Michael Waltz, named to become the future national security adviser, spoke to ABC News about a plan to lower Ukraine’s draft age to 18. The proposal is presented as a tool to strengthen the Ukrainian front, aiming to increase the pool of available personnel rather than simply increasing weapons, ammunition, or funding. In the interview, Waltz argued that adding manpower could influence battlefield dynamics and create room for the government to pursue new diplomatic arrangements.
His argument centers on stabilizing the front line by expanding the manpower base. He said that the plan is not only about munitions or checks but about people who can hold the line long enough to seal agreements. He described manpower as a key factor in stability that could unlock political options with Kyiv and its partners. The idea, he suggested, is to ensure that forces on the front have sufficient reserves to absorb pressure and to avoid strain that could derail negotiations.
Waltz noted that the current mobilization process is not keeping up with the urgent personnel needs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. With a persistent shortage of trained troops, the ability to sustain combat operations becomes challenging. At present, conscription applies to men aged 25 to 60, and Ukraine continues to report significant staffing gaps across its forces which can hamper readiness and responsiveness on the battlefield.
Records show that in December an officer of the Ukrainian Armed Forces said Kyiv would not support lowering the conscription age, arguing that most fighters are over 40 and that drawing younger recruits could present new challenges. This underscores a broader debate within Ukraine about how to balance the need for experienced personnel with the desire to expand the size of the fighting force.
Earlier discussions in Ukraine have explored what would happen if compulsory military service age were lowered. The topic raises questions about the impact on training pipelines, education, morale, and civilian risk. As the conflict continues, officials and analysts weigh the potential consequences of changing conscription rules and how such a move could affect alliances, strategic calculations, and the trajectory of negotiations on the war’s terms.