Voluntary military service Voluntary Military Service Harry Schwarz, former South African ambassador to the United States Published in Monograph No 1: Get on Parade, February 1996 Since time immemorial, there have been individuals who have volunteered for military service, but there have also been many occasions when those in authority have compelled people to render military service rather than expecting them to volunteer. Two interesting examples can be taken from the Bible. In the book of Exodus we are told that military service was compulsory but that there were grounds for exemption, not only if the male did not yet have an heir but also if he did not have a vineyard. And while, on one occasion, Saul did not enforce compulsory service, he sent parts of an ox around the land to illustrate what might happen to the cattle of those who did not volunteer. In South Africa, it is noteworthy that despite the political divisions in the white community caused by participation in the two world wars, blacks having been given no say as to whether the country should be at war or not, the Smuts government sought to enlist only volunteers for the war against Germany, Italy and Japan, and they eventually included people of colour. The reasons for conscription of white youths in the pre-1994 period of government are sufficiently recent to acquire no analysis. So that my remarks may be seen in the correct context, I set out what I believe: At this stage of South Africa`s history, a voluntary SANDF is the only logical and practical political, social and military option. Voluntary military service can be a unifying and beneficial factor, and can be a national asset. Voluntary military service is, of course, divided into full-time and part-time service. Full-time service is either related to a complete career or to a fixed-time contract. Today, both of these are almost inevitably voluntary. Tsarist Russia sought to supplement its elitist voluntary army element with conscripts forced to serve, often for decades. Interestingly, some of South Africa`s white immigrants from Russia at the turn of the century came here to escape this unacceptable form of conscription. As World War 1 demonstrated, the Tsarist concept did not create a willing or effective military force. But there can be successful conscripted armies, particularly where the population as a whole supports the cause and conscription is regarded as a mechanism to ensure a fair sharing of the tasks that have to be performed. Israel is such an example. The problem of a professional army with a monopoly of military power is that it has the potential to be used for political purposes, such as coups. The events of 27 April 1994 demonstrated a South African tradition of service by the military to the government of the day. Or, more correctly, service to the state and the integration of the SANDF is designed to make it more reflective of the population as a whole, which will further strengthen this tradition. It is, however, a safeguard of democracy if professionals alone do not constitute the military machinery of the state. Among the reasons why I, for one, believe that a coup d`etat is not practically possible in the United States is not only the vertical and horizontal division of political power, but the fact that the federally controlled military is supplemented by the National Guard, which is a part-time voluntary force spread right across the numerous states of that country. The success of a voluntary force depends upon the spirit on which it is founded, the attitude of the country towards it, and the functions which it performs. There is an obvious difference between someone who wishes to serve and one who is unwilling and compelled to do so. The National Guard in the United States is based on the concept of the citizen soldier; this had its origin in the Minutemen, persons who were available at short notice (hence the word `minute`) to defend their land. They were not soldiers by trade, but followed many vocations. Historically, their membership included 18 United States presidents, of which Captain Abraham Lincoln and Captain Harry S Truman were just two. The concept behind the National Guard is the slogan, "To Keep the Nation the Land of the Free". There can be political debates about the United States constitution and its economic and social structure, and this is not the time or place to engage in them, but the concept of a part-time volunteer force in which public figures of today or tomorrow are active and which is perceived as an instrument of freedom, as opposed to one of oppression, is vital to morale, the success of such a force and an acceptable place for it in the community. The relationship between a part-time voluntary force and people is vital for its success. Not only must people wish to join, sacrificing part of their leisure time (in the United States it means many weekends), with employers needing to feel that they benefit from the service of their employees; equally important, if not more so, is the relationship between the force and the people as a whole. While there is a need for a conventional part of the part-time volunteer force, which arguably saves money (in the United States, for example, it is said that the cost is one fifth that of a full-time soldier) and so helps taxpayers, this is somewhat distant from the individual citizen. If a part-time volunteer soldier is perceived as being helpful to the more direct needs of the community, the perception of a part-time force as a national asset will be more readily created. The United States National Guard comprises 500 000 Americans serving 3 000 communities. In only one year it has dealt with more than 300 actual natural disasters, involving more than 30 000 members of the force. In South Africa, territorially orientated units can help not only with national disasters (helicopters of 15 Squadron, in which I have a particular interest and which is a full-time unit, with pilots mainly on contract, have helped