The Patriot Files Forums  

Go Back   The Patriot Files Forums > Other Conflicts > Cold War

Post New Thread  Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-01-2021, 12:32 PM
Boats's Avatar
Boats Boats is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sauk Village, IL
Posts: 21,784
Post The Russian Military is Facing a Looming Demography Crisis

The Russian Military is Facing a Looming Demography Crisis
By: Ethan Woolley - National Interest News - 02-01-21
Re: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...-crisis-177414

Re: https://nationalinterest.org/sites/d...?itok=nGWgvug2
Tags: Russian - MilitaryDraft - Demographic Decline - Soviet Union - Military

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the newly formed Russian Federation’s demography essentially walked off a cliff.

Peter Suciu (a writer for National Interest News): Has written previously in National Interest about the Russian Finance Ministry’s proposed ten percent reduction in military personnel as a cost-cutting measure and about the pushback the proposal has received from the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD). Budgetary pressure associated with the Covid-19 pandemic makes the need for cutbacks like this understandable, but it is not the only challenge that threatens the size of Russia’s armed forces; the other is demographic, and it has been a long time coming.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the newly formed Russian Federation’s demography essentially walked off a cliff. Fertility rates fell far below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman—reaching an anemic 1.2 from 1997 to 2001—and death rates skyrocketed. Unsurprisingly, one generation after this demographic disaster, the Russian military is facing difficulties maintaining a military with roughly 900,000 personnel. However, whatever challenges the Russian military has faced thus far pale in comparison with demographic constraints it will face in the next decade.

According to the UN’s World Population Prospects report from 2019, there were a projected 14.25 million men aged 20-34 in Russia in 2020. By 2050, the median estimate predicts there will be only 12.91 million. A nine percent decrease in the recruiting pool will obviously complicate the military’s recruitment efforts. However, the true disaster is far closer than mid-century; in 2025, there will be only 11.55 million and in 2030, 11.23 million. This means there will be a roughly 20 percent decrease in the number of eligible male recruits during the 2020s. This problem predated the coronavirus and the associated budgetary constraints.

How specifically will this 20 percent decrease in eligible male recruits impact the military’s strength? A crude metric, the “militarization rate”—a ratio comparing the number of men aged 20-34 with the size of the military—allows Russia’s demographic challenges to be put into context. In 2020, Russia’s militarization rate was 6.31 percent, based on 14.25 million men aged 20-34 in the country and a standing military of 900,000 (as estimated by the Institute of International and Strategic Studies). Before we compare this to other countries, the limits of this metric should be addressed; first, approximately five percent of Russia’s armed forces (45,000 people) are female, and thus are not accounted for by this metric, and second, men aged 18 and 19 are eligible to serve and thus are also not accounted for. Nonetheless, this admittedly crude metric provides a method of comparing Russia’s level of recruitment with other nations in order to place Russia’s demographic challenges into context.

Given the projected decline in men aged 20-34 by 2030, to maintain a military of 900,000 Russia would have to increase its militarization rate to 7.79 percent in 2025 and 8.01 percent in 2030. When viewed in a vacuum, these metrics mean very little. When compared to other countries, however, they reveal just how militarized Russian society already is. Here are the 2020 militarization rates for other powers: the United States, 3.86 percent; France, 3.62 percent; Turkey, 3.58 percent; Italy, 3.52 percent; Japan, 2.54 percent; Pakistan, 2.24 percent; United Kingdom, 2.21 percent; China, 1.24 percent; India, 0.77 percent. Russia is also more militarized than its neighbors; Ukraine’s 2020 militarization rate was 4.82 percent, Romania’s 3.80 percent, and Poland’s 3.16 percent.

If there is such a thing as a hypothetical “maximum militarization rate” that a society can bear, Russia is by far the closest major power to reaching it, meaning its capacity to increase recruitment over the medium-term is severely limited when compared to its peers. This does not mean that the situation is hopeless, although it may be more complicated after the coronavirus pandemic. Some options, like salary increases to make military careers more attractive, are already a nonstarter, since as Peter Suciu writes, the Finance Ministry is already moving in the opposite direction.

Another solution could be to extend the term of conscription to two years instead of one. Due to the highly technological nature of modern warfare, conscripts spend a significant portion of their service in training and are thus only combat-ready for the last few months of their term. If the draft was extended, conscripts would be combat-ready for longer and the MoD would not lose the human capital it spent time and money developing after only a few months. There are tradeoffs to this approach; keeping young men in the military longer would mean keeping them out of the labor force for an additional year and could negatively impact growth. Additionally, conscription is already politically unpopular and any moves to extend it would almost certainly be met with resistance, something of which the approval-rating-obsessed Putin regime may be wary.

