Calls for reintroduction of British conscription are crass nonsense: Patrick Mercer

Do you remember all that daftness that went on a few weeks ago about Britain having to reintroduce conscription? It was the flavour of the week with every general, fireside fusilier and even some government ministers whose military experience went no further than the school cadets chipping in.

Calls for reintroduction of British conscription are crass nonsense: Patrick Mercer

As Armageddon approaches, they claimed, our youngsters need to be forced to shoulder a rifle for a couple of years. I’m still not sure what it was really about, but I do know that it was crass nonsense.

Suppose we raised, say, 100,000 new troops where would we put them? Our barracks and airfields have become migrant centres and with what would we arm them? All our artillery, missiles and tanks have gone to Ukraine. Then think about the political impact and the costs. Would some aging blowhards’ jingoism be enough to persuade the young that the good times have ceased to roll? I doubt it.

One man who doesn’t have the time for such flights of fancy, though, is President Zelensky. Now, it’s hard for a Western mind fully to comprehend the attitudes that former Soviet countries have towards sacrifice, but put simply, the 60 million or so who fell defeating Nazism or at the hand of Stalin have seared the national psyche. That’s why, with a falling birth rate, children are prized and protected beyond all else and why Ukrainians can only be conscripted from 27 years old.

As a result, foreign visitors see cities like Kyiv teeming with young, fit men tripping from bar to nightclub whilst the average age of a rifleman at the front is 43! And all this is accompanied by the constant refrain that Ukraine – whose casualties have been shocking – is running out of troops. It’s hard to grasp, but Kyiv’s government seems to want to spare the young only to let them die later.

And there’s even odder things being suggested. Ministers have proposed that only those below a certain income level should be conscripted. The argument goes that someone who’s economically productive should be saved for society’s good and, I suppose, that does make a sort of Orwellian sense. But, regardless of the practicalities, the idea of the poor being forced to die for the rich is disgusting.

Then there’s the endless stream of videos showing young men being caught, cuffed and violently bundled into the press gangs’ cars, or hosts of lads being dragged out of hiding places in trucks and boats as they try to defect across the Ukrainian border in order to avoid the draft. Could this be Russian propaganda? I doubt it, there’s far too much of it and other details are just too good to be fake and, anyway, most of it comes from free, credible Ukrainian sources.

All of this speaks, of course, to the fact that the initial rush of patriotic volunteers are now dead, injured or exhausted. But, with about 800,000 troops already under arms, surely Kyiv has enough to keep Moscow at bay, doesn’t she? Well, the point is that yet more are needed to roll Russia back with units that have been constantly in the line since early 2022 needing to be rotated for refitting and rest whilst entirely new brigades are formed to replace those lost in the disastrous counter-offensive of last summer.

General Sirski, the new, overall commander of Ukraine’s forces is acutely aware of his manpower problems and has launched an inquiry into why only about 20 per cent of his army has been in battle. Now, modern armies do have a lot more administrators than warriors, but the threat that faces Ukraine may soon overwhelm them and it should be perfectly possible to allow a gunner to take a rest as a clerk for a few months and vice versa. As the steady flow of coffins continues, though, winkling soldiers out from safe billets is going to be a real challenge.

Amidst political turmoil, the age of conscription is to be lowered from 27 to 25, but even this will not produce the extra half million troops that the country needs.

Yet, doesn’t Russia face the same problems with recruiting? Well, no. The Kremlin can call upon a much larger population and they’ve also lit upon the less than revolutionary idea of offering candidates good salaries and incentives to become regular soldiers.

Certainly, a number of young men are conscripted for short terms each year, although the Western press has preferred to publish of lurid stories of prisoners being offered a pardon in exchange for almost certain death. The reality, though, has been rather more prosaic.

Quietly, Russia has built up its forces by using her wealth to attract recruits who will spend several years in uniform and, if they wish, develop full careers. In other words, she’s taken exactly the same approach as Britain and NATO does, but there’s a degree of forward planning here which is worrying.

Suppose my assertions are right and that the shooting is forced to stop by political means rather than a clear victory sometime before the US elections in November. What are these vast ranks of Russian regular soldiers going to do then?

Standing armies are expensive to maintain and they’re not going to be kept simply for parades in Red Square. No, the people in the Kremlin are not stupid: these costly, combat experienced troops are being readied, I feel sure, for a decisive showdown with NATO in the not too distant future.

Patrick Mercer is a former MP for Newark and Army colonel.