A conscientious objector is an individual whose personal beliefs are incompatible with military service, or sometimes with any role in the armed forces. This constitutes a conflict in the case of conscription.

The reasons for refusing to serve are varied. Many conscientious objectors are so for religious reasons -- notably, the Quakers are pacifist by doctrine and Jehovah's Witnesses, who, while not strictly speaking pacifists, refuse to participate in the armed services on the grounds that they believe Christians should be neutral in worldly conflicts. Other objections can stem from a deep sense of responsibility toward humanity as a whole, or from simple denial that any government should have that kind of moral authority.

The legal status of conscientious objectors has varied over the years and from nation to nation. Many conscientious objectors have been imprisoned for refusing to participate in wars. In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled in 1970 that it is not necessary for a conscientious objector to have a religious basis for their beliefs.

Because of their conscientious objection to participation in military service, whether armed or unarmed, Jehovah's Witnesses have often faced imprisonment or other penalties. In Greece, for example, before the introduction of alternative civilian service in 1997, hundreds of Witnesses were imprisoned, some for three years or even more for their refusal. More recently, in Armenia, young Jehovah's Witnesses have been imprisoned (and remain in prison) because of their conscientious objection to military service. [1] (http://www.hrwf.net/html/armenia_2003.html#ConscientiousObjectionTo)

Some conscientious objectors are unwilling to serve the military in any capacity, while others are willing to serve in non-combatant roles; in World War I, many conscientious objectors drove ambulances, often under fire. In World War II, some conscientious objectors volunteered for hazardous scientific experiments.

Conscientious objection in Britain

Britain recognized the right not to fight in the 17th century following problems with attempting to force Quakers into military service. The Militia Ballot Act allowed Quakers to be excluded from military service. A more general right to refuse was not introduced until during WW I, with the introduction of universal male conscription by the Military Service Act of May 1916.

The Act allowed for objectors to serve their country in non-combatant roles (alternate service) if they could convince a tribunal of the quality of their objection. Around 16,000 men were recorded as conscientious objectors. 7,000 were granted non-combatant duties, but 3,000 were sent to special labour camps. Around 1,000 men refused any form of service; they were forced into the army and forty-one of them were sentenced to death and only reprieved by government intervention.

In World War II following the National Service (Armed Forces) Act of 1939 there were around 61,000 conscientious objectors in Britain. As in World War I individuals had to face a tribunal, the tribunal could grant full exemption, conditional exemption on alternate service, exemption from combatant duties, or dismiss the objection. An individual could appeal to special appeal tribunals which were headed by a judge.

Of the 61,000 only 3,000 were given complete exemption and 18,000 were dismissed as false claimants. Of those that undertook military service almost 7,000 joined the Non-Combatant Corps, set up in mid-1940; its companies worked in the medical services or any military project not requiring the handling of "material of an aggressive nature". Around 450 NCC members worked in bomb disposal. About 5,500 objectors were imprisoned, charged with offences relating to their unrecognized objection. A further 1,000 were court-martialled and sent to military prisons.

Britain retained conscription as National Service until 1960. The use of only volunteer soldiers was hoped to remove the need to consider conscientious objectors. The concept was returned into active law in 1998 when Britain accepted the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Conscientious objection in Spain

The Spanish Constitution of 1978 acknowledged conscientious objectors. The Spanish parliament established a longer service (Prestación Social Sustitoria) as an alternative to the Army. In spite of this, a strong movement appeared that refused both services. The Red Cross was the only important organization employing objectors. Because of this, the waiting lists for the PSS were long, especially in areas like Navarre, where pacifism, Basque nationalism and a low unemployment rate discouraged young males from the army. Tens of insumisos (non-submittants) publicly refused the PSS or deserted the Army. Several civilians denounced themselves as encouraging non-submission. The government feared popular reaction, reduced the service time and substituted jail punishments by administrative ones like inadmittability to public service.

Fronting the decreasing birth rate and the popular opposition to the army, the Spanish government tried to modernize the model carried from the Franco era, professionalizing it. The new army tried to provide an education for civilian life and participated in peace operations in Bosnia.

In spite of this, the number of professional recruits is not covering the expectations of the Ministry of Defence, and there are plans to recruit foreigners from Spanish America.

Conscientious objection in East Germany

Main article: Conscientious objection in East Germany

The situation today

Conscientious objection exists since the incorporation of forced military service but was not officially recognized until the twentieth century, when it was gradually recognized as a fundamental human right as a part of the freedom of conscience.

Despite the fact that international institutions like the United Nations (UN) or the Council of Europe (CoE) regard and promote conscientious objection as a human right, as of 2004, it still does not have a legal basis in most countries. Among the roughly one-hundred countries that have conscription, only thirty countries have some legal provisions, 25 of them in Europe. In Europe, most countries with conscription more or less fulfill international guidelines on conscientious objection legislation (except for Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Finland and Russia) today. In many countries outside Europe, especially in armed conflict areas (Israel/Palestine, DR Congo), conscientious objection is punished severely.

While conscientious objectors - or short CO's - used to be seen as deserters, traitors, cowards, slackers or simply un-patriotic, their image has changed drastically in the Western world in past decades. Especially in Europe, where objectors usually serve an alternative civilian service are regarded as making an equally important contribution to society as conscripts. Parallel to that, the number of objectors has risen significantly, too: E.g. in Germany from less than one percent of all eligible men to more than fifty-percent in 2003.

See also

• Arndt Pekurinen
• Center on Conscience and War (http://www.nisbco.org)
• Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (http://www.objector.org)
• GI Rights Hotline (http://www.girights.objector.org)
• The European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (http://www.ebco-beoc.org)
• War Resister's International (http://www.wri-irg.org)
• Peace Pledge Union (http://www.ppu.org.uk/cos)