As the war in Ukraine is about to enter its fourth year and, in the meantime, diplomats attempt to negotiate an end to that conflict, the imperialist powers are preparing for the war to come, which will be of a vastly different scale compared to the numbers and geography of the current war in Ukraine, as it is expected to be a general war, involving all the major powers, as well as the smaller ones, on a global scale. Therefore, in all the command centers of the national bourgeoisies, it appears increasingly necessary to equip themselves with the economic, political, and military tools to sustain the level of imperialist conflict. Among these is the military mobilization of masses of millions of men to be thrown into the meat grinder of war, as the war in Ukraine is abundantly and bloodily demonstrating.

Military Service Reform in Germany

The step taken by Germany is an important sign of the path it has embarked upon, of its preparations for war. In fact, on December 5, the Bundestag passed a law to “modernize” military service, the objective of which, in a nutshell, is to increase the number of soldiers from the current 184,000 to 260,000–270,000 by 2035, bringing the number of reservists to approximately 200,000. The plan is to enlist at least 20,000 young people as early as next year, with the prospect of continuous increases in subsequent years, from 23,000 in 2027 up to 38,000 per year by 2030—roughly one in eight young people each year. To meet these new needs, more than 270 new barracks will be built by 2031 at a cost of 3.5 billion euros.

This does not, therefore, mark a return to compulsory military service—which has been suspended in Germany since 2011—but rather the introduction of a semi-compulsory system for men and an optional one for women, which also aims to attract young people through financial and educational incentives.

Starting in 2026, all men and women who have turned 18 will receive a questionnaire asking about their willingness to perform military service. To encourage young people to agree to perform military service, financial incentives have been devised, such as a monthly stipend of approximately 2,600 euros—up from the current 1,800—and advanced training, for example in the use of drones, allowing service to be performed near one’s place of residence whenever possible.

However, if the number of volunteers is insufficient to meet the expected targets, mandatory draft may be reinstated. 

The current reform is a political compromise between those who want to rapidly strengthen the military without immediately reintroducing mandatory draft and those, particularly within the CDU/CSU, who believe that draft may be unavoidable if there are not enough volunteers.

Those who are certainly opposed to the new law and, in general, to the prospect of expanding draft are the young people who have protested in over 90 German cities.

This military service reform is part of a broader German rearmament plan aimed at building Europe’s most powerful army through a massive investment of 1 trillion euros—a momentous shift from the entire post-World War II era. This is a necessary choice rooted not only in the ongoing inter-imperialist conflict—particularly with Germany siding with Ukraine in the war against Russia—but above all in the changed economic conditions resulting from the severing of the advantageous energy ties with Russia following the Ukrainian conflict, which have led to a severe crisis in German industry. The expansion of war production would allow for the conversion of those struggling factories, redirecting them toward arms manufacturing.

To achieve its war-preparation objectives, Germany has abandoned its traditional fiscal discipline and requested an exemption from the “Stability Pact” from the European Union so that military spending is not subject to budgetary constraints. Germany is also moving to dismantle its welfare state; Chancellor Merz had declared, “We have been living beyond our means for years,” highlighting high public spending on social services and announcing a review of them. The direction is clear: the priority is military spending; in the future, less money for schools and hospitals, but more weapons.

The trend in other European countries

Germany’s shift toward militarism is obviously not an isolated case, but also affects the rest of Europe, where various countries are preparing plans for rearmament and the overhaul of military service.

With the end of the Cold War, starting in the 1990s, several European countries transitioned from compulsory conscription to a system based on professionalism and specialization. However, the experience of the war in Ukraine has shown this system to be completely inadequate for dealing with a major war like the one currently being fought in those territories, with hundreds of thousands of men deployed at the front and in the rear, and the need to continuously replace heavy casualties. Therefore, the European bourgeoisie finds itself urgently needing to adapt its national armies by increasing the number of soldiers. The demands of the European ruling classes, however, clash with a social reality very different from that of the last century, when masses of young peasants and workers, hardened by hard labor and deprivation, could be drafted into the military. Today’s European countries are now aging societies, with birth rates in steady decline, while, on the other hand, the spread of consumerist lifestyles and the cult of the individual make the prospect of defending the homeland unappealing. Therefore, efforts to reform military systems must take this social context into account to avoid serious political repercussions.

Currently, compulsory military service exists in the Scandinavian and Baltic countries, as well as in Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Greece, and Croatia, which reintroduced it in 2024 with two months of basic training. But as in the German case, the reintroduction of compulsory military service is not the only model being considered; at this stage, there is a tendency to favor hybrid approaches that incentivize and encourage voluntary enlistment and are geared toward forming an army composed of professional forces and reserves.

