In 2005, then-Prime Minister Andrus Ansip opened higher national defense courses, where he called conscription a dying system and expressed his belief that the future belonged to a professional defense force. According to him, Estonia’s current defense needs no longer support a mass army, but rather professional and operational military units.
This position was not accidental. It was another stage in which society discussed the meaning of conscription seriously. While previously, compulsory service was seen as the only possible path, in the 21st century, this perspective began to crumble.
Ligi: “Every person should be able to choose their own actions”
The then Minister of Defense, Jürgen Ligi, shared Ansip’s vision, arguing that Estonia needed professional soldiers rather than conscripts. Ligi’s argument was logical: “Our defense needs do not require a mass army, but professional units that would be ready to participate in international missions.” He also stressed that people should be able to choose for themselves what they do with their lives.
“Our defense needs do not require a mass army, but professional units that would be ready to participate in international missions”
Jurgen Ligi
Does Conscription Increase Defense Capabilities?
Ansip and Ligi’s positions sparked heated debates. Many politicians and military personnel, such as the chairman of the Patriotic Union, Tõnis Lukas, considered a mercenary army absurd and believed that abolishing conscription would mean the loss of Estonia’s defense capability. However, the reality is more complicated.
Does conscription alone make Estonia a better country to defend? Experts have pointed out that the fact that thousands of 18- and 19-year-old boys sniff gunpowder once in their lives does not automatically make them competent soldiers. What does compulsory conscription count as if people go into the reserves but are not trained or kept ready?
The Declining Role of Conscription and Future Prospects
By now, many developed countries have abolished conscription or reduced it to a minimum. Sweden abandoned broad-based conscription in 2010, Denmark keeps military service formal, many undertake it voluntarily. Finland is one of the few in Europe where conscription has continued systematically, but even there, debates about a paid army are regular.
If Estonia wants to be a modern and highly combat-capable country, it should base itself on modern security models, not Soviet-era dogmas. Compulsory military service is not necessarily a sign of strength, but rather a waste of scarce resources.
The time is ripe for Estonia to take a step forward and acknowledge that conscription is truly a dying system – just as Andrus Ansip envisioned in 2005.
Sources:
- Priit Rajalo, Postimees. Estonia is moving step by step towards a mercenary army
- Äripäev. Let conscription be a thing of the past
Leave a Reply