CONSCRIPTION FOR PEACE
OUNTRIES which enter into far-reaching commitments abroad, as this country has done with the general con- sent of its people, must possess the means to honour the commitments if called on. That is the case for the measure of conscription announced by the Prime Minister on Wednesday. Conscription is alien to the spirit and tradition of Britain, but the place it holds in the life of countries like France and Switzerland, Holland and Den- mark, disposes of any idea that it is undemocratic. So far as it involves compulsion it limits individual freedom, as well as being gravely uneconomic, and except in circum- stances that make its adoption imperative, a country is happy that can avoid recourse to it, whatever be its value as an instrument of discipline and morale. Mr. Chamberlain clearly took that view when he limited the application of the measure to a period of three years, with the provision that it might be rescinded even before that if international conditions warranted. Conscription is not being adopted as a permanent feature of the national life.
The merit claimed, and on the whole justly, for the new measure is that it is better calculated than any other demon- stration we could give to reassure our friends in Europe and to impress potential foes. That is a matter of capital importance ; it may turn the scale between war and peace ; and the Prime Minister did well to insist that this, like every military measure Great Britain is taking today, is being taken with the aim first and foremost of averting war, and only secondly of achieving victory if war comes. The wisdom of the speed with which the Government has moved is doubtful. The abandonment of the voluntary system is a momentous step for ourselves, but it may be questioned whether the prospective addition of 200,000 men to our forces some six or nine months hence will so deeply impress Herr Hitler that it was imperative to bring conscription into being before his Reichstag speech, particularly when
•
that meant sacrificing all hope of introducing the Conscrip- tion Bill as an agreed measure.
That is the most serious aspect of the situation. Labour is known to be radically opposed to compulsory military service, the Prime Minister has repeatedly pledged him- self not to introduce conscription in peace-time, and by any rational interpretation of the English language this is peace- time ; at any rate, it is no less so than a month ago, when the pledge was last repeated ; not only are we not at war, but we still hope to avoid war. For that reason it was of the first importance that Mr. Chamberlain should use every en- deavour to carry Labour with him in his new departure, instead of confronting it with the Cabinet decision as a fait accompli. A breach in the national unity will be a heavy price to pay for the addition to our military strength, and it is to be hoped that Labour, which has undoubtedly ground for complaint, will in spite of that realise the duty of accept- ing a measure which arises logically and directly out of the foreign policy which Labour has consistently advocated. M. Blum has put that to his British colleagues very cogently.
The measure itself is wise and moderate. Its operation is limited in time to three years ; it applies only to men be- tween 20 and 21, and they will only be called up gradually as they can be trained and equipped ; the flow of volunteers of other ages into the Territorials will therefore not be affected, and most of the conscripts after their six months' service will become Territorials for another three years and six months. There will be "conscription of wealth" in the form of a further limitation of the profits of armament firms, and for conscientious objectors work of national importance will be substituted by permission of special tribunals, which will, it may be hoped, discharge their difficult task with some sympathy and imagination. In making the fundamental de- parture of imposing conscription in peace-time we may claim justly that it is conscription not for war but for peace.
