Getting the Right Kind of Soldier

Summary of Olof Santesson's article in RSAWSPJ no 4 2001.

This is a report of the symposium on "Conscription 100 years" held by the Royal Swedish Academy of War Sciences on 4th September, 2001.

Sweden was late in getting a conscript army. For two centuries - even more if you include an older version the Swedish armed forces depended to a great extent on a homegrown system. It used a very special kind of regular warrior: half farmer, half soldier.

Guards units, fortress garrisons, artillerymen and such augmented this force. But the body of troops were those men who for most of the time worked their fields. The revolutionary wars and the continental use of huge conscripted armies in the 19th century finally made it clear, however that, in the long run, Sweden couldn't get by with her few farmer-soldiers. After prolonged, intense debate a conscripted Swedish army was born in the spring of 1901.

Even in its new version this army had its ups and downs. Between the two world wars only part of all eligible 20-year-olds were drafted into the Army. After European hostilities broke out in 1939, it took a huge effort to bring the Army up to strength. But it succeeded. The Swedish Army ended the Second World War with ten infantry divisions, three armoured brigades, a considerable number of anti-aircraft guns, in all a field army of some 300 000 troops. In addition there were territorial units and the Home Guard; the Air Force was one of the strongest in the world and the Navy had reached its peak.

Gradually the armed forces once more were reduced in strength. And finally, at the turn of the century, in a radically changed political and security policy climate, the Army finds itself with the lowest manpower structure for centuries - about 40 000 in the field army and of higher units there is just one division. And each year only one third of all eligible young men are called up to serve.

Is this fair to those who are chosen - and to those who are not given the possibility to serve? Has the cultural climate changed for good? Do young people have different conceptions of what their country can ask of them? Has the system deteriorated to such a degree that it would be better to abolish it entirely in favour of an all-volunteer force, as so many European countries have done?

These were some of the questions that stimulated the Royal Swedish Academy of War Sciences to organize a symposium in the old Armoury (today the Army Museum) in downtown Stockholm on the theme of "Conscription 100 Years". The event took place on 4th September 2001.

The speakers, academics and fellows of the Academy, were perhaps agreed on one thing: there is a need for good and well-educated soldiers, especially officers, in all the tasks given to the Armed Forces such as defence against attack, guarding the territorial borders, taking part in peace missions and aiding the civilians in severe challenges against a well-functioning society.

In the ensuing panel discussion some differences of opinion became evident. For instance, one active soldier, Colonel Anders Brännström, commander of an Infantry Regiment, definitely argued in favour of keeping a "selective conscription". Another, Major General Karlis Neretnieks, Head of the Swedish National De-fence College, equally strongly made the case for an all-volunteer force. Most felt there was still time for a choice.

But, at the end of the day, it seemed that nobody really wanted to get rid of all conscript soldiers. We may need them for a rainy day, at least as Territorial Forces.