Britain, Conscription, and a New National Guard

 “A house divided against itself, cannot stand.”

President Abraham Lincoln

A house divided

August 10^th. Britain is divided against itself. How can Britain afford both domestic security and national security at a time when both are under threat? Ever since the banking and monetary crisis of 2008-2010 British security and defence policy has simply not added up – literally. Successive British governments of all persuasions have also made huge errors of political and strategic judgement over the last thirty years one of which has been to rapidly increase the size of the population whilst cutting vital services. For example, since 2000 the officially acknowledged British population (it is probably significantly bigger) has grown from 58.9 million to 68 million people (Macronet) whilst services and other vital infrastructures have effectively been cut.  In 2010, the Cameron government even slashed the armed forces by 10% during the Afghanistan campaign. These failures of policy have helped turn a once stable society into a fractured one with potentially catastrophic social and political consequences. There is much to do to restore Britain, and it must be done quickly but here are two policy options that must now be explored: a new form of conscription and a British National Guard.

Whatever the strength of the British military instrument of power it is and will be effectively neutered if the home base is politically and socially insecure. Keeping the peace, be it at home or abroad, requires a continuum of effects from societal security to credible defence but both are being profoundly undermined by social unrest and the profound gap between official narrative and a dangerous lack of force and resource.  That is precisely why the likes of China, Russia and other autocratic states are applying hybrid war against the British to further exploit what they see as palpable weakness and instability.

At the high state-on-state end of the conflict spectrum keeping the peace will require Britain to deploy far more, more capable, and more capacious armed forces able to project power quickly allied to the capacity to move in some mass.  This is something General Lord Richards and I explore in great depth in our forthcoming September book “The Retreat from Strategy.”  The changing character of war will also demand of the British much greater fusion between emerging and disruptive technologies and military personnel. However, a new form of civil-military partnership will also be required allied to a new concept of civil defence to support communities from threats both within and without.  

The New Conscription

“There is a piece of shit at the end of this stick,” shouted the irate Sergeant brandishing his pacing stick in the face of an uncooperative soldier.  “Not this end, Sergeant,” came the reply. The word ‘conscription’ evokes a vision of unwilling citizens forced to ‘do their bit’ and ‘square bash’ (march) around draft parade grounds shouted at by an equally unimpressed regular sergeant. If there is one sure fire way to destroy the high-end operational effectiveness of a professional force it is to impose upon them people who do not want to be there and have little desire to cooperate. At the same time, cuts to the regular armed forces have clearly left Britain’s armed forces patently unable to meet the roles, missions, and tasks that Government demands of them. 

Future deterrence and defence will depend on a new form of civil-military cooperation which is precisely what the citizen armies of the past were.  It may still be needed in extremis but before that a new form conscription could come in the form of a partnership with the corporate sector.  Given the changing character of war the tech sector has a vital role to play in the form of apprenticeships are paid for jointly by both the state and companies.  Such a system would see young tech savvy civilians hone and develop their skills in support of national security and defence in partnership with the state.  Additional tax incentives for both companies and individuals could encourage such participation which will be vital in the coming age of the AI metaverse. Upon completion of service draftees would enter a new civil-defence technology reserve.

A British National Guard

The summer riots in England suggest that the traditional model of British policing is no longer sufficient to deal with a quite different society to the one for which it was created.  The police do have specialist counter-riot police and mutual support mechanisms, but they too have been subject to the cuts imposed by the Government ever since the banking and monetary crisis of 2008-2010. There are simply not enough of them and the majority are ill-equipped and ill-trained to deal with the spectrum of threats the modern ‘copper’ must confront.

The US National Guard is comprised of trained civilians under the Department of Defense who can be called upon both to support the civil authorities in times of emergency and deployed overseas in support of campaigns.  They also comprise an Active Guard and Reserve made up of former servicemen and women who retain their training and skills.  The irony is that the National Guard dates to December 1636 and was set up by the then English government in London as the Colonial Militia. Britain has long had a tradition of territorial reserves, as well as reserves and volunteer reserves which could be adjusted to form a new British National Guard. 

United we must stand

Striking a new security and defence balance will require London to do the one thing it is patently useless at – new thinking and putting the interests of ALL British people above and beyond the narrow obsession of bureaucratic politics between the Palace of Westminster at one end of Whitehall and Trafalgar Square at the other. It will also demand of a grossly irresponsible political class an end to the endemic policy short-termism (the COVID virus of politics) which has enshrined the politically convenient at the expense of the real job of government which is to face hard reality. Without fear nor favour?  There can be neither room for “we want the 1950s and we want it now” nostalgia which seems to be the motivation of at least some of the rioters, nor the naïve nonsense that there is no link between mass immigration and societal security.  Rather, British society is what it is, and it is that multicultural society that must be protected, secured, and defended. That means all its people irrespective of race, creed, or orientation! Period! To do that will require a new kind of partnership between a new kind of British state with a new kind of British society. It is called change.

However, when political and social cohesion collapses at home so does the capacity of a state to deter adversaries, defend its people, and realise its critical national interests.  Neither security nor defence can be credible if the home base is broken.  Projecting power and protecting people are one and the same. A house divided?  It is time for a re-think, London.  Are you (for once) up to it?  Are we (for once) up to it?

Julian Lindley-French