ABSTRACT
Military conscription, being called upon to defend the state, is a key moment in defining personal as well as political identity. In certain contexts participation in military service becomes a minimal requirement for belonging to the nation. The act of objecting to compulsory military service challenges some of the most fundamental tenets of political and social organization. It disputes a society's conception of national interest and good citizenship. Furthermore, men who object to military service challenge what it means to be a 'real man' in society and will be open to charges that they are not 'true men', that they have not only defied the conventions of accepted political agency but that their personal identity is 'deviant'. As Helman (1999a) notes in her study of conscientious objection in Israel:
Conscientious objection involves an alternative discourse of citizenship to the hegemonic one constructed by the state. There are many definitions of citizenship but as Lister (1997) notes: 'At its lowest common denominator, we are talking about membership of a community ... and about the relationship between
individuals and the state and between individual citizens within that community' (p.3). Citizenship defines who is included and excluded from the political community and who is a legitimate and illegitimate political actor. 'Struggles over citizenship are thus struggles over the very meaning of politics and membership in a community' (Werbner, 1999, p.221). Werbner (1999) also contends that it is those who are marginalized or excluded who are most likely to challenge hegemonic definitions of citizenship. The link between citizenship and modes of personal identity, such as gender, are forged because citizenship and gender are both 'group markers', they both assign roles to individuals and also define who is included and excluded from the group (Isin and Wood, 1999, p.20). Concepts of citizenship and gender are also hierarchical, defining who holds greater and lesser power in society.
