If World War 3 breaks out, you could be shamed publicly and be sent to a tribunal.
Pat McFadden discusses prospect of conscription in 2025
Global conflict has escalated once more in a matter of days, with new threats being waged against the UK from Russia following Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s backing for Ukraine.
The PM was warned that Britain faces an “inevitable” Russian attack over the UK’s constant and unfaltering support for Ukraine. Security chiefs were put on high alert on Tuesday for a potential strike, either targeting Mr Burnham himself or key military sites, following the Prime Minister’s high-profile visit to Kyiv and his decision to deepen military co-operation with President Volodymyr Zelensky.
With the UK now being dragged into the ever more serious conflict in the Middle East, the prospect of the war ramping up yet further, especially as Russia takes Iran’s side and continues its push into Ukraine, is an ever more real one.
While conscription is not a certainty, if a full on WW3 scale situation were to happen, historical precedent suggests it could be used again in the UK.
But what happens if you’re called up to fight, and you refuse?
In WW2, those who called themselves ‘conscientous objectors’ were sent to tribunals to hear their case.
British people could be forced to join the army if WW3 breaks out (Image: Getty)
They had to go to court to argue their reasons for refusing to join up, and if their cases were not dismissed, they were granted a category of exemption and given a non-combat job to help the war effort.
But regardless of the court outcome, there is the prospect of public humiliation in another way.
Back in World War One, people used to wave white feathers at men in the streets as a mark of shaming those who refused to stand up and fight for their country. These ‘conscientious objectors’ had refused to fight for the UK in the 1914-1918 conflict against Germany, often for moral reasons. And as a result, ‘The White Feather Campaign’ was organised by women to publicly present men not in uniform with a white feather, as a mark of cowardice.
The Parliament website explains: “Conscientious objectors had to appear before a tribunal to argue their reasons for refusing to join-up. If their cases were not dismissed, they were granted one of several categories of exemption, and were given non-combatant jobs.”
Today, the rights of conscientious objectors have been recognised by European courts.
A report on conscription issued in March 2025 by the UK government explains how it works in other European countries as regards national service today.
It says: “Most countries obligate men to serve, offering opportunities for women to volunteer if they wish. Many also offer an alternative civilian option for conscientious objectors. Some use a lottery model, meaning that only a small proportion of eligible men are required to serve.”
It adds: “The European Parliament’s research service briefing on mandatory military service says all EU Member States with an active conscription system have recognised the rights of conscientious objectors through national law.”
For example, in Findland, males are mandated to serve by law, but non-military service can be given to conscientious objectors.
In Greece, it’s similar, with the minimum terms: “Less than 12 months military or 15 months civilian service for conscientious objectors.”
Of course, while you may be granted the chance to take up a non-combat role in the event of WW3 breaking out, it won’t stop people waving a white feather at you in the street.
As explained by the Peace Museum via the University of St Andrews: “The women of the ‘White Feather Campaign’ were militant in more ways than one: with passive aggression, they tried to shame men into signing up and fighting in the war, believing that military involvement was necessary and right.
“The symbol they used took some well-known peace imagery – the classic white dove – and twisted it to fit their public campaign. It is important to remember that, in their militarism, many of these women felt that they were ultimately working towards global peace: joining the ‘war effort’ was the best way, in their view, to bring the First World War to an end. Their views stood in stark contrast to the moral pacifism of conscientious objectors, who argued against violence as a means of solving conflict.”