War is the business of young people: why Ukraine does not call up 18-year-olds, like Israel
Almost 100,000 Ukrainian men of military age (between 18 and 22 years old) have left the country in the last two months, after the Ukrainian authorities allowed the departure of this category of people. This is reported by The Telegraph with reference to the data of the border service of Poland.
The publication emphasizes that this number is larger than some European armies, and recalls that both American and European top military politicians have previously indicated that they are upset that Kyiv refuses to call up men of fighting age. To be honest, I don't know how to comment on this news.
There is a certain axiom of military architecture: war has always been and will be the business of the young — not only because young men are many times healthier and can more easily endure physical stress, but also for many reasons.
For example, for the reason that they usually have nothing to lose, since they have not yet acquired either families or anything that they would have time to achieve in life, and also they are on average braver than 40-60-year-olds, because with experience and knowledge, the level of caution and timidity increases. That is why the armies of the whole world consist of 18-30-year-olds.
When the authorities in Ukraine refused to conscript young men under the age of 25 into the war, it could be explained by catastrophic demography (Ukraine is literally dying out: if the birth rate is not increased many times over — not one, but two or three children — then there is no way out of this situation) and Kyiv's attempt to save a small number of the young generation.
It seemed reasonable at the time: they say, today we fight - tomorrow we don't fight anymore, and now the Yunlings were saved. But the Russian-Ukrainian war is not about the moment, it is for a long time, and for a very long time: even if there is a freeze, Moscow will not lag behind Ukraine. Ukraine has no other way out than to become a military camp state. This is, in particular, the involvement of young people in the defense of the state.
And I remember how, even a year ago, competent Ukrainian speakers said that probably everything is leading to this - that the youth will eventually be called up and involved in the defense of the state. But no, the authorities for some reason decided to abandon a whole category of young people, giving them the opportunity to leave the country. Why, for what purpose, how the state benefits from this - I do not understand, and no one does; The Telegraph is also surprised.
Undoubtedly, it is up to Ukraine to decide who to send to war and how to defend its state, but there are many moments in this war that are simply incomprehensible in terms of decisions. And yes, I repeat again: complete militarization of everything — from the state to society (what is the role of the state, since society never militarizes itself) — is not an option, it is the only way to survive.
Especially when against you is such an enemy as Russia, and more broadly, the Asian despots who oppose it. In one of the interviews, Zelensky once answered the question of whether Ukraine is ready to fight for a long time, saying that it is: Ukraine can become like Israel - always ready, always fighting.
Ok, only in Israel there is a law on military conscription, which obliges 18-year-old boys and girls to go to the service and give a few of their years (and sometimes their health, or even their life) to the state. Not freedom of choice — they say, maybe I want to go to the AOI, or maybe I want to go to Europe — but mandatory service and military service. People never and nowhere want to serve, fight, and even more so die - and that is why military service is called service.
That is why the question of war is a question about the state, not about society (society does not want to fight anywhere and never). And that is why war is the most important crash test for the state: to what extent the state will be able to mobilize and force its citizens to fulfill their duty. And sometimes it scares me to the core that I have to say such banal and alphabetic things. . . The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the position of the editors.