Altering the MoD’s approach to the role of women in the armed forces could also address the problem, at least in part. As mentioned earlier, there are currently about 45,000 women serving in the Russian armed forces, but they face different physical requirements and are not eligible for combat roles. The MoD could amend its policy in three ways: allow women to volunteer for combat roles, extend the draft to women but not for combat roles (thus freeing up men to serve in combat roles), or fully extend the draft to women for all roles. All three of these possibilities are unlikely to materialize, but the MoD has indicated its willingness to evolve on this issue by its decision to allow women to serve as pilots. To be clear, Russia does not need to implement Israeli-style conscription of women to address this problem; female recruitment is low even compared to the United States, where in 2019 women constituted 20 percent of the Air Force, 19 percent of the Navy, 15 percent of the Army, and 9 percent of the Marine Corps. Increasing the female component of the Russian armed forces from just five percent to even ten percent could significantly address Russia’s declining male recruitment pool over the next decade, even if they only serve in support roles.

It is important to note all of these challenges exist so long as the MoD seeks to maintain its current size. As demonstrated by its resistance to the Finance Ministry’s recently proposed ten percent cuts, the desire to maintain the current size of Russia’s armed forces remains strong. However, the financial burden that such a policy would entail—made worse by Covid-19—is only part of the story. In five, ten, and even thirty years, Russia will have fewer young men than it has right now. If maintaining a 900,000-man standing military is already challenging, how will such a target be attainable in the decades to come? The solutions proposed here, such as increased salaries, extending the draft, or increasing female recruitment are all ways to address the problem to varying extents, but they do not change the fundamental problem of Russia’s demographic structure and the challenges it poses to the Russian Armed Forces. If in the coming decade we see the Russian Federation draw down the size of its military, such measures may be blamed on coronavirus-related cutbacks. While this explanation may not necessarily be untrue, a decrease in the size of the armed forces was already baked into Russia’s demographic profile; the Covid-19 pandemic may end up being a convenient scapegoat.

About this writer: Ethan Woolley is a student at the European University at St. Petersburg, where he is pursuing an MA in Energy Politics in Eurasia. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a BA in International Relations and Russian and East European Studies.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal note: It seems Russia's baby boom has ended - hence less troops for the military.
As stated above: It seems maintaining a 900,000-man standing military is already challenging, how will such a target be attainable in the decades to come?
-
Note: I also found this: Is military mandatory in Russia?

Russia. One year of military service is required for Russian men between the ages of 18 and 27. The country allows for some exceptions — sons or brothers of men killed during their military service are released from conscription, for example.
-
Is there conscription in Russia?

The Russian Federation has had a conscription army since 1918. In recent years, approximately 400,000 young men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-seven are drafted each year to serve in the regular army, the Ministry of Internal Affairs forces, border troops, and other branches of Russia's vast armed forces.
-
Is there a difference between a military draft and conscription?

Conscription is the compulsory induction of individuals into the Armed Services, whereas the draft is the procedure by which individuals are chosen for conscription. Men within a certain age group must register with the Selective Service for possible conscription, but conscription itself was suspended in 1973.

Define Conscription:

U.S. Conscription:

Compulsory enrollment and induction into the military service. Conscription is commonly known as the draft, but the concepts are not exactly the same. Conscription is the compulsory induction of individuals into the Armed Services, whereas the draft is the procedure by which individuals are chosen for conscription. Men within a certain age group must register with the Selective Service for possible conscription, but conscription itself was suspended in 1973.

Conscription first came into use as a legal term in France in 1798. It derives from the Latin conscriptionem, which refers to the gathering of troops by written orders, and conscribere, which means "to put a name on a list or roll, especially a list of soldiers." A person who becomes a member of the armed forces through the process of conscription is called a conscript.

Conscription typically involves individuals who are deemed fit for military service. At times, however, governments have instituted universal military service, in which all men or all people of a certain age are conscripted.

Most governments use conscription at some time, usually when the voluntary enlistment of soldiers fails to meet military needs. Conscription by national governments became widespread in Europe during the nineteenth century.

Some of the American colonies employed conscription. During the Revolutionary War, the American government used selective, temporary conscription to fill the ranks of its military.

The United States used conscription again briefly during the Civil War. The Union Enrollment Act of 1863 drafted all able-bodied men between twenty and forty-five years of age. The act provoked a hostile public response because it excused from military service those who were able to pay a fee of three hundred dollars. The law incited violent public disturbances, called the Draft Riots, in New York City between July 13 and 16, 1863. One thousand people were injured in the riots.

In 1917, one month after the entry of the United States into World War I, Congress passed the Selective Draft Act (40 Stat. 76). The act created a government office to oversee conscription. It also authorized local draft boards to select eligible individuals for conscription. The following year, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of conscription, noting that Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the power to "raise and support Armies" (Selective Draft cases, 245 U.S. 366, 38 S. Ct. 159, 62 L. Ed. 349 [1918]).

