Denmark to draft women into army amid growing Russian aggression, military expansion
After nearly four months of military training, the young soldier and the rest of her unit spent early June completing their final exercises near the Danish army's barracks in Hovelte, 25 kilometres north of Copenhagen.
Katrine and other female soldiers, all of whom spoke to The Associated Press on June 11 on the condition that only their first names be used because of operational security, volunteered for military service earlier this year. Until now, that was the only way for women to be part of the armed forces.
The Scandinavian country is seeking to increase the number of young people in the military by extending compulsory enlistment to women for the first time. Men and women can both still volunteer, and the remaining places will be filled by a gender-neutral draft lottery.
"In the situation the world is in now, it's needed," Katrine said. "I think it's only fair and right that women participate equally with men."
Under new rules passed by Denmark's parliament earlier in June, Danish women who turn 18 after Tuesday will be entered into the lottery system, on equal footing with their male compatriots. The change comes against a backdrop of Russian aggression and growing military investment across NATO countries.
Move based on 'current security situation': conscription program head
Even from the relative safety of Denmark, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine casts its shadow. Lessons from the Ukrainian battlefields have even filtered down into their training.
"That makes it very real," Katrine said.
Denmark's gender-parity reforms were originally outlined in 2024 as part of a major defence agreement. The program was originally expected to be implemented by early 2027, but has been brought forward to summer 2025.
Col. Kenneth Strøm, head of the conscription program, told AP the move is based on "the current security situation."
"They could take part in NATO collective deterrence," Strøm added. "Raising the number of conscripts, that would simply lead to more combat power."
Denmark, a nation of six million people, has about 9,000 professional troops. The new arrangement is expected to bring up to 6,500 annual conscripts by 2033, up from 4,700 last year.
Under Danish law, all physically fit men over age 18 are called up for military service. But because there are usually enough volunteers, there's a lottery system so not all young men serve. Women, by contrast, could only volunteer previously, making up roughly a quarter of 2024's cohort.
"Some will probably be very disappointed being chosen to go into the military," Anne Sofie, part of Katrine's cohort of volunteers, said of the new female conscripts. "Some will probably be surprised and like it a lot more than they think they would."
The duration of service is also being extended from four to 11 months. Conscripts will first spend five months in basic training, followed by six months of operational service, plus additional lessons.
A 'gradual process' of building up military
The move is part of a broader military buildup by the Nordic nation.
In February, Denmark's government announced plans to bolster its military by setting up a $7 billion US fund that it said would raise the country's defence spending to more than 3 per cent of gross domestic product this year. Parts of the conscript program are being financed by the so-called Acceleration Fund.
"We see a sharpened security situation in Europe. We have the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. We have focus on the Baltic countries, where Denmark is contributing a lot of soldiers. So, I think it's a general effort to strengthen the Danish defence," said researcher Rikke Haugegaard from the Royal Danish Defence College.
But Haugegaard notes there are many challenges, from ill-fitting equipment and a lack of additional barracks, to potential cases of sexual harassment.
"For the next year or two, we will be building a lot of new buildings to accommodate all these people. So, it will be a gradual process," she added.
