Conscription is robbing Finland’s hockey talent, to the delight of the army bureaucracy

On the ice, Mikko Rantanen has faced broken bones, slashing sticks, and playoff brawls. Off the ice, his toughest opponent turned out to be his own government. Finland’s conscription system has ensnared the NHL star in a legal and financial nightmare that reveals how little the country values its brightest athletes.

Politicians love to bask in the reflected glory of sporting triumphs. Few moments capture this better than the recent scene with Donald Trump, who, after handing Chelsea the Champions League trophy, lingered on stage unfazed, despite the frantic efforts of FIFA’s president to usher him away. However, the desire to steal the limelight is universal, and in Northern Europe, it is hockey players who are often forced to humanise the sordid politicians. 

In 2011, after Finland’s ice hockey team won gold in Bratislava, a massive crowd flooded Helsinki’s Market Square to welcome the national heroes. The then-President Tarja Halonen couldn’t miss the chance to polish her image. Draped in a blue-and-white scarf, she was quick to congratulate the players personally. Similarly, her successor took every chance he could to present himself as a hockey aficionado, appearing as a patron for the 2023 World Championship. Even the current President, Alexander Stubb, just couldn’t resist the urge for some political marketing, inviting Finnish Florida Panthers players for dinner and a photo-op. 

Amid all those PR moves, one could easily forget that it is the state that is the gravest danger to the careers of Finnish hockey players. Governmental intrusion into their lives regularly hits them with season interruptions as well as exorbitant fees, and at times manages to end or halt careers.

From Puck to Penal Code

Hockey might very well be the most difficult sport to play. It necessitates a virtuosic mixture of precision, balance and powerful force. It requires the sly swordsmanship of the stick, the relentless pursuit between defence and attack and the resilience to glide through the storm of ice shards. To play ice hockey is to endure a whole plethora of violence: collisions, stick strikes, puck wounds, and mid-game brawls.

A hockey career requires years of relentless dedication and painful sacrifices to reach the very top. Many Finnish players push themselves to that limit. They catch the eye of scouts, cross the Atlantic, and land multimillion-dollar contracts with NHL giants. Every aspect of their lives is consumed by the pursuit of excellence, by the drive to become the best of the best. After a decade of single-minded devotion, they find themselves at the heart of the fiercest playoff battles, and then the state strikes. 

This is exactly what happened to the Finnish hockey titan Mikko Rantanen. In April of last year, just as the then Colorado Avalanche player was preparing for the first-round series in the Stanley Cup Playoffs against the Winnipeg Jets, he found himself called for military service back in Finland. Desperately seeking to avoid having his career destroyed by a 6-month absence, he was instructed to seek a formal deferment request to postpone the start of his military service. 

Yet it was too late. Unable to process the paperwork on time from across the ocean and missing the deadline by four hours, he found himself in the midst of criminal prosecution for unauthorised absence. A year later, the court decided to fine him close to $100,000 for what was overblown by the state to be a 15-day absence from the army, even though he missed the deadline by mere 4 hours. 

The seemingly draconian punishment is largely the result of Finland’s highly progressive fine system, where penalties are proportional to income. From speeding tickets to draft evasion, wealthy Finns pay vastly higher sums than those with lower earnings. Since Rantanen earned about $10 million last year, his fine was correspondingly higher.

Rantanen’s case is far from unique; it reflects a broader struggle many Finnish hockey players face under the often absurd demands of the country’s conscription system. Young players can lose up to an entire year of their careers, as military service lasts anywhere from six to twelve months, precisely when following a strict training regimen is most critical. The obligation hangs over them constantly, enforced by the threat of heavy fines or even imprisonment. 

Prosecuting hockey players serves as a show trial. It is supposed to intimidate all youth into submission, sending the message that no one can escape the draft. In practice, hockey players face much stricter conscription enforcement than the average Finn. For young boys in Finland, it is somewhat commonplace to seek exemptions from the draft or at least try to shorten the army service on the grounds of medical or mental issues. I personally know a few Finnish men who were excused from military service on the grounds of dubious or entirely made-up illnesses. Hockey players don’t have that luxury. In their case, seeking any such exemption could be a career-ending media storm.

The young sportsmen are also hounded by the morality police at home. Rantanen’s four-hour delay has dragged him through months of national scandal, now picked up by the American press, where headlines smear him as a potential draft dodger. Under all this pressure, he has only commented on the matter with extreme caution, never daring to question the sanctity of his “civic duty” for fear of a permanent stain on his reputation and losing sponsors. The nationalist witch hunt against hockey’s front line is always arm’s length away from grabbing pitchforks.

The financial toll is no less absurd. The case is not unlike that of BTS in South Korea, where the draft halted a global cash cow for more than eighteen months. Finland too bleeds its brightest: uniquely skilled athletes are pulled away from the pinnacle of their craft, forced into menial service designed for the lowest common denominator. The cost in money and in squandered talent is staggering. One could also argue that Finland’s harsh enforcement of conscription creates significant risks for NHL clubs, reducing their willingness to sign players who could, at any moment, find themselves in the crosshairs of zealous prosecutors and forced to trade the rink for boot camp.

In that sense, the hockey players’ case presents conscription as the most destructive form of taxation. It is a tax in kind, imposed on men by compelling them to perform unpaid labor for the state, regardless of their abilities. Rather than paying honest salary for skilled and well-suited volunteers for whom soldiering would be the best career, and allowing the most talented men to thrive in their chosen fields, mandatory service hauls everyone into uniform at slave wages. Conscription squanders human capital, whether it be a neurosurgeon, a quantum physicist, or an NHL hockey player. This is the strongest argument for a volunteer army: it draws in those best suited to soldiering, while leaving men free to pursue the careers in which their talents matter most.

Army service is not merely a contractual inconvenience. Military service has quite the potential to damage the physical health of conscripts. The prison-like environment of military barracks encourages all sorts of vices, from smoking, vaping, and drinking to nicotine pouches and binge eating. Around 2% of Finnish conscripts suffer serious cases of frostbite during service. The most shocking still is the observation that the most fit of the recruits are actually likely to end military service less healthy than they started. In a 2020 study, it was shown that “Conscripts who were initially in the highest fitness quartiles showed a decline in performance in all assessed fitness variables”.

The career damage of conscription was, for many years, tacitly acknowledged by the state itself. Until 2015, male athletes had the possibility of earning a place in a sports school, which shortened conscription service to 66 days so as not to disturb the training. State officials seemed to understand the short window of peak performance for elite athletes and the need to minimise career disruption. Yet this concession overlooked all other professions, where career setbacks caused by conscription were treated as irrelevant.

Today, hockey players are in the exact same spot as all other men. They are forced against their will to numbly pace around military barracks, crawl through training grounds and polish their boots to the liking of drill sergeants for months without end. To hell with their careers, ambition and private lives. If the process happens to cripple a Stanley Cup hopeful or two, so much the better, what is one man’s career against the sacred right of the government to keep him crawling in the mud? 

Support freedom and independent journalism by donating today.