Today's advo-
with criminal contempt. As then-military
conscription if it were to be universal and
conscription advocate Philip Gold rightly
directed at preventing a new "Dark Ages"--
cates of conscrip-
as Philip Gold once contended.123 It is
argued more than a decade ago, the proposal
tion see the draft
for mandatory civilian service was "utterly
much harder to make a case for taking at
as a means of
pernicious, not only in its desire to insure
most 9.5 percent of 18-year-old males when
equity by spreading hardship, but also for its
no serious international threats beckon.
maintaining
attempt to use conscription for social engi-
Only two arguments appear to have any
unpopular and
neering. If the military claim is to have any
force at all.
validity, it must remain unique."119
unnecessary
New Commitments
Civilian conscription could also degrade
deployments.
The first is that only with a draft can
military effectiveness either by creating com-
America fulfill all of its new commitments: in
petition for quality recruits or by overloading
Bosnia, Haiti, Macedonia, Somalia, Kosovo,
the services with unnecessary personnel. For
and who knows where else in the coming
instance, there is evidence that universal ser-
years. Today soldiers are understandably less
vice has harmed Israel's military, resulting "in
than enthusiastic about serving in such
a bloated officer corps as well as an under-
places. The only criterion for U.S. interven-
trained and unready army in which many
conscripts have no real jobs."120 In addition
tion in those conflicts appears to be that no
serious American interest be involved.
to creating other problems, large-scale volun-
Whatever the merits may be of what
tary national service programs would almost
Johns Hopkins University professor Michael
certainly divert bright young people from the
military.121 Even today's limited AmeriCorps
Mandelbaum has derisively called "foreign
policy as social work,"124 no justification exists
may be having an adverse effect on military
recruitment: more than half of young men
for forcing young Americans into uniform to
undertake that task.125 For most of America's
surveyed opine that "AmeriCorps and other
programs offer better ways to get money for
history, the only argument for compulsion
college."122 Yet the president recently pro-
was that a draft was necessary to preserve
the United States from a threat. Indeed,
posed to double the number of participants
when Congress reinstated the draft in 1940,
in that program.
the deployment of conscripts was limited to
U.S. possessions or the Western Hemis-
Unfair and Stupid
phere.126 For years Britain and France followed
a similar policy. The former maintained its
global empire through volunteers and moved
The result of a renewed draft would be to
to coercion only during World War I; the lat-
substitute some people who do not want to
ter originally restricted the use of draftees in
serve for some who do. Reinstituting con-
its ill-fated colonial adventures in Vietnam
scription would add to the armed services a
and Algeria. Observes Philip Gold, "Only the
few brighter soldiers along with many who
United States, among democracies, has
were less bright. The draft would be socially
assumed since World War II that draftees
disruptive and economically costly; it would
could be sent anywhere to do anything."127
harm military cohesion, discipline, and reten-
tion. Finally, conscription would be grossly
Again, advocates of conscription are pushing
unfair to the few 18-year-olds who found
for a draft to sustain precisely the most frivo-
themselves unwillingly in uniform while a
lous of America's commitments.
vast majority of their compatriots went
However, 18-year-old Americans have no
about their lives as before.
duty to suit up to patrol a new colonial
A justification for such a policy is hard
empire, attempt to mend failed societies,
to conjure up. At least a legitimate, though
rebuild Humpty Dumpty states, and settle
unconvincing, argument could be made for
ancient quarrels. What better evidence is
13