Germany Considers Draft Lottery to Fill Army Ranks

Germany faces backlash over its proposal to use a lottery system in military conscription due to fairness and constitutional concerns.

Germany is moving to bolster its armed forces with a new model of military service – but a proposal to select draftees by lottery if volunteers fall short has ignited intense legal and political debate. The governing coalition is split over how far to rely on voluntary enlistment versus compulsory service, and whether a random draw can fairly decide who must serve. Meanwhile, legal experts question the constitutionality of a “draft by chance,” and President Frank-Walter Steinmeier and youth representatives have added their own voices to the controversy. With the clock ticking to implement a new law by January 2026, Germany faces a fundamental dilemma: how to expand its military rapidly in response to security threats, without violating principles of fairness and public trust.

Government Plan Aims to Attract Volunteers First

Facing a significantly changed security landscape in Europe due to Russia’s war in Ukraine, Germany’s government – a coalition of the conservative CDU/CSU and center-left SPD – has agreed that the Bundeswehr (Germany’s armed forces) must grow substantially. The target is to increase the active-duty military from about 183,000 soldiers today to 260,000 in the coming years, and to expand the reserve forces accordingly. To achieve this, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD) drafted a new Military Service Act focusing primarily on volunteer recruitment, which the Cabinet approved in August.

Under the plan, universal registration and screening of young people would be reintroduced after over a decade without conscription. Starting in 2026, all young men turning 18 would receive a government letter with a QR code linking to an online questionnaire. They would be required to provide personal details – such as education level, height, weight, any disabilities – and indicate their willingness to serve in the military. (Notably, young women would not have to fill out the form, as the current law envisions only men for compulsory military duty.) This nationwide “muster” (physical assessment) process aims to create a clearer picture of each year’s potential recruits and to prompt young citizens to seriously consider military service. Simply by engaging all eligible youths with the topic, officials hope more will opt to enlist.

To make military service more attractive, the government also plans incentives for volunteers. These include better pay for conscripts and even helping cover the cost of a driver’s license for those who serve, as part of a broader “Bundeswehr charm offensive” to appeal to young people. The idea is to emphasize voluntariness and benefits, following a model similar to Sweden’s, where only a limited number of the most qualified and motivated are ultimately brought into service. “We only want to bring in the 5,000 fittest and most motivated each year,” Minister Pistorius has said – suggesting that, even if conscription is revived in some form, it would be highly selective and not a return to mass drafting of an entire age cohort.

However, what if these measures still don’t yield enough soldiers? This is the crux of the dispute. The coalition’s agreement mentions a largely voluntary system, but also leaves open the door to mandatory service “if needed.” Pistorius has acknowledged that “if voluntariness isn’t enough, there will be no way around a compulsory call-up” – but only with an explicit Bundestag authorization in that case【15†】 (i.e. Parliament would have to vote to activate any draft). The CDU/CSU “Union” bloc, on the other hand, is pushing to build a trigger mechanism into the law now: if volunteer numbers fall short, some young people would be conscripted to fill the gap. And they have a specific method in mind for selecting those draftees: a random lottery.

Is a Lottery Draft Legal and Fair?

The proposal to let lot chance decide who must serve in the military has become highly controversial. Legally, conscription remains part of Germany’s constitution – the Basic Law (Grundgesetz) – even though the compulsory draft was suspended in 2011. In principle, all male citizens can still be obligated to military service from age 18 under Article 12a of the Basic Law. During the Cold War, this was the basis for maintaining a very large army; West Germany pledged to NATO it could mobilize half a million soldiers in wartime, necessitating regular drafts of young men. Conscription was justified not only by defense needs, but by an ideal of “Wehrgerechtigkeit,” or fairness in bearing the burden: because military service is a severe infringement on personal freedom (it may require risking one’s life to defend the country), that burden was supposed to be shared broadly and equitably among the male population.

Today, with a much smaller force needed, only a fraction of each cohort would ever be called up – raising questions about equality. In fact, the German Federal Administrative Court has warned that if the number of men actually drafted is far lower than the number legally liable for service, such a gap may violate the constitutional principle of equal burden-sharing. In a 2005 ruling, the court held that lawmakers must adjust the system if too many young men are exempted in practice, because it would be unjust for only a select few to perform mandatory service while most do not. This concept of fairness underpins much of the current debate.

