UK conscription explained: what 'being called up' could mean for you or your loved one

Britons are being urged to brace themselves for the possibility of conflict as a startling government dossier insists citizens "must actively prepare" for warfare, sparking conversations about the reality of modern combat for the UK.

An authority on military strategy discloses potential strategies for national defence, suggesting that a "well-trained resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread."

The freshly released National Security Strategy report underscores the growing perils tied to nuclear arsenals, claiming the complexity surpasses the trepidation experienced during the Cold War.

Echoing a sense of nostalgia for Britain's resilience, parts of the security analysis call upon the indomitable spirit evoked during the Blitz of the Second World War.

In an age defined by "radical uncertainty", Prime Minister Keir Starmer has committed to allocating five per cent of GDP to bolster national security over the next ten years, with an intent to synchronise civilian and military efforts not seen since the year 1945, reports the Mirror.

While there is no direct reference to the reinstatement of national conscription within the document, the notion of such measures is igniting public debate as the spectre of a threat looms over national security like never before.

Professor Anthony Glees, a prominent European affairs specialist from The University of Buckingham, expressed his disheartenment amidst the National Security Strategy update. "It's revealing and depressing that the National Security Strategy outlines, correctly, the grave danger the UK now faces, but does not mention 'conscription' once. Not once."

He outlined the report's acknowledgement of direct wartime threats to the UK: "It tells us, correctly, that we 'need to actually prepare for the UK Homeland coming under direct threat in a wartime scenario'. We need, it says, to 'strengthen our approach to domestic security, restore security to our borders'."

Professor Glees further detailed the pronounced threats from formidable rivals: "It describes the threat to us here in the UK posed by Russia and Iran in particular - and outlines our need to 'gain the upper hand' when confronting their frequent cyber attacks, their landgrabbing tactics in Europe and beyond, their intrusion into outer space, cyberspace (ie undersea data-carrying cables)."

However, he lamented an oversight in military recruitment strategies: "But one of the most important and cheapest ways we have of countering and addressing these myriad real threats to our way of life, increasing the size of our armed forces through some form of conscription, is totally ignored."

Despite the debate over National Service resurfacing continually, conscription has been repeatedly dismissed by successive governments who believe that a volunteer military force is more effective and robust for the nation's defense needs.

Amid escalating global tensions, support for National Service as "absolutely vital" is gaining traction. Professor Glees has voiced serious concerns, insisting that the government is being "totally reckless" by not expanding the UK's armed forces in line with its own strategy's objectives.

He cautioned: "This is totally reckless, particularly given the widely reported view of General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former NATO deputy supreme commander, Europe, just a few months ago, that we should immediately begin to conscript 30,000 young Brits each year to bring our army up to the crucial 100,000 mark."

Professor Glees further asserted: "I've often said in the past that, as an academic, this seems absolutely vital to me. A well-trained, resourceful UK land army of young and spirited Brits will deter Putin where nukes fear to tread, because as his attack on Ukraine shows, our nukes do not deter him, any more than his nukes deter Ukraine."

However, questions remain about how modern-day conscription would be implemented and whether all conscripts would be expected to engage in combat.

An expert on national defence, Professor Glees has passionately advocated for conscription in modern-day Britain, declaring: "I favour conscription for national service for everyone capable of it. Not everyone should undergo military training as in weapons training; cyber skills, for example, for offensive and defensive purposes, are a form of weapons training. But those who are up for proper military training should be given it."

He further enthused about Europe's potential for unity against threats by pointing out the combined might of European countries compared to Russia: "The EU, the UK and Norway have a population of 523m, more than times as large as Russia with 144m. Our joint GDP is $24tr compared with Russia's $2tr."

As living costs skyrocket, he suggested lucrative incentives for young Britons to undertake national service: "We can afford to offer our young people fabulous inductions to commit to a year's national service, for example, cheap loans for mortgages, free university and college places."

The security specialist echoed the Prime Minister's sentiments regarding the benefits of bolstering national defence and the role of youth, stating: "In the National Security Strategy, the Prime Minister says we need to 'unleash a defence dividend, to use national security to strengthen our country'. Exactly so. That dividend is not simply AI and IT; it is our young people who need to understand that their future liberty relies on their willingness to serve. That is where conscription comes in."

Professor Glees warns that despite widespread fears of nuclear warfare, any future European conflict is more likely to involve conventional forces. He stressed, "will be fought with conventional means, not nukes", highlighting that nuclear devices are intended as a last-resort.

Adding to his argument, the expert cautioned: "Putin knows that if we were to use them to prevent him from taking over our country, we could destroy Russia in the bat of an eyelid. But he also knows that we would be committing suicide in doing so. That is why conventional strength is real strength."

He emphasised the historical precedent by stating: "A future war in Europe (just like the current war in Ukraine or the war between Israel and Iran) will be fought with conventional means, not nukes. Nukes are last resort weapons, but leave plenty of space for conventional forces to go past them, like the Maginot Line, which was meant to defend France from the Germans, but they simply went over the top of it."

Further reinforcing the need for ground forces, Professor Glees remarked: "Until recently, we've put just about all our defence eggs in our Vanguard-class Trident-carrying submarines. In fact, we need a strong land army to keep our shores safe, not least from the very things the Review outlines, which include the key demand that we properly protect our borders, which we are not doing at the moment."

Brits first experienced conscription during what would later be recognised as World War I. Before this, such compulsion hadn't been used for regular army recruitment since the early 18th century, when vagrants and those in debt were briefly impacted by an early form of conscription, according to the Official Public Record.

However, the monumental events of the 20th century would alter everything. Passed in January 1916, the Military Service Act 1916 enforced conscription on all single men aged between 18 and 41 unless they were exempt.

This was extended to 50 in April 1918.

Two years on, in 1920, conscription would be abolished, but not for long. Those who celebrated their 18th birthday in 1945 will now be 98 years old.

Those still alive may well recall leaving their hometown behind to battle the Nazis, or bidding farewell to friends, family members and neighbours.

On September 3, 1939, the same day that Britain declared war on Germany, Parliament passed The National Service (Armed Forces) Act, which mandated that all men between the ages of 18 and 41 had to register for service.

Exemptions were granted to those deemed medically unfit, as well as those who worked in crucial sectors such as farming, engineering and medicine. Any conscientious objectors had to present their case before a tribunal.

In December 1941, a second National Service Act was enacted, stipulating that all single women and childless widows aged between 20 and 30 could be summoned, while men under 60 were required to partake in some form of National Service. This included military service for men under the age of 51.

Even after the war concluded in 1945, National Service persisted in the UK until the 1960s to tackle manpower deficits, with the final servicemen being discharged in 1963.