British Trade Unions and the End of Conscription: The Tripartite Committee of 1950-56

Abstract

Peacetime conscription, the nuclear deterrent, American bases in Britain and British troops in Germany these were among the most important practical measures in the Attlee government's strategy for resisting the threat of Soviet domination over Europe. Building the political support necessary to carry through this policy, however, was far from being an automatic process, particularly within the Labour movement. If the trade unions, acting as Bevin's 'praetorian guard' had not thrown their weight behind the government's policy, Britain's response to the Cold War might have been very different.' Nevertheless, within ten years several of these same unions had reversed their position on the nuclear deterrent and endorsed unilateralism, temporarily changing official party policy and provoking a fight between the party leadership and the left.2 There have been several interpretations of this reversal. Some observers have seen it as the outcome of unpredictable changes in union leadership which, given the authoritarian nature of union decision-making, permitted radical shifts in policy without corresponding changes in rank and file opinion.3 To others the reversal resulted from the generational passing of a group of reactionary and unrepresentative union leaders and the arrival in power of men more in tune with rank and file opinion.4 Yet another group of writers has argued that defence policies became a pawn in a larger struggle over domestic policy, especially nationalization of industry.5 It is the aim of this article to throw light on the unions' action by focusing on their earlier reversal of policy regarding the issue of peacetime conscription. Although the defence strategy that incorporated American bases, nuclear weapons and conscription were components of an integrated response to the perceived Soviet challenge, examination of the unions' attitude toward con-