The “contingent draft” model now being discussed would indeed depart from the old universal draft. Instead of calling up everyone, it envisions drafting only as many people as the military actually needs at a given time. Government officials argue this makes practical sense – today’s Bundeswehr simply lacks the barracks space and training staff to absorb an entire age group. The last conscripts left service in 2011, and infrastructure has since shrunk; a full return to year-round national service is viewed as unfeasible. Thus, the coalition agreed to emulate Sweden’s approach: rely on volunteers as much as possible and tap a limited number of conscripts only if necessary. Defense Minister Pistorius has indicated a focus on quality over quantity, saying the aim would be to draft only the most fit and motivated candidates to meet the shortfall.

But can picking only some men to serve ever be truly “fair”? This is where the lottery idea comes in – and where constitutional lawyers are divided. Proponents contend that if not everyone will be drafted, then a random lottery is the fairest way to choose who is. “It’s the only way everyone has the same risk and the same chance to be selected,” argues Thomas Röwekamp, a Bundestag defense committee member from the CDU. Similarly, CDU deputy leader Norbert Röttgen, who helped develop the lottery proposal, told parliament that with hundreds of thousands of young men in each cohort but only tens of thousands potentially needed for service, the question of fairness must be answered by the legislature. “Under a random selection, every man has an equal chance, the same risk,” Röttgen said – “in that equality lies fairness.”

From this perspective, randomness is not arbitrariness but a neutral, unbiased selector. In a legal opinion for the Union bloc, former Constitutional Court judge Udo Di Fabio concluded that a lottery draft can be compatible with the Basic Law’s equality principle. Since every eligible individual’s odds are the same, the state is not discriminating or picking on anyone arbitrarily – chance, Di Fabio argues, “means no one’s will or personal bias is influencing who gets picked,” making it an objective selection method. He further noted that in the current context of urgent defense needs, trying to fully draft entire age groups or to conduct lengthy aptitude screening for every individual would be impractical and “dysfunctional”. In other words, a limited draft by lottery could be justified to get Germany’s defense capabilities up to speed quickly, even if it’s an imperfect solution.

However, many experts are not convinced this would pass constitutional muster. The crux is that the Basic Law forbids “arbitrary” interference with fundamental rights – and being conscripted into the armed forces is certainly a serious interference. The Federal Constitutional Court has long held that the state needs substantive, justifiable criteria for deciding who must serve and who is excused. “Call-ups cannot be carried out in an arbitrary manner,” the high court warned in a 1978 decision. Critics say a pure lottery fails that test. Karin Groh, a public law expert at the Bundeswehr University Munich, acknowledges the egalitarian argument but has “doubts about its constitutionality.” “Here chance decides, and not – as required – a materially justifying reason, about a profound infringement of fundamental rights,” Groh told reporters, noting it creates a “massive unequal burden” among members of the same generation. Likewise, legal scholar Alexander Thiele (Berlin) insists the state must be able to explain why one person is made to serve and not another in such an important matter. “For a decision this significant, the government needs a comprehensible reason why one is chosen and the other is not,” he said, arguing that selection by aptitude or other rational criteria should take priority over blind luck. Thiele also fears public perceptions of fairness would suffer if military duty literally came down to a lottery draw – those spared by luck might feel less obligation, and those drafted might feel unfairly singled out by fate.

Indeed, some commentators have derisively labeled the idea a “Wehrdienst für Pechvögel”, or “military service for the unlucky”, and suggest it would violate the spirit of equal civic duty. A columnist in Süddeutsche Zeitung noted that the coalition’s plan essentially creates “a draft for those who draw the short straw,” which would be “hardly reconcilable” with constitutional equality mandates. If the lottery provision becomes law, it’s widely expected to face a challenge in the Federal Constitutional Court to settle the matter once and for all.

Political Clash Over the “Draft Lottery” Proposal

Beyond the legal debate, the lottery plan has opened a political rift within the governing coalition. When Minister Pistorius’s draft law reached the Bundestag for its first reading on October 16, it did so without a unified coalition position – an unusual situation that underscored the depth of disagreement. The CDU/CSU (Union) continues to press for a lottery-trigger mechanism to be included, while the SPD (Pistorius’s party) remains largely opposed.

