Germany faces a critical gap between its strong military spirit and the material, logistical, and personnel resources needed to sustain a modern defense. Defense officials emphasize that while soldiers are capable and highly motivated, the armed forces suffer from significant deficits in equipment and infrastructure. An estimate shared by Eva Högl, the parliamentary Ombudswoman for the Army, places the needed investment at about 50 billion euros. This figure represents a substantial portion of the extraordinary package announced by Chancellor Olaf Scholz following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a package that also includes support for Ukraine. The austerity measures implemented during Angela Merkel’s tenure left German forces outdated, and this has become a focal point as 2024 marks a shift with defense spending reaching around 2 percent of GDP for the first time in decades, aligning with NATO commitments.
Beyond hardware, the military must address a shortage of personnel. In 2011, after years of debate, Germany suspended compulsory service and moved toward a professional army with an estimated 200,000 soldiers. This figure was historically modest compared with the Bundeswehr’s strength during earlier decades. Between 1960 and 1990 the army hovered around 480,000 soldiers, while East Germany maintained a separate force of about 260,000. The goal of a compact, professional force has not been achieved. By 2023 the number had declined to 181,000, signaling a persistent recruitment challenge as Germany increasingly commits to international missions rather than a large domestic defense posture.
Nordic models as a blueprint
Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, a Social Democrat, faces the task of modernizing not only technology, weaponry, and facilities but also addressing the gap in military vocations. His recent trip to the Baltic and Nordic states reinforced his interest in the Swedish model. Sweden reactivated conscription in 2017 after years without universal service and now selects annually about 30,000 recruits, with roughly 10,000 progressing to the professional army. Denmark is moving toward a longer service period, increasing it from four to eleven months and extending the obligation to both genders. Pistorius argues that Germany should consider expanding its contingent to around 203,000 soldiers by 2030 and potentially adopting a system similar to Sweden. However, Scholz has shown hesitation, likely to avoid inflaming a coalition already divided on the issue. Environmental allies within the coalition are particularly wary of restoring conscription, and this political dynamic remains unusual in Germany’s current governance.
Scholz’s stance contrasts with the minister’s position, highlighting a broader debate about how Germany should balance modernization with social and political realities. The discussion encompasses not only manpower but also the adaptation of the force to rapid geopolitical shifts and the demands of collective European defense. The possibility of reintroducing conscription is tied to questions of national identity, civil defense, and the ability to sustain a capable, ready army in a multipolar world.
Air defense and civil protection
The renewed interest in conscription is tied to broader concerns about potential air threats and the need for robust civil defense. A growing portion of the German population supports reactivating the draft as part of a broader strategy to deter aggression and strengthen national resilience. A Stern magazine survey reported that more than half of Germans favor reactivating conscription, reflecting anxiety about perceived security gaps as regional tensions rise.
The conversation also turns to the availability of shelter and protective infrastructure. The lack of a comprehensive bunker system to shield the population from a potential air attack has drawn comparisons with Nordic peers such as Finland and Sweden. Finland, a country with about 5.5 million residents, operates a well-developed network of underground shelters and tunnels capable of housing large numbers of citizens during emergencies. Helsinki hosts a significant number of bunkers, with subterranean spaces designed to safeguard hundreds of thousands of people. By comparison, Germany has around 600 shelters that could protect a portion of the population, though the capacity and resilience of these facilities fall well short of the Nordic example. Civil defense and protective infrastructure are central to the broader debate about national readiness in an era of heightened security risks.
The ongoing discussion encompasses how a modern defense posture can integrate advanced technology, personnel policy, and civil protection. As Europe reassesses threat perceptions and collective security guarantees, Germany’s choices about its military structure, recruitment, and protective frameworks will influence its role within NATO and the broader European defense landscape. The aim is to build a credible, adaptable force that can meet both alliance commitments and the evolving security needs of its citizens, while navigating domestic political considerations and resource constraints.