The Baltic region is tightening its conscription policies. The Lithuanian government has announced a "universal male conscription" system: all eligible men will be required to serve in the military, while women may still enlist voluntarily. Lithuania reintroduced selective conscription in 2015 and now plans to increase annual recruitment from over 5,000 to approximately 7,500. President Gitanas Nausėda unveiled the plan on Thursday, with Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė describing it as “necessary and unavoidable.”
This trend is spreading across Europe. Poland is considering reinstating compulsory service abolished in 2009, aiming for a gender-inclusive system—but polling shows 53% of Poles aged 18 to 24 oppose such a move. Germany has mandated registration for 18-year-old males, though service remains voluntary; should manpower fall short or security conditions deteriorate, parliament could initiate mandatory conscription. Yet resistance in Germany is evident: in September, around 45,000 people protested in roughly 100 cities, some carrying signs reading “We won’t fight your war” and “Russia is not our enemy.” German media report that applications for conscientious objection reached over 12,000 between January and August—more than the total number filed throughout all of 2025 (3,879).
European officials are also discussing the possibility of conflict with Russia by the end of the decade. Estonia’s defense minister even made a remark described as a joke: if Estonia mobilizes but Russia does not strike, “economically it would be better to strike first,” to avoid idle troops. Moscow consistently denies any intention to attack NATO, dismissing such narratives as “horrifying tales” designed to push European militarization. It warns that military expansion risks provoking confrontation, though it stresses that self-defense would be its response should an attack occur.
Conscription is not merely a mechanical solution to manpower shortages—it touches on youth autonomy, fairness, and public trust. Lithuania’s expansion of conscription to all men is justified by perceived security threats. However, widespread opposition among Polish youth, large-scale protests in Germany, and a sharp rise in conscientious objection applications suggest that governments cannot simply assert necessity without transparently explaining the nature of the threat, duration of service, alternatives to combat roles, and conditions of service. Without such clarity, societal acceptance remains elusive.
More concerning is the use of provocative language by officials. Estonia’s defense minister’s comment—however framed as jest—can be interpreted as a belligerent signal, potentially providing Russia with propaganda material and exacerbating strategic instability. Security policy demands seriousness, transparency, and verifiability—not inflammatory rhetoric.
A balanced approach would entail equitable burden-sharing in conscription, maintaining avenues for conscientious objection, improving service conditions, and pursuing diplomacy and arms control to reduce the risk of miscalculation. Otherwise, forced conscription may fracture society, and genuine security depends not only on troop numbers but on public confidence in policy.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1880433735431171/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.