Just days prior, it seemed the coalition negotiators had a tentative deal: reports emerged that Union and SPD representatives had agreed in principle to add the lottery selection for conscription if volunteer numbers proved insufficient. A press conference was even announced for October 14 to present the compromise. But in a dramatic turn, that deal fell apart at the last minute amid pushback within the SPD. Pistorius himself balked at the lottery idea, and a heated meeting of the Social Democratic parliamentary faction made clear there was no consensus. The planned press briefing was abruptly canceled, and the two sides returned to their corners, leaving the fate of the lottery provision uncertain.

Despite this turbulence, the draft law moved into parliamentary debate on schedule. Defense Minister Pistorius defended his plan to lawmakers, emphasizing that it was crucial to start rebuilding Germany’s military readiness. He strongly endorsed comprehensive medical screenings (muster) for entire age cohorts, saying: “We have to know who can defend our country in a crisis, and with what qualifications,” stressing the importance of updated data on the youth population’s fitness and skills. On the contentious issue of compulsion, Pistorius reiterated his preference for voluntarism, but indicated some openness: “I’m okay with discussing other ideas. The parliamentary process is exactly the place to do that,” he said in his Bundestag speech. However, he also made one point firm – if voluntary enlistment truly falls short, “there will be no way around a mandatory call-up” as a last resort, albeit “only under the condition of a Bundestag decision.” In essence, Pistorius signaled willingness to compromise on the how (the mechanism or criteria for a draft), but maintained that the if (the eventual need for conscription) must remain a possibility.

Union politicians likewise struck a conciliatory tone in parliament, despite their push for the lottery. “We’re open to other suggestions,” said CDU defense spokesman Röttgen, even as he staunchly defended the random-draw concept as “the fairest solution we can find right now”. Jens Spahn, the CDU/CSU parliamentary leader, noted that the intense arguments of the past days were “all part of the process”. “Yes, we debated hard – that’s how it should be,” Spahn said, adding that he is confident the coalition will reach a compromise in the coming weeks. “What matters is that in the end we make decisions. And this coalition will do that, as it has in the past months, without doubt,” he assured, suggesting the public spat would be resolved in time.

SPD lawmakers remain skeptical of the lottery. Within the Social Democrats, many argue that “service with weapons must remain voluntary” in principle. They also point out that the details of how a lottery draft would work – Who gets in the pool? Would there be exemptions or deferments? How to ensure no demographic bias? – are murky and untested. The absence of clarity on those points fueled their reluctance to sign off on the idea. For now, the official government bill in the Bundestag is Pistorius’s original version, which contains no compulsory element beyond the initial questionnaire and medical screening. Any mechanism for enforced service will have to be added via amendments if the coalition partners come to an agreement later in the legislative process.

President and Youth Reps: “Don’t Gamble with Young People”

The contentious debate has drawn in voices from outside the coalition as well. Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier – who, in Germany’s system, traditionally stays above day-to-day politics – made an unusual foray into the discussion. Steinmeier expressed doubts about the lottery proposal, urging lawmakers to reconsider that approach. “They [the coalition] have to judge for themselves whether a lottery is really a suitable procedure. Allow me to have some doubts,” Steinmeier said in a television interview. Notably, as President, Steinmeier must ultimately sign any new conscription law and has the right (and duty) to vet it for constitutionality before doing so. His public skepticism signals that he might view a lottery clause as potentially problematic under the Basic Law.

Instead of a selective draft, President Steinmeier advocated a broader concept: a universal service duty for all young people, with both men and women contributing. He has repeatedly suggested that every young adult could be required to spend a period in service – either military service or an alternative social service in the community. “We should open ourselves to the idea that we need a duty of service for men and women,” Steinmeier said, proposing a model where youth choose either to join the armed forces or to work in areas like healthcare, elder care, or disaster relief. Such a system, he argues, would instill civic responsibility across the board and avoid the fairness issues of drafting only a few. (Implementing a universal service for both genders, however, would be a monumental shift – likely requiring constitutional changes and massive administrative infrastructure, and it is not part of the current legislative plan. Steinmeier’s stance sets a long-term vision rather than a short-term solution.)