In 2017, neighbouring Sweden instituted a military draft for both men and women after its government spoke of a deteriorating security environment in Europe. Norway introduced its own law applying military conscription to both sexes in 2013
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
Is Canada beating ploughshares into swords with its NATO 5% pledge? Not likely
By anyone's measure, $150 billion a year is an eye-watering amount of money to spend on anything — let alone defence. While it pales in comparison to the inflation-adjusted appropriations of the Second World War, it is potentially, for this generation, the very definition of beating ploughshares into swords (new window) . Or is it? Following all of the political sound and fury and sticker shock of last week's NATO summit in The Hague, the question of what Prime Minister Mark Carney's government wants to accomplish with all of that money — on an annual basis — is coming into even sharper focus. On the surface, the Liberals have pledged to quickly and efficiently rearm the Canadian military. We are protecting Canadians against new threats. I wish we didn't have to, but we do have to and it is our core responsibility as government, Carney said at the summit. "The people who have been making sacrifices have been the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces because they have not been paid to reflect what we are asking them to do. They haven't been operating with the right equipment in many cases. We're making up for that. WATCH | Procurement remains a challenge, says former officer: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Don't get 'distracted' by 5% NATO target, former officer warns government | Power & Politics As Prime Minister Mark Carney commits to meet the new NATO spending target of five per cent of GDP by 2035, former vice-chief of the defence staff Guy Thibault tells Power & Politics he supports upping Canada's defence spending but warns the government should focus on improving procurement and supporting Canadian Forces personnel. But the reflex is strong within federal institutions to use military procurement as a tool of economic development. It has been thus for decades. At the same time, we keep getting told — by the prime minister nonetheless — that we are in extraordinary times and a national emergency. Much was made, both in the run-up and in the aftermath of the NATO summit, about the signing of a security and defence industry partnership between Canada and the European Union (new window) . Politically, it has been cast since last spring's election as a vehicle — if not the vehicle — to realize rearmament. There are a few steps to go before Canada can unlock the potential of buying military equipment in bulk with its allies. But when you look at the framework of the partnership, the rearmament potential is dwarfed by the economic opportunity for Canadian defence contractors to sell into Europe under the $1.25-trillion ReArm Europe plan. The approach seems to be that Canada wants both its guns and butter. Neither, outside great wars of the last century, has ever been mutually exclusive and they don't have to be. However, the material state of the Canadian military is such that the guns — to extend the metaphor — were needed yesterday. While a partnership with the Europeans makes good economic and geopolitical sense in the long term, it doesn't appear to be a solution to the immediate rearmament crisis. European industrial bases are simply not prepared at the moment for a protracted conflict, said Seth Jones, president of defence and security at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. If you look at European states, they still lack sufficient capabilities in combat support, in short-range air defence and long-range indirect fires, air lift. Jones also noted there are significant challenges with munitions stockpiles, with supply chain weaknesses [and] within the broader European and U.S. industrial bases workforce. If the Canadian government is serious about rearmament beyond a tool of economic development, the issue will come down to the question of where do you find a hot production line and how quickly can you acquire what the military says it needs. Poland, a member of the European Union since 2004, decided it wasn't going to put all of its eggs in the EU basket. Shortly after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government in Warsaw embarked on a swift rearmament plan. Poland is NATO's top military spender — aiming to direct 4.7 per cent of its gross domestic product toward defence. It has tapped into production lines in both the United States and South Korea. Polish Defence Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz told Politico last winter that his government's strategy was to continue to buy from the U.S. in order to maintain economic relations. It's kind of an insurance policy, he said. The decision was made even though politically, and socially, many in Poland believe the U.S. is an unreliable ally and might not be there in a crisis with Russia. It is perhaps a lesson for Canada as the Liberal government crosses the treacherous political tightrope of still maintaining a defence relationship with the U.S. and explaining its decisions to a public still angry about the trade war and Trump's 51st state desires (new window) . The first test will come later this summer when a report by the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Department of National Defence about continuing with the F-35 purchase is presented. Carney and his team will have to decide whether to pivot away from the plan (accept only a limited number of the warplanes and fill out the rest of the order elsewhere) — or stick with what may be a politically indefensible position of carrying on. The prime minister said at the NATO summit that he had held discussions with European partners for the purchase of fighter jets