Selective Service war gaming a 'special skills' draft

Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request show that the Selective Service recently gamed out what a military draft would look like in a future war. It would not resemble the one the nation lived through 55 years ago for the Vietnam War or the contingency plans in current standby Selective Service regulations. Instead, those with “special skills” would be conscripted first.

This is the opposite of what the Selective Service says in its promotional materials, that “if a draft is authorized, individuals are selected through a random lottery” from among all young men regardless of their occupation or current skills.

According to the January 2026 military mobilization exercise, the first wave of draftees could include “computer network technicians, electronics technicians, aerospace engineers, divers, welders, gas turbine engine mechanics, electricians, heavy equipment operators, longshoremen, steel workers / pipefitters, radar / communications technicians, fiber optic technicians, mariners, aviation structural mechanics, cyber security specialists, robotics operators and technicians, air traffic controllers, logistics specialists, [and] linguists.”

A retired Army officer who spoke with RS suggested these kinds of skills indicate “the skill set required to expand (the) Navy, both manning ships and shore support, plus airfield operations.”

Officially, the Selective Service claims that a draft would be activated only in the event of a “national emergency.” This euphemistic language suggests a natural disaster or defense against invasion of the United States — what the chair of the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service (NCMNPS) posed as the “Red Dawn scenario”.

But the January exercise followed a much different course — an escalation to war, presumably with China over Taiwan, leading to full mobilization and then the draft.

In this scenario Washington intervenes militarily after Country A (China) blockades Country B (Taiwan) and the U.S. tries to break the blockade. The war escalates to “U.S. air attacks” on “Country A homeland.” A national emergency is declared and a draft is activated after full mobilization and retaliatory “kinetic strikes” by Country A on U.S. bases in Alaska and Hawaii. The first wave draft is declared shortly after. This scenario is very similar to the one envisioned recently in RS by Doug Bandow for how a U.S. attempt to break a Chinese blockade of Taiwan might escalate.

A provision in the NDAA for FY2022 required the Department of Defense conduct an exercise that would “include the processes of the Selective Service System in preparation for induction of personnel into the armed forces” by the end of FY2023. That exercise still hasn’t been conducted, but the SSS engaged in the above exercise in preparation for it. Multiple scenarios were considered in the SSS exercise, but only one was released in response to my FOIA request.

The lottery has long been considered central to the fairness of a draft. Many Americans would likely draw a line between a draft to mobilize against an unprovoked invasion of the United States and one to backfill military ranks in war started with China on behalf of another country 8,000 miles away.

All of this comes as the SSS is preparing to replace the failed system of self-registration with an automated system (also likely to fail) under which the SSS will try to identify and locate potential draftees by using existing databases from other Federal agencies.

Proposed regulations for “automatic” draft registration have been held up in review by the White House for more than three months, running down the clock for the SSS to complete the notice-and-comment administrative proceedings required before the change in the registration law takes effect on December 18, 2026.

I suspect the White House has realized that visible moves toward an unpopular draft in the middle of an unpopular war with Iran will fan the flames of opposition to its war policies. Meanwhile, the SSS has maintained radio silence since the “automatic” registration law was enacted, not issuing any statements or responding to any inquiries from journalists for more than six months.

Meanwhile, the idea for a “special skills” draft has been a controversial one ever since it was conceived of by the SSS in the early 1990s.

Aside from the SSS mandate to maintain readiness for the general draft, U.S. law mandates a parallel plan for a draft of “persons qualified for practice or employment in a health care occupation.” Proposed regulations for the Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS), to include men and women up to their 45th birthday in 57 occupational categories from dietitians and physical therapists to dental assistants and medical equipment repair specialists, were published in 1989. The SSS has maintained contingency plans ever since for activation of the HCPDS.

Congress has never seriously debated a special-skills draft other than for health care workers. But despite the lack of any Congressional authorization for planning and preparation for a broader special-skills draft, it has been under discussion by the Pentagon and the SSS for many years.

In 2004, a spokesperson for the SSS said that, “Talking to the manpower folks at the Department of Defense and others, what came up was that nobody foresees a need for a large conventional draft such as we had in Vietnam. But they thought that if we have any kind of a draft, it will probably be a special skills draft.”

Negative public reaction quickly prompted the Acting Director of the SSS to walk back the significance of this planning: “Today's discussions about a broader special-skills draft are a practical outgrowth of normal contingency planning and are conceptual only.”

When the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service (NCMNPS) was established in 2016, part of its mandate from Congress was to consider “the feasibility and advisability of modifying the military selective service process in order to obtain… individuals with skills (such as medical, dental, and nursing skills, language skills, cyber skills, and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) skills) for which the Nation has a critical need, without regard to age or sex.”

The option of a special-skills draft modeled on the HCPDS was discussed but voted down by the NCMNPS. In closed-door meetings, one NCMNPS member noted that “it would be less politically feasible to set up a separate skills draft” than a draft that impacted all young men equally, and another opined that a special-skills draft would not be “fair and equitable.”

The continued prominence of a special-skills draft in SSS war games, despite the absence of a legal basis for it and its rejection by the NCMNPS, is indicative of the disconnect between what the SSS says and what it is doing, as well as between SSS fantasies and the real obstacles to a draft.

We all should be concerned about what sort of draft and what sort of war the SSS is preparing for. The time to consider whether we want a draft, and whether current contingency plans could feasibly be activated, is before the nation is committed to a war that would require a draft.

Yet there were no hearings or debate before Congress rubber-stamped the SSS proposal for “automatic” registration. Congress has never considered whether a special-skills draft would be feasible or fair. There’s been no audit of the accuracy or completeness of the SSS registration database since 1982.

Even supporters of a draft should be concerned about reliance on unworkable plans. It’s time for Congressional oversight hearings on whether the SSS is making realistic plans for national defense, or just trying to justify its continued existence in the face of proposals to abolish the agency.