Military Readiness: Armed forces overstretched, Tucson panel agrees

Tuesday, August 21^st, 2007

By Bill Hess
Herald/Review

TUCSON – The nation’s active duty and reserve ground forces – Army and Marines – are stretched thin and stressed to nearly a breaking point, a panel of experts said Monday.

A former secretary of defense, three major generals and a former Army captain with combat experience in Iraq expressed concerns about the Army and Marines.

One of the participants at a roundtable discussion on military readiness, held by Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, said no GI will allow the military to break.

The Tucson roundtable discussion about the military is the first of many Giffords is planning.

“Our goal is to begin to analyze how the United States of America can maintain the most formidable military in the world and succeed in transitioning to a new kind of warfare that will allow us to stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan, and defeat terrorist threats around the world,” the congresswoman said, setting the stage for the Monday morning event attended by more than 60 people.

What the country has to face is something that is not just within “the domain of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,” she said.

“I believe the best ideas, and a stronger nation, emerge when citizens and elected officials function in collaboration,” Giffords said.

The panel’s consensus was the problems facing the men and women in uniform have to be addressed now, to stop the continued stretching and stressing of America’s armed forces.

Another theme was that our armed forces cannot just be ready to fight terrorism but also must be strong enough to counter “a peer enemy” that may try to take advantage the United States’ attention on combating global terrorism, members of the panel stated.

Most of the discussion focused on ground forces, primarily the Army, and how the lack of manpower is hurting the ability to respond to the war on terrorism.

“More of an active duty (force) is needed to meet contingencies,” said former Defense Secretary William Perry.

Perry, who served in the Clinton administration from February 1994 to January 1997, appeared at the roundtable by way of video teleconference from Stanford University in California.

Not only must the Army active duty forces be strengthened so must the National Guard and Reserve units, he said.

The amount of deployments is wearing down the Army, Perry said.

Agreeing was Phillip Carter, a former Army captain who has written extensively on military issues.

Soldiers and Marines go in and out of Iraq at a fast pace, he said, noting at the end of every conflict the nation’s military is reduced which cannot continue.

“Over time, the U.S. military has gone up and down like a roller coaster,” he said.

Even with the deployment turmoil the war on terrorism is causing for the nation’s military, “the all volunteer force is better than we have ever fielded in America’s history or world history,” Carter said.

However, the constant operations tempo is not providing the relief needed between deployments. He said the ideal is for every 12 months in combat, 36 months home.

The one to three ratio is needed to allow soldiers time to be with their families and to train, Carter said.

Currently, a soldier deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan has 15 months of duty and possibly home for a year, he said.

“They are at their breaking point,” Carter said.

Signs some members of the military have had enough comes from statistics showing the departure from the services of middle-grade noncommissioned and commissioned officers, he said.

As an example, Carter said departures of West Point graduates is at a 30-year high with 46 percent leaving the military in 2006, “when their service obligation was done.”

And, while the public remains strong in supporting the military, there is a lack of a national call to service, he said.

“The military can’t do it alone. This is a national issue,” Carter emphasized.

Veterans are watching to see if there is any backward trend in support. They will be alert to a lack of good treatment, especially in the medical and psychological arenas, he said.

Although the military provides much of the financial support, the citizens have to recognize other government agencies must be more involved, Carter said.

“The VA really needs help,” he said, adding, “They (the returning GIs) are going to return to care; and, sure, some will fall through the cracks.”

No personal connection seen

Giffords, whose congressional district includes Fort Huachuca and Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, had said earlier, “One of the most troubling aspects of the Iraq war is that so few Americans feel a personal connection to it. There is no sacrifice or change in their daily lives despite the $12 billion of taxpayer dollars being spent every month to support the effort.”

The opposite is true for the men and women serving in the nation’s armed forces and their families, she said.

Maj. Gen. David Rataczak said America’s National Guard is suffering from the same problems as the active duty forces.

As the adjutant general of the Arizona National Guard, he has seen a large number of state residents called to deploy to help in the battle against terrorism.

The Army side of the state’s National Guard has deployed 4,600 of its 5,600 members with 1,600 currently deployed, and the Arizona Air National Guard, with 2,700 members, has also been called upon to provide a large number for deployments, he said.

Fortunately, Arizona is No. 1 nationally in recruiting members for the state’s National Guard.

But, he too said families and those serving are becoming tired of deployments.

Only national leaders will determine when to end deployments, Rataczak said.

Facing the national leaders are the questions, “Will they get out, and when will they say enough is enough?” the general remarked.

As deployment of the National Guard continues, the missions of the organizations suffer, especially in light that the men and women of the National Guard “are first responders to the first responders” in the states, Rataczak commented.