and submarines. Speed vs. shift Carney has called for a shift away from Canada's economic and military reliance on the U.S. But how much of that is truly possible, if the stated goal is to rearm quickly and if Europe's defence industrial base is still in its own rebuilding phase? If the Liberal government does intend to move swiftly, there are existing mechanisms such as the National Security Exception (NSE), which allows the government to bypass certain trade agreement obligations when the equipment is deemed essential for national security. There's also the mechanism of the Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR), which can be used to acquire essential equipment on an accelerated timeline to meet a specific and immediate operational need of the Canadian Armed Forces. It can also use an Advance Contract Award Notice (ACAN), which indicates the Defence Department's intention to award a contract to a specific supplier and allows other potential suppliers to demonstrate what they can provide. At the end of the NATO summit, Carney was asked if he intends to use any of those tools at his disposal. It doesn't sound like it. The great question. The first thing we look to do is change the machinery of defence procurement, if I can put it that way, he said referring to the new defence procurement agency being set up by his government. Once the agency is built, Carney said they'll look to make adjustments to our ability to buy Canadian and our ability to buy more rapidly as appropriate. Murray Brewster (new window) · CBC News
CBC
8 hours ago
- CBC
Is Canada beating ploughshares into swords with its NATO 5% pledge? Not likely
By anyone's measure, $150 billion a year is an eye-watering amount of money to spend on anything — let alone defence. While it pales in comparison to the inflation-adjusted appropriations of the Second World War, it is potentially, for this generation, the very definition of beating ploughshares into swords. Or is it? Following all of the political sound and fury and sticker shock of last week's NATO summit in The Hague, the question of what Prime Minister Mark Carney's government wants to accomplish with all of that money — on an annual basis — is coming into even sharper focus. On the surface, the Liberals have pledged to quickly and efficiently rearm the Canadian military. "We are protecting Canadians against new threats. I wish we didn't have to, but we do have to and it is our core responsibility as government," Carney said at the summit. "The people who have been making sacrifices have been the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces because they have not been paid to reflect what we are asking them to do. They haven't been operating with the right equipment in many cases. "We're making up for that." Don't get 'distracted' by 5% NATO target, former officer warns government | Power & Politics 6 days ago Duration 8:49 As Prime Minister Mark Carney commits to meet the new NATO spending target of five per cent of GDP by 2035, former vice-chief of the defence staff Guy Thibault tells Power & Politics he supports upping Canada's defence spending but warns the government should focus on improving procurement and supporting Canadian Forces personnel. But the reflex is strong within federal institutions to use military procurement as a tool of economic development. It has been thus for decades. At the same time, we keep getting told — by the prime minister nonetheless — that we are in extraordinary times and a "national emergency." Much was made, both in the run-up and in the aftermath of the NATO summit, about the signing of a security and defence industry partnership between Canada and the European Union. Politically, it has been cast since last spring's election as a vehicle — if not the vehicle — to realize rearmament. There are a few steps to go before Canada can unlock the potential of buying military equipment in bulk with its allies. But when you look at the framework of the partnership, the rearmament potential is dwarfed by the economic opportunity for Canadian defence contractors to sell into Europe under the $1.25-trillion ReArm Europe plan. The approach seems to be that Canada wants both its guns and butter. Neither, outside great wars of the last century, has ever been mutually exclusive and they don't have to be. However, the material state of the Canadian military is such that the guns — to extend the metaphor — were needed yesterday. While a partnership with the Europeans makes good economic and geopolitical sense in the long term, it doesn't appear to be a solution to the immediate rearmament crisis. "European industrial bases are simply not prepared at the moment for a protracted conflict," said Seth Jones, president of defence and security at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "If you look at European states, they still lack sufficient capabilities in combat support, in short-range air defence and long-range indirect fires, air lift." Jones also noted there are significant challenges with "munitions stockpiles, with supply chain weaknesses [and] within the broader European and U.S. industrial bases workforce." If the Canadian government is serious about rearmament beyond a tool of economic development, the issue will come down to the question of where do you find a hot production line and how quickly can you acquire what the military says it needs. Poland, a member of the European Union since 2004, decided it wasn't going to put all of its eggs in the EU basket. Shortly after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government in Warsaw embarked on a swift rearmament plan. Poland is NATO's top military spender — aiming to direct 4.7 per cent of its gross domestic product toward defence. It has tapped into production lines in both the United States and South Korea. Polish Defence Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz told Politico last winter