Youth representatives, meanwhile, have voiced frustration at being left out of the conversation. Quentin Gärtner, General Secretary of the national student council (Bundesschülerkonferenz), criticized the government for debating reforms that directly affect young people’s lives without sufficiently consulting those who would serve. “Perhaps the government should first sit down properly with the affected young people, instead of getting lost in internal squabbles,” Gärtner told Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland, referring to the coalition’s infighting. The prolonged uncertainty, he warned, is breeding anxiety: “The ongoing insecurity is certainly not leading to more acceptance among young people. We’re already in a mental health crisis for children and youth. One does not gamble with young people.”The phrase “Man zockt nicht um junge Menschen” – “you don’t play games of chance with young people” – has since been echoed by others cautioning against a lottery-style draft. Gärtner’s plea is for policymakers to recognize the human impact of their decisions on the next generation, many of whom feel caught in the middle of a political tug-of-war over a possible return of conscription.

Steinmeier echoed these concerns, indirectly chiding the coalition’s handling of the issue as a “communicative failure.” He noted that after the public blow-up, “the shock was big” even within the government, and expressed hope that this shock “will lead to a greater willingness to compromise” and “get this sorted out quickly.” By raising the stakes – hinting that he could scrutinize the law closely and by highlighting youths’ worries – the President and civil society voices are pressuring the coalition to find a solution that is not only legally sound but also broadly acceptable to the public.

Opposition Reactions and Next Steps

Unsurprisingly, opposition parties are seizing on the coalition’s disarray. The Greens and the Left Party (Die Linke) – both historically skeptical of militarization – have criticized the revival of conscription in any form. Green parliamentary leader Katharina Dröge slammed the situation as a “mess”, saying “Nobody knows how things will proceed now”. Left Party MP Désirée Becker accused the government of “stoking fear and uncertainty among young people”. Becker also questioned whether the Bundeswehr truly needs as many as 80,000 additional soldiers, suggesting the manpower targets might be overstated. On the other end of the spectrum, the far-right AfD – which in principle favors conscription for nation-defense – nevertheless denounced the lottery scheme as the “height of injustice”. “This is conscription at random – it doesn’t get more unfair,” an AfD lawmaker said, even as the AfD itself remains internally conflicted on pushing for a draft (their party base in ea Germany is split on the issue).

Despite these divisions, there is broad agreement on one thing: Germany’s armed forces need strengthening. The war in Ukraine has been a wake-up call for Berlin. The new military service law is justified in the draft text by a “massive worsening of the security situation in Europe” due to Russia’s aggression. As Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) put it in a recent speech, the goal is to build the “strongest conventional army in the European Union” to ensure peace through deterrence. “We want to be able to defend ourselves so that we don’t have to defend ourselves,” Merz told lawmakers, encapsulating the logic that a larger, ready force will discourage potential threats. To reach the target of 260,000 active troops and 200,000 reservists (up from the current ~183k active and ~50k ready reservists), some expansion of intake is necessary – whether via volunteers, conscripts, or both.

For now, the draft law will go through the normal legislative process. In the coming weeks, parliamentary committees will debate amendments, and experts (including constitutional lawyers and military officials) will be heard in hearings. The governing parties have set themselves an ambitious deadline: the second and third readings (final votes) are expected by the end of November, with the aim of the law taking effect on January 1, 2026. This gives negotiators only a short window to resolve the sticking points – chiefly, whether to include a selective conscription mechanism like the lottery or not. If they fail to agree, the law could still pass in a stripped-down form focusing purely on voluntary service and data collection, but that would leave the question of what to do in a shortfall scenario unanswered. Conversely, if they do insert a lottery draft clause, it may provoke legal challenges or require further clarification to ensure it meets constitutional standards.

As the Bundestag deliberations continue, there are hints of compromise floating around. One possibility mentioned is to authorize a smaller “pilot” program or limited draft that could later be reviewed by lawmakers before any large-scale implementation – effectively a way to test the waters. Another idea is to emphasize selection by suitability: for example, draft those with particular skills the Bundeswehr needs, rather than by pure chance. The coalition’s internal negotiations are reportedly considering such alternatives to a blind lottery, in hopes of finding a formula the SPD can live with and the CDU/CSU can accept.

In summary, Germany’s attempt to modernize its conscription policy has opened a Pandora’s box of ethical and legal issues. The coming weeks will determine whether the country can strike a balance between military necessity and fairness to its citizens. The outcome will not only impact defense readiness, but also send a signal to young Germans about what obligations – if any – they will owe to their nation in an era of renewed geopolitical tension.

Sources: Tagesschau stern.de lto.de Bundesverwaltungsgericht bverwg.de