Congress instituted the first peacetime use of conscription in 1940 when it passed the Selective Training and Service Act (54 Stat. 885). This act, which expired in 1947, enrolled those who served in U.S. armed forces during World War II. In 1948, Congress passed the Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C.A. app. § 451 et seq.), which was used to induct individuals for service in the Korean War (1950–53) and the Vietnam War (1954–75). Presidential authority to conscript individuals into the U.S. armed forces ended in 1973. No individual has been conscripted into the military since then.

In 1976, the Selective Service System was placed on a standby status, and local offices of the agency were closed. President jimmy carter issued a proclamation in 1980 requiring all males who were born after January 1, 1960, and who had attained age eighteen to register with the Selective Service at their local post office or at a U.S. embassy or consulate outside the United States (Presidential Proclamation No. 4771, 3 C.F.R. 82 [1981]). Those who fail to register are subject to prosecution by the federal government.

In 1981, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of requiring only men, and not women, to register with the Selective Service (rostker v. goldberg, 453 U.S. 57, 101 S. Ct. 2646, 69 L. Ed. 2d 478). The United States has never conscripted women into military service, nor has it ever instituted universal military service. It has conscripted only individuals meeting certain age, mental, and physical standards. Congress has allowed the deferral of conscription for certain individuals, including those who need to support dependents or are pursuing an education. Among those who have been declared exempt from service are sole surviving sons, conscientious objectors to war, and ministers of religion.

The U.S. government also has the power to conscript property in times of emergency.
-
Boats

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However some countries use - Involuntary Servitude:

What is Involuntary Servitude:

Slavery; the condition of an individual who works for another individual against his or her will as a result of force, coercion, or imprisonment, regardless of whether the individual is paid for the labor.

The term involuntary servitude is used in reference to any type of slavery, peonage, or compulsory labor for the satisfaction of debts. Two essential elements of involuntary servitude are involuntariness, which is compulsion to act against one's will, and servitude, which is some form of labor for another. Imprisonment without forced labor is not involuntary servitude, nor is unpleasant labor when the only direct penalty for not performing it is the withholding of money or the loss of a job.

The importation of African slaves to the American colonies began in the seventeenth century. By the time of the American Revolution, the slave population had grown to more than five hundred thousand people, most concentrated in the southern colonies. The Framers of the U.S. Constitution did not specifically refer to slavery in the document they drafted in 1787, but they did afford protection to southern slaveholding states. They included provisions prohibiting Congress from outlawing the slave trade until 1808 and requiring the return of fugitive slaves.

Between 1820 and 1860, political and legal tensions over slavery steadily escalated. The U.S. Supreme Court attempted to resolve the legal status of African Americans in dred scott v. sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393, 15 L. Ed. 691 (1857). The Court concluded that Congress was powerless to extend the rights of U.S. citizenship to African Americans.

With the secession of southern states and the beginning of the Civil War in 1860 and 1861, the Union government was under almost complete control of free states. In 1865 Congress enacted the Thirteenth Amendment, which the Union states ratified. Section 1 of the amendment provides that "[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Section 2 gives Congress the authority to enforce the provisions of section 1.

The Thirteenth Amendment makes involuntary servitude unlawful whether the compulsion is by a government or by a private person. The penalty for violation of the amendment must be prescribed by law. Although the principal purpose of the amendment was to abolish African slavery, it also abolished other forms of compulsory labor similar to slavery, no matter what they are called. For example, it abolished bond service and peonage, forms of compulsory service based on a servant's indebtedness to a master.

An individual has a right to refuse or discontinue employment. No state can make the quitting of work a crime, or establish criminal sanctions that hold unwilling persons to a particular labor. A state may, however, withhold unemployment or other benefits from those who, without Just Cause, refuse to perform available gainful work.

A court has the authority to require a person to perform affirmative acts that the person has a legal duty to perform. It has generally been held, however, that this power does not extend to compelling the performance of labor or personal services, even in cases where the obligated party has been paid in advance. The remedy for failure to perform obligated labor is generally limited to monetary damages. A court may, without violating the Thirteenth Amendment, use its Equity authority to enjoin, or prevent, a person from working at a particular task. Equity authority is the power of a court to issue injunctions that direct parties to do or refrain from doing something. A court also may prevent an artist or performer who has contracted to perform unique services for one person on a given date from performing such services for a competitor.

The Thirteenth Amendment does not interfere with the enforcement of duties a citizen owes to the state under the Common Law. Government may require a person to serve on a petit or Grand Jury, to work on public roads or instead pay taxes on those roads, or to serve in the militia. Compulsory military service (the draft) is not a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment, nor is compulsory labor on work of national importance in lieu of military service, assigned to conscientious objectors.

Forced labor, with or without imprisonment, as a punishment upon conviction of a crime is a form of involuntary servitude allowed by the Thirteenth Amendment under its "punishment-for-crime" exception.
-
Boats
__________________
Boats

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

"IN GOD WE TRUST"
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.