that his government's strategy was to continue to buy from the U.S. in order to maintain economic relations. "It's kind of an insurance policy," he said. The decision was made even though politically, and socially, many in Poland believe the U.S. is an unreliable ally and might not be there in a crisis with Russia. It is perhaps a lesson for Canada as the Liberal government crosses the treacherous political tightrope of still maintaining a defence relationship with the U.S. and explaining its decisions to a public still angry about the trade war and Trump's 51st state desires. The first test will come later this summer when a report by the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Department of National Defence about continuing with the F-35 purchase is presented. Carney and his team will have to decide whether to pivot away from the plan (accept only a limited number of the warplanes and fill out the rest of the order elsewhere) — or stick with what may be a politically indefensible position of carrying on. The prime minister said at the NATO summit that he had held discussions with European partners for the purchase of fighter jets and submarines. Speed vs. shift Carney has called for a shift away from Canada's economic and military reliance on the U.S. But how much of that is truly possible, if the stated goal is to rearm quickly and if Europe's defence industrial base is still in its own rebuilding phase? If the Liberal government does intend to move swiftly, there are existing mechanisms such as the National Security Exception (NSE), which allows the government to bypass certain trade agreement obligations when the equipment is deemed essential for national security. There's also the mechanism of the Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR), which can be used to acquire essential equipment on an accelerated timeline to meet a specific and immediate operational need of the Canadian Armed Forces. It can also use an Advance Contract Award Notice (ACAN), which indicates the Defence Department's intention to award a contract to a specific supplier and allows other potential suppliers to demonstrate what they can provide. At the end of the NATO summit, Carney was asked if he intends to use any of those tools at his disposal. It doesn't sound like it. "The great question. The first thing we look to do is change the machinery of defence procurement, if I can put it that way," he said referring to the new defence procurement agency being set up by his government. Once the agency is built, Carney said they'll look to make "adjustments to our ability to buy Canadian and our ability to buy more rapidly as appropriate."
Winnipeg Free Press
20 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Movie Review: In ‘Heads of State,' a buddy comedy with statesmen
Say what you will about the Idris Elba-John Cena vehicle 'Heads of State,' but it's surely the first buddy comedy about the fraying bonds of NATO. The potential collapse of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization plays a surprisingly pivotal role in this fitfully diverting, for-background-noise-only, straight-to-streaming movie. Elba plays the embattled British Prime Minister Sam Clarke, while Cena co-stars as the recently elected U.S. President Will Derringer, a former action star. 'Heads of State,' directed by Ilya Naishuller ('Nobody'), is mostly about their relationship, a tense and adversarial one challenged further when an assassination plot leaves them stranded together in Belarus. But that 'Heads of State,' which debuts Wednesday on Prime Video, is such a mild romp makes it all the more surprising to hear a line uttered like: 'If NATO falls, there's backstop against despots and dictators.'not It's a funny time to release a comedy set around international political disconnection and imperiled Western democracy. But if you were beginning to worry that 'Heads of State' is too timely, don't. Any nods to current events here serve more as reminders of how much 'Heads of State' — like most of Hollywood's output — is unengaged with anything resembling our political reality. You could argue that that's not necessarily a bad thing. You could also argue that the greater sin of 'Heads of State' is underusing Stephen Root. (He plays an expert working for the bad guys.) But the vaguest hints of real-world intrigue only cast a pale light on the movie's mostly lackluster comic chops and uninspired action sequences. The best thing going for 'Heads of State' is that the chemistry between Elba and Cena is solid. The 'Suicide Squad' co-stars trade barbs with a genial ease. Most of the time, those revolve around their characters' divergent histories — Clarke was a commando before becoming a politician — in debates like which one of them is 'gym strong' as opposed to 'strong strong.' That's one of the few decent gags in the script by Josh Applebaum, Andre Nemec and Harrison Query. But one problem in 'Heads of State' goes beyond the high-concept set-up. The best buddy comedies — 'Midnight Run,' '48 Hrs.,' 'The Nice Guys' — are predicated on opposites thrown together. Elba and Cena have their obvious differences. (Cena's Derringer is exaggeratedly optimistic here, too.) But ultimately they're both beefy dudes in suits. Weekly A weekly look at what's happening in Winnipeg's arts and entertainment scene. As the MI6 agent Noel Bisset, Priyanka Chopra Jones gives the movie a kick. But her scenes are left to the beginning and end of the movie. In between, we're left to wonder where she went, how two political leaders would have such non-existent security and whether a few half-decent jokes are enough to forgive the movie's geopolitical delusions. 'Heads of State,' an Amazon MGM Studios release is rated PG-13 by the Motion Picture Association for sequences of strong violence/action, language and some smoking. Running time: 113 minutes. One and a half stars out of four.