with floods and other natural disasters), but also with many other important functions that benefit people visibly and directly. These can cover a wide field. In the United States the National Guard is available to support conventional forces; for instance, they were active in the Gulf War. But they are also available when there are tornadoes and floods, and for other situations requiring humanitarian aid. They help with the education of underprivileged persons, build roads and bridges, and airlift the sick and injured as well as medicines. In the words of the United States authorities: "So whatever crises may erupt, America knows who to call call out the National Guard." In South Africa, we would be able to say: "Call out our voluntary citizen soldiers." At this time in our country`s history, we are, of course, greatly preoccupied with violence from many sources, particularly criminal, whether this be against persons or property. It is clear that the voluntary citizen soldier can play an important role in this. Obviously, they need special training. They can supplement but cannot replace the police, even though in some countries the functions of the military and the police are combined. The citizen soldier has, in my view, many advantages: He/she will be perceived without any political baggage of the past; He/she will have knowledge of the area in which operations take place, as the unit will be stationed in the area in which the soldier lives and/or works; As a member of the community, the soldier knows the language, the problems and the people, and they will not regard the citizen soldier as an outsider; They can be supplementary to existing law and order functions, and release personnel for specialised duties; Qualified persons can render a variety of services to the community, whether they are professionals such as doctors and dentists (perhaps by means of mobile units), or artisans who can help build infrastructure. All these services are useful, and will make them more acceptable to the community. The RDP can benefit from forces that are efficiently used. In my view, and it is my personal view only, the citizen soldier should not only be seen as a person carrying arms and learning to march in step, but as an individual who renders the community services that are so urgently needed. That law and order may be a priority does not mean that it is the only function to perform. There can be a completely new approach to what military service as a citizen soldier really means and what it can achieve, without jeopardising the fundamental functions prescribed by the constitution for the SANDF. The question of who will want to join the new citizen army and who will be accepted is, of course, important. The full-time membership of the new SANDF is well above needs and affordability. If all eligible personnel are integrated, we are told, membership would be about 135 000, while planning provides for about 90 000. This means that, except for experts and particular shortages, little or no recruitment will take place for a number of years. There is, of course, a risk of the wrong type of individual seeking to join a citizen`s army, whether this be the full-time or part-time component. The concept of the macho gun-slinging Rambo is one our country can do without in the SANDF. We have enough of these on our streets already. The citizen forces need to be composed of people who are representative of the community and have a desire for service, not glory. There are many people in our country who received privileges in the past, and there are now those who are looking to the state to do much for them in the future. If one receives a benefit, in this case from the state, there is in my view an obligation to repay it in some way. There may be no better way than to render service to the community as a whole. The world is not one big waiting-to-receive place; it is also a place in which there must be something given in return. The whole question of service and responsibility is one which our society needs to face fairly and squarely, without undue delay. Our society cannot survive if it does not have a fundamental sense of responsibility on the part of the individual. This means the responsibility to respect persons and the property of others, as well as the responsibility to obey laws made by democratic legislatures and administered by people chosen for the purpose. This sense of responsibility can be induced by people with credibility who have themselves accepted these principles and who are rendering a service. We know that military force cannot, in the long term, suppress a people against their will. Nor can security and police forces eliminate crime in a society of people without jobs and without the means to meet the basic needs of life. But a well-motivated, efficient citizen soldier, volunteering not only to help enforce the law but to render a service, to assist and improve the quality of life, can be of benefit in seeking to reduce levels of crime. There are benefits from part-time voluntary service which will accrue to those who participate. Training in skills, camaraderie, discipline and a supplementary income are among them. There are also benefits to the community in a contribution to stability and direct services rendered, and the state benefits from savings and cost-effectiveness. Lastly, let me mention something which may be regarded by some as old-fashioned and unsophisticated: the word `patriotism`. It is heart-warming to see enthusiasm about a new flag and to hear words of love for a country, and a new feeling by people for each other. But patriotism also means making a contribution which is not enforced but which is voluntary, a contribution towards the welfare of the country and its people. We can echo the United States National Guard`s motto that its function is "To keep the land free". We should be able to add that our citizen soldiers can also heal our country, and make it a better place for all its people to live.
