Does Anyone Sense a Draft?
This story got a little bit of play a few days ago, but it didn't raise the red flags it should've. Although they've been meeting their quotas for the last couple of months, the Army, the Army Reserves, and the Army National Guard continue to be short on personnel. They're all expected to miss their goals for 2005. Recruitment within the available pool of potential recruits has become more and more ineffective, so what can they do? There's one easy answer, according to The New York Times: Expand the available pool!
The Pentagon has requested that Congress raise the maximum age of recruits to 42. Currently, volunteers without previous military experience cannot be accepted for active duty if they are older than 35 or for the Reserves or the Guard if they're older than 39. If approved, 42 will become the maximum age across the board.
In truth, the Pentagon has little choice. They have to get soldiers from somewhere, and there's only so many times the hitches of those currently serving can be extended through stop-loss. Surely many of those extensions will be up soon, and forcing soldiers to continue their service yet again will quickly result in diminishing returns. Of course, one way to expand the pool of potential recruits would be to reinstate the draft. Once the military could force draftees to enlist rather have to convince them to volunteer, the pool would be many times larger, so older recruits would be less necessary. The Pentagon might keep the age at 42 for volunteers, but a draft would surely stop somewhere in the 20s. Michael at AMERICAblog cited a USA Today report stating that the Army is already behind on its recruiting goals for 2006, and it seems unlikely that simply raising the age of eligibility would add enough to catch up. A draft can't be far away. But then again, maybe not. Now that I think of it, maybe the troop pullouts expected next year are not entirely by the military's choice.
posted by Doug @ 11:57 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
At least one problem here isn’t the public, it’s those of us who are in the Army (and other services) now. Don’t misunderstand what I’m about to say; conscript soldiers have performed as bravely and as ably as volunteers for the first two centuries of our nation’s existence. However, the shock of the change from volunteer to conscription is not something I’d be willing to stick around for. And I’m not alone in that. A draft may well solve manpower problems, but you re very likely to be left with a very large, but very inexperienced military.
Just a few of the things that would have to change if we were to try to implement a draft:
Scrap all current Transformation efforts: You may be able to proceed with the Modular Force concept, but you’ll have to halt all changes and reformulate the Tables of Organization and Equipment (TO&E). This is because…
Increase Team and Squad sizes: Conscript troops have a wide variation in levels of motivation, education and initiative. To compensate, more oversight is required. This means more NCOs per troop. One SGT who currently supervises 5 or 7 troops would have to narrow his focus to 3 or 4. When you increase the Team and the Squad, you also increase the Platoon, the Company, the Battalion and all the way up. This means…
A larger and longer logistical train is needed: More troops means a need for more “beans and bullets” and that means more trucks, more truck drivers, more and bigger convoys…This by itself is a problem given current challenges in Iraq.
Bigger platoons also means different equipment has to be obtained: The Bradley, the workhorse of our Mechanized Infantry formations, is designed so that 4 of them can carry one entire platoon. Three each carry a Squad and the fourth carries the platoon HQ. You don’t want to split squads up (hinders teamwork), so a new vehicle that will carry more troops has to be purchased. That’s just one example of that sort.
In order to save money to pay for the larger Army, pay will be cut: And why wouldn’t they? When troops no longer have the choice to serve or not, any pay can be considered “fair.” At the very least, the raises that have become so regular over the last decade, will stop. I also predict, if a draft were initiated, all current troop welfare programs would be frozen if not halted and cut back. The volunteer service has been the biggest single motivator for improving living conditions, facilities, equipment…. No one will volunteer to be mistreated.
As for stop loss; When stop loss is in effect, soldiers in units that have been placed on alert for deployment may not End Term of Service (ETS) or retire (unless for attaing maximum military age: 60) until either the unit is stood down from alert or 90 days after redeploying (returning home).
At whichever end point, all troops hat would have ETSd or retired will do so.
Nothing sinister in this. It is done soley to stabilize manpower rosters for deployment.
Also, once a troop has reached 12 months from the date he was supposed to separate from the service, he can choose to do so.
Thanks very much for this. Instituting a draft would not be a seamless transition and, as you point out, would present its own challenges. It's certainly not an easy answer, but we don't seem to have any of those in any aspect of the operations in Iraq. Although holding on to the volunteer army is preferable, how long can it continue to provide the necessary manpower?
The current program of Army Transformation involving resetting our forces to the Modular Force organization holds the key, first by doing more with less and secong by having more to do it with.
Here's the scoop: Congress has limited the size of the Army to 10 combat divisions. They have not, however, defined what a division is. In the modular Force, the Division will be largely ceremonial and less an actual organizational structure. Instead, the basic maneuver element will be the Brigade.
The Brigade in the Modular Force will be somewhat smaller than the previous (Army of Excellence) organization. The biggest change will be more organic support in the Brigade and one less combat Battalion. (2 rather than 3) Battalions, though, will be larger thaen the AoE Battalion. Better support, always on line rather than having to be requested, and more efficiently organized though fewer shooters has resulted (at least in wargames) in greater Comabt Power. Divisions have been comprised of 3 Brigades. In the Modular Force, the "Division" will have 4. In the plan we grow the Army from 35 (there are separate Brigades not assigned to Divisions) to 44 Brigades and recenly the decision was made to add 4 more (where they fit I don't know at this time).
So we grow from 10 Divisions to over 14 Division equvalents.
This process began in 2004 and is expected to run through 2008. By the end of next year the expectation is to have half the combat formations reset (including the National Guard who haven't been included in the numbers above another 28 to 30 Brigades).
It'll get easier as we go.
I left out a more important, but intangible element.
Current policy dicatates that National Guard troops may only be deployed for 24 months in a 6 year period (beginning wth the first day of deployment) unless they volunteer for duty beyond that period. I have been to Afghanistan. I was on Active Duty for that deployment for 12 months. Most of my Battalion have been deployed for 12 months to Egypt (MFO-Sinai) a couple of years ago. We are slated for a new deployment to Afghanistan, but this one will be ~15 months in duration. 80% of he Battalion, to be deployed will have to sign a waiver to allow it. To be sure some will not. It is their right. But to date, most of us have. There is nearly as much combat power in teh National guard as there is in the Active service. The dedication of those of us in the Guard are a big part of why we will be able to continue.
Will this reorganization of the Army balance out the recruitment shortfalls the Army is currently experiencing? Will recruitment targets be lowered accordingly (or have they been already)? Or will we still need to find more personnel from somewhere?
I can't give a definitve answer to that. To fully staff all the combat formations of transformation the Army has to grw in end-strength by 20,000 to 25,000 troops. Obviously there's a breakover point here somewhere.
But this only represents 4-6 Brigades out of over 70 in the plan (including the National Guard).
We will have to continue to use the National Guard, perhaps heavier than we'd like. It seems to me that we have several years before any kind of crunch.
Post a Comment
<< Home