Among the countries moving toward a revision of military conscription is France, which had suspended compulsory military service in 1997 and had begun moving toward the professionalization of the armed forces, while explicitly stipulating that military service “may be reinstated at any time by law when national defense conditions so require.” We are not yet at that point, but the demands of the national bourgeoisie are no longer even concealed, so much so that the Chief of Staff of the French Army, Fabien Mandon, stated at the Congress of Mayors of France on November 18: “If our country falters because it is not ready to lose its sons […] or to suffer economically because the priority must be military production, then we are truly at risk. […] You must discuss this in your cities.”

The bourgeoisie is clearly stating that further sacrifices must be made and blood shed for the fatherland.

The current approach is not to proceed with the reintroduction of compulsory draft just yet, but to push for voluntary recruitment. “The new military service” will be open primarily to young people between the ages of 18 and 19 starting in the summer of 2026. It is expected to last ten months, with one month of training and nine months in operational units across France. The plan aims for 3,000 recruits in 2026, rising to 10,000 by 2030 and potentially 50,000 by 2035.

What sets France apart is that, at this stage, the focus is on developing a “culture of defense,” by strengthening the “Day of Defense and Citizenship,” which is held annually and is mandatory to obtain a certificate of participation—a requirement for future civil service exams and driver’s licenses. In essence, the mobilization of youth is achieved through the promotion of a patriotic spirit, but it is by no means certain that this will yield the expected results, making the transition to forms of conscription based on compulsory service inevitable.

Even in the United Kingdom, which abolished compulsory conscription in 1963, transitioning to a fully volunteer and professional military, there is a perceived need for a change of course, as evidenced by Rishi Sunak’s 2024 proposal for mandatory national service for all 18-year-olds, to be carried out in either civilian or military contexts. That proposal did not pass, but recently the British government launched a program called the “sabbatical year” to allow young people up to age 25 to spend a year in military service, incentivizing them through pay and the opportunity to subsequently join the professional ranks or find skilled civilian employment. In this way, although large numbers are not expected, the aim is to address the increasingly serious recruitment problems of recent years and meet established recruitment targets.

Italy is also taking action, with the Minister of Defense declaring his intention to propose a bill for “voluntary draft”.

The European path toward militarism does not concern only the enlistment of youth; rather, in addition to an economy increasingly oriented toward arms production, the whole of society is slowly being drawn into the vortex of war preparations. Early signs are already visible in certain initiatives involving French and German hospitals. In France, on July 18, 2025, the Ministry of Health sent a circular asking all hospitals to prepare, by March 2026, to receive up to 15,000 wounded soldiers in the event of war, anticipating peak influxes of casualties—100 per day for 60 consecutive days and peaks of 250 wounded per day for at least three consecutive days. Plans to address war scenarios are also underway in Germany. The goal is to manage a massive influx of casualties: every hospital must be ready to receive up to 100 wounded soldiers per day. 

Polish Rearmament

The European country that has resolutely embarked on the path of rearmament and troop expansion is Poland. The Polish leadership has set its sights high; Prime Minister Donald Tusk has set a goal for 2026 to make the Polish military the “strongest army in Europe,” promising significant investments in infrastructure and the domestic industry. Moreover, Poland has already allocated $41.5 billion to military spending for 2024, equivalent to 4.1% of GDP, rising to 4.7% of GDP in 2025 with $45 billion. For 2026, spending is projected to reach 4.8% of GDP, nearly $55 billion. 

Having depleted a significant portion of its arsenal by supplying Ukraine with its older military equipment, Poland has signed several commercial agreements with companies in the U.S. and South Korean military-industrial complexes, purchasing aircraft, attack helicopters, tanks, and systems from the Americans, and tanks from the South Koreans—with a plan to expand the fleet to up to a thousand units—as well as self-propelled howitzers, fighter jets, and long-range rocket launch systems.

But Poland’s goal is also to increase industrial production directly within the country; in particular, through agreements with South Korea, the aim is to develop joint production and the transfer of military technologies to Poland. The agreement with the Korean company Hyundai Rotem, a supplier of K2 Black Panther tanks, is a step in this direction; it will enable the establishment of a center for the production and technical maintenance of these tanks in the industrial town of Gliwice. 

