even without the notwithstanding clause, if it had as its stated objective increasing the proportion of women in the military, a profession where they were historically underrepresented.

Could keep legal scholars busy for years with this one.

 

[OldSolduer]

We could latch onto the UK Gurkha Program and have a company of Gurkha's with them earning citizenship for themselves and family. I be honoured to have them as neighbours. This way we fill out infantry numbers and don't have to create a new program from scratch.

You saw what happened to Afghan interpreters?

 

[Kilted]

Conscription has a solid track record of building armies for geographically local missions — self-defence or invading your neighbour. It has a decidedly mixed record of building expeditionary armies for global entanglements. The French had an interesting mixed model for many years, with a conscript army for home defence and volunteer units that specialized in overseas conflict.

But it’s undoubtably a tough argument for Canada — we struggled to sell Canadians on conscription during both world wars, and it’s unlikely that their 21st century descendants will be enthusiastic.

But it would change our military culture. And build a more diverse force. So if those are the priorities…

Do we have a legal opinion on conscription? I suspect it would require the notwithstanding clause, which puts it on a 5 year clock, which would make peacetime conscription impossible in practice, but wartime conscription could still be an option.

It could be done under the emergencies act. I'm not sure if it would be specifically forbidden under the charter. I imagine we would need to use the emergencies act in order to deploy conscripts regardless, or ask for volunteers for smaller deployments.

I imagine that it would need to be ingrained in some significant legislation in order to try and prevent the next government from getting rid of it.

I'm guessing that it could probably survive various charter challenges if it allowed the possibility for objectors for specific groups (yay, another way to divide society).

There would of course have to be consequences for refusing service (which at this point I guess would include refusing to be vaccinated). Is jail time used as a deterrent in other countries or are people forced into uniform kicking and screaming?

 

[brihard]

Oh God. This silly fantasy is back? Never mind that it’s simply stupid - the military and emergency services are not a jobs program and have too much real work to do to babysit conscripts - it would also blatantly breach the Charter in probably several ways. Zero chance this could exist outside of a context of necessity for national survival.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Oh God. This silly fantasy is back? Never mind that it’s simply stupid - the military and emergency services are not a jobs program and have too much real work to do to babysit conscripts - it would also blatantly breach the Charter in probably several ways. Zero chance this could exist outside of a context of necessity for national survival.

I tend to agree with you.

If we want our youth to mingle and meet different regional people and cultures perhaps this is a better mandatory method. Maybe with some expansion and added community involvement portions.

Katimavik - Home

Since 1977, Katimavik has brought together young people from all over Canada to learn, share and grow together.

katimavik.org

Katimavik - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I've served with a few people who went through it and they were all thoroughly well spoken and intelligent people who I continue to hold in very high regard.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I tend to agree with you.

If we want our youth to mingle and meet different regional people and cultures perhaps this is a better mandatory method. Maybe with some expansion and added community involvement portions.

Katimavik - Home

Since 1977, Katimavik has brought together young people from all over Canada to learn, share and grow together.

katimavik.org

Katimavik - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I've served with a few people who went through it and they were all thoroughly well spoken and intelligent people who I continue to hold in very high regard.

The same can be said about the Canadian Cadet/Junior Canadian Rangers Organizations. Some of the best people I have met in Canadian society have passed through these youth organizations.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The same can be said about the Canadian Cadet/Junior Canadian Rangers Organizations. Some of the best people I have met in Canadian society have passed through these youth organizations.

Good point.

 

[The Bread Guy]

You saw what happened to Afghan interpreters?

And ask the Gurkhas about how their pension scheme worked out ....

Joanna Lumley urges government to meet 'brave and loyal' Gurkhas veterans staging hunger strike opposite Downing Street over pensions

The actress, who led a successful campaign to get Gurkhas settlement rights in Britain, says ministers "cannot praise our veterans to the high heavens when it suits them, but ignore them and condemn them to poverty when it doesn't".

news.sky.com

... If we want our youth to mingle and meet different regional people and cultures perhaps this is a better mandatory method. Maybe with some expansion and added community involvement portions.

Katimavik - Home

Since 1977, Katimavik has brought together young people from all over Canada to learn, share and grow together.

katimavik.org

Katimavik - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I've served with a few people who went through it and they were all thoroughly well spoken and intelligent people who I continue to hold in very high regard.

This was a good program, from what I've heard from participants and seen of their subsequent achievements. That said, 1) I can remember a lot of non-Trudeau fans saying that was an indoctrination program, and 2) those taking the military track (looking from the outside looking in, being in the military myself in those days) were often treated a bit second-class, dilletante-y by the rest of the military, so a culture shift would have to be more than just this ....

... (Re: The burden imposed upon all the lifers baby-sitting temporary "national service" workers.) You mean they would actually have to train people ...

 

[GR66]

Maybe we could effectively organize, train and equip the Class A Reservists we already have (and are here by choice) before we start trying to implement a mandatory service program for people that aren't so committed to military service.

 

[Kirkhill]

Conscription has a solid track record of building armies for geographically local missions — self-defence or invading your neighbour. It has a decidedly mixed record of building expeditionary armies for global entanglements. The French had an interesting mixed model for many years, with a conscript army for home defence and volunteer units that specialized in overseas conflict.

But it’s undoubtably a tough argument for Canada — we struggled to sell Canadians on conscription during both world wars, and it’s unlikely that their 21st century descendants will be enthusiastic.

But it would change our military culture. And build a more diverse force. So if those are the priorities…

Do we have a legal opinion on conscription? I suspect it would require the notwithstanding clause, which puts it on a 5 year clock, which would make peacetime conscription impossible in practice, but wartime conscription could still be an option.

Canada didn't have a conscription crisis per se until it started sending conscripts over seas. Home service conscription was a lot less problematic, even in Quebec.

Sefl-Defence is an easy sell. We just don't seem to be able to convince ourselves that Self-Defence is necessary. In fact, I will go farther. I get the impression that many regulars are adamantly opposed to a Self-Defence Force because

It would change our military culture.

 

[Kilted]

The same can be said about the Canadian Cadet/Junior Canadian Rangers Organizations. Some of the best people I have met in Canadian society have passed through these youth organizations.

And yet the majority of former Cadets hide the fact that they were Cadets when they join the CAF.