Some of the equipment of the National Guard, as is the case with the active duty, are in places like Iraq and used as units come in.

However, on the homefront, states are lacking many assets such as helicopters, communication gear and medical equipment, and that “leaves states without proper equipment,” the general said.

“Are we stressed? Yes, we are. Are we reaching a breaking point? I don’t know,” Rataczak said, adding “I doubt it (the military) will ever break.”

What concerns him is “when we stop the war,” that means funds will dry up for the military to replace equipment and to provide for GIs and their families. History has proven this, he said.

“That’s happened so many times in the past, I’m concerned it will happen again,” Rataczak commented.

Robust National Guard needed

Also a member of the panel was retired adjutant general of the Arizona National Guard, Maj. Gen. Bill Van Dyke.

Like Rataczak he called upon having a robust National Guard, but one that is not constantly tasked in a strategic role unless it is absolutely needed.

Even during the height of the Vietnam War, not many National Guard units were deployed, and those that did were mostly Air Force assets, he said.

Now national leaders see the Guard as a place to dip into for manpower without understanding the National Guard has other missions of importance on the homefront involving responses to natural disasters, Van Dyke said.

That doesn’t mean the National Guard will not heed the call when it is given, but rather the nation has to determine how large and strong the active duty forces will be, he said.

Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Donald Shepperd, the former director of the Air National Guard and now a CNN military analyst, said while national leaders say America is at war, that is not true.

“America’s not at war, ” he said.

And, while the nation’s armed forces are stressed “Americans are not stressed,” Shepperd said. “We are not threatened in Tucson, Arizona.”

Shepperd is a Tucson resident.

There is progress being made in Iraq, he said, noting, “It’s the Iraqis who are at war.”

And solutions to the conflict have to be made by the Iraqi parliament, which he said can best be described as dysfunctional.

But there is no need to have a holier than thou attitude when it comes to Iraqi elected officials, because their counterparts in the United States have problems too, Shepperd said.

“We can’t even deliver an immigration bill,” he noted.

As for the $12 billion being spent a month countering terrorism, that is slightly more than 3 percent of America’s gross national product based on a $13 trillion economy, the general said.

And, by 2025, when America’s economy is expected to be $17 trillion, the projected defense portion will be about 2.1 percent, Shepperd said.

Care in using military

Nations have to be wary on how they use their military, Shepperd said.

In the recent conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Israeli forces fought a different combat.

They did not come in as a strong military force but went there “as policemen,” he said.

Giffords, who recently returned from a trip to Israel, said that nation is a strategic ally to the United States.

Economically, socially and culturally the two countries have much in common, she said.

However, Israel does have security concerns, especially when it comes to the nuclear ambition of Iran, the congresswoman said.

The United States is offering a $30 billion security and weapons package to Israel and also $20 billion to Saudi Arabia and other nations in the Middle East she said.

Ensuring Israel is secured is in America’s best interest and has the backing of Democrats and Republicans, Giffords said.

Shepperd said the United States has to ensure it does not decide future conflicts will be solely against insurgents or terrorists.

There are peer competitors waiting, he said, naming China and Russia as two possibilities who may want to engage in a traditional large-scale war, the general said.

Perry agreed, stating, “Whatever we do, the military has to be prepared for peer competition. We don’t know who we will fight.”

Future conflicts require balance

In the audience was retired Army Chief of Staff John A. Wickham Jr., who served in the senior service uniform position from 1983 to 1987.

Wickham said there has to be a balance in developing a military that can react to any potential type of conflict.

At one time the National Guard and Reserves were seen as roundout units, to fill in the active forces when needed, but that idea wasn’t accepted by the active duty generals “including my buddy Gen. Colin Powell,” Wickham said.

What has to be envisioned is a military force, at all levels that is all inclusive, one that not only looks after soldiers but their families as well, said the retired four-star, who lives in Tucson.

Recent reports of a high suicide rate in the Army with a third committed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the highest in three decades, are depressing, Wickham said.

And finding out the number of Army officers in graduate school is about 200, down from 7,000, is also not a good statistic, he said.

Carter said the human connection is a must; otherwise, the U.S. military will suffer.

For critics who say America has failed because it has yet to stand up an Iraqi Army, Shepperd said, “It’s hard to create an Army in the midst of war.”

But he said what the United States has to recognize is when America’s Army went into Iraq it was an army of liberation, but it doesn’t take long for the people of that nation to see it “as an army of occupation.”

When asked by a member of the audience if the draft should be returned, the panel and the congresswoman said no.

Giffords said she and other members of Congress are waiting for next month’s report from Gen. David Petraeus on his surge program in Iraq.

“That’s when we’ll get the nuts and bolts of realism,” she said.

Click here to read the article in the Sierra Vista Herald