Abolishing the Deferment: Why Now?

This time the protests began as a response to the controversial bill, adopted by parliament in the first reading in late October, which effectively removes the practice of deferment from military draft for university students. Instead, the new bill provides an option for students to sign a contract with the Ministry of Defense, which would allow them to receive deferment for completing their studies, but after that they would have to serve three years instead of two. Thus, it abolishes the practice, when those students who went on to post-graduate level studies and proceeded to work in universities or research institutions were relieved of military service altogether. It also means that most young males will have to choose between serving two years at the age of 18 or serving three years at a later age, in case they opt for the contract with the Defense Ministry (it is not yet clear how the system of contracts will work in practice).

Defense Minister Vigen Sargsyan and the ruling Republican Party argue that the previous practice of deferment for university students was discriminatory, created social injustice and opened opportunities for corruption. What is probably more important, the military lost potential recruits as a result of the determent: the Ministry of Defense claimed that the majority of students who received deferment never proceeded to serve in the army, even after completion of their studies.

There is another important argument in favor of the bill: In the last ten years Armenia has experienced significant loss of population, mostly due to emigration from the country, and it means that in the future the Armenian military may face lack of recruits. However, the ruling party avoids stressing this factor, since this would also mean accepting responsibility for emigration and the socio-economic difficulties that caused it.

Government critics point to the hypocrisy of some ruling party members, who are today supporting the bill, but who have avoided military service by using the determent option in the past. Besides, the bill’s critics add, it will not solve the issue of corruption: those who have used corruption to avoid military service in the past will continue doing it, using other paths. As opposition lawmaker Nikol Pashinyan has argued, the majority of those who do not serve in the army are exempted due to medical reasons: hence the biggest corruption risks are in this field rather than in the universities. In addition, even Republican Party MPs agree with concerns that abolishment of the deferment could push more families to emigrate, in order to shield their young sons from the perspective of serving in the military at the age of 18.

The elephant in the room in these discussions is something that all Armenians know, but few politicians address openly. The members of the ruling elite, composed of government officials and “oligarchs” are essentially a privileged caste, de facto exempt from the obligation of military service. Obviously, this law is an unwritten rule, but its informal nature does not make it less powerful. Young members of the elite have various ways of either avoiding military service altogether, or serving in privileged conditions (e.g. in the Ministry of Defense or in Armenia’s embassies abroad). In some cases this is achieved through their parents’ connections, in other cases through bribes. The ultimate result is the same: children of the ruling elite very rarely find themselves in the trenches. In the absolute majority of cases, those who have lost their lives or have been injured in the fighting on the border come from disadvantaged groups in society.