Poland’s ambition to build the largest army in Europe is also driven by the goal of expanding the army to 300,000 soldiers. In Poland’s case, the Russian invasion of Ukraine led to a shift from the 2008 policy of suspending draft, favoring instead an approach based on voluntary enlistment. Starting in April 2022, the “Become a Soldier of Poland” campaign was launched, which resulted in 14,000 enlistments within a couple of months. Capitalizing on widespread hostility toward Russia and patriotic propaganda about defending the homeland from the enemy invader, attractive pay is drawing many young students and wage earners. Currently, the Polish army has about 215,000 soldiers, including 180,000 professionals and 35,000 territorial defense troops—roughly triple the number from ten years ago—with plans to reach 300,000 soldiers by 2035.

Europe’s War “Until the Last Ukrainian”

Europe is preparing militarily and continues to support Ukraine’s war effort against Russia, as evidenced by the €90 billion loan approved by the EU—which Kyiv will never be able to repay—and stubbornly stands in the way of attempts at peace between the Americans and Russians, rejecting Trump’s peace plan.

Beyond the stance of European imperialist powers in favor of continuing the war through economic and military support for Ukraine, on the eve of the fourth year of the war, Europeans find themselves in serious difficulty regarding military supplies, making their rearmament necessary—a process that will certainly not occur solely with the aim of continuing to send weapons to Ukraine, but above all to strengthen their own national armies. The same applies to plans for expanding European troops, whose deployment on Ukrainian territory is currently deemed possible by the so-called “willing” nations.

The attitude of European imperialists—hostile to Russian-American dialogue and consequently in favor of continuing the war—cannot be understood as an attempt to save Ukraine from the Russian advance, not least because, despite all the military support provided so far during these nearly four years of war, the Russian advance, though slow, is steady and continuous. In fact, the hand extended by the Europeans to the Ukrainians is quite weak, consisting of exorbitant financial outlays and arms shipments, without even the most “willing” being in a position to provide Kyiv with the security they so often boast about.

Therefore, it is clear that the Europeans are calling on the Ukrainians to die not for a desperate national defense but to give European countries the time they need to rearm. This is why, time and again, they intervene in the ongoing negotiations with a proposal for a truce, that is, to halt fighting at the front without laying the groundwork for a more or less definitive resolution of the conflict itself—a truce that would serve only to give Ukraine a chance to catch its breath, stockpile weapons, reorganize the army, and resume hostilities, thereby prolonging a conflict that serves to buy more time for rearmament.

The war must continue, but with the Ukrainians serving as cannon fodder!

From this perspective, the discussion regarding one aspect of Trump’s peace plan—specifically, the number of soldiers in Ukraine’s future military structure—is highly significant.

In Trump’s plan, the size of the Ukrainian army is set at 600,000 troops, while in the second plan, “agreed upon” with Kyiv, the figure is 800,000 troops in peacetime. The Ukrainian proletariat has no illusions: whether or not peace is achieved, their fate is in uniform, to shed their blood in this war or the next. But European proletarians cannot delude themselves either: the militarization of Ukraine heralds and paves the way for that of the rest of Europe.

The Overthrow of Militarism

The Ukrainian conflict leaves no doubt on this point: the frenzied race toward general war compels all national bourgeoisies to prepare militarily, including the necessity of forming a large army through the conscription of masses of proletarians. The European bourgeoisies in particular will be forced to abandon the professional army and move progressively toward the extension of military service, up to a conscript army.

Moreover, the situation in Ukraine is particularly significant from this perspective, since the need to replace enormous losses has turned the country into a vast hunting ground for men to be sent to the front as cannon fodder.

The reaction to forced mobilization is substantial; some estimates suggest at least 850,000 Ukrainians of draft age are in hiding to avoid capture, 650,000 have fled abroad, and there may be 300,000 deserters in 2025 alone, with October setting a new record for unauthorized abandonment of a military unit, with over 21,000 official cases, compared to 17–18,000 per month during the summer—extremely high numbers considering approximately 30,000 people are mobilized each month.

The tragedy is that the phenomenon of desertion, though widespread, still represents a spontaneous and individual refusal to escape the ongoing massacre, and there is a lack of organized opposition to the war.

The only way to stop the war, however, would be to fraternize at the front and turn the weapons against the internal enemy—that Ukrainian bourgeoisie which has sold its own proletariat to the American and European imperialists.

Russian soldiers should do the same; their estimated number of casualties (no official figures are provided) has been rising in recent months at a rate of 25,000 per month, bringing the total number of losses since the start of the conflict to between 250,000 and 300,000.

The militarism that is gaining ground throughout Europe carries within it the seeds of its own destruction as soon as the proletarians, enlisted in the national armies and sent to fight their brothers in other nations, refuse to submit to their own ruling classes and turn the weapons in their hands against them. It is the hoped-for transformation of war between states into class war that will be possible only insofar as it is inspired by the presence of a strong revolutionary communist party with solid foundations and organized on an international scale.