Landpower and the reserve components

Joint Force Quarterly,  Dec, 2004  by John C.F. Tillson

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

The Army Reserve components--the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR, established in 1908) and Army National Guard (ARNG, established in 1936)--have distinguished themselves throughout the Nation's history. Both served proudly in World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War when they stood ready for instant mobilization in the worldwide war against communism, the first Gulf War in 1991, the second Gulf War in 2003, and a variety of post-Cold War assignments from Bosnia and Kosovo to the Sinai and Afghanistan.

The modern history of the Reserve components began with Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird implementing the Total Force policy in 1970. He directed the military departments to consider tire Reserve as part of the total force available to meet security needs. The Reserve components assumed an increasing role in the national security strategy during the 1970s. They were receiving modern equipment and the resources to maintain manning and training levels by the end of the decade. Throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s they continued to increase their capabilities and their support to the active component.

A Growing Demand

Questions regarding the accessibility of Reservists and their willingness to serve in the first Gulf War were resolved by successful Reserve participation. The President's willingness to mobilize the Reserve components and their enthusiastic response has quieted the skeptics. Confidence in both units and individuals is now high within DOD. The major question facing the Army and the Nation today is what impact more frequent deployment will have on citizens serving.

Although the resources devoted to the Reserve components have always fluctuated, the last thirty years have seen a focus on readiness and capability. As the active force has been reduced in the post-Cold War world, the demands on the Reserve components have increased. This will call for added resources to enable more training, better equipment, and appropriate pay and benefits.

It appears that the challenges facing ARNG and USAR will increase. They will occur both at home and abroad and cover the range of military options from the law enforcement and mitigation tasks associated with homeland security and defense, to peacekeeping and stability operations in failed states, to major combat. This piece puts these issues for the Army Reserve components into perspective, identifies current ARNG and USAR transformational initiatives, and suggests additional options for dealing with evolving challenges.

As we consider the future of ARNG and USAR, we must understand their size and importance relative to the Army active component and to the active and Reserve components of the other services. A number of insights emerge.

* The Army total force is much larger than the other services.

* The Army Reserve components are much larger than the other Reserve components.

* The Army Reserve components have more force structure than the Army active component in almost every category.

* The Army Reserve components provide a greater portion of total Army manpower and force structure than any other Reserve component.

* The Army has more than half of its combat force in the Reserve components while the other services have less than half.

Transformation Plans

Both USAR and ARNG have plans to transform their forces and management to meet new demands. These plans do not appear complete, but their outlines seem reasonably well understood. The major aspects of the USAR transformation plan are:

* Change the management paradigm from alert-mobilize-train-deploy to train-alert-deploy to enhance the ability of units to deploy rapidly. Schedule unit readiness to provide predictability to members and ensure units are ready when needed. Achieve a 10:1 capability-to-need ratio so a soldier will deploy once in S years for a maximum of 270 days.

* Reduce the number of units, including command and control headquarters, within the current manpower level to fully man (90 percent or higher) the remaining units.

* Create an individuals account (12 percent of USAR end strength) to ensure that soldiers in units are qualified in their military operational specialty and fully deployable. Soldiers undergoing individual training, for example in basic or advanced training, will be in that account and will not count against the manning levels of units. Soldiers in advanced training will not have to train and maintain membership in a troop unit simultaneously.

* Cease the practice of cross leveling soldiers between units to fully man the receiving unit. This change is made possible by the reduced number of units and the individuals account.

* Reform the individual mobilization augmentee (IMA) program to create an individual augmentee (IA) program to provide individuals across a range of specialties needed by combatant commanders.

Aspects of the ARNG transformation plan are:

* Change the management paradigm from alert-mobilize-train-deploy to train-alert-deploy in order to enhance the ability of units to deploy rapidly.