Misconception about National Guard's Mission
Category: Thinking Allowed... War on Terror...
Posted Sunday, September 04, 2005 at 02:27 PM [GMT-6]

A letter to the editor published in today's local newspaper is an example of the kinds of misconceptions floating around in the climate of stress:

The situation on the Gulf Coast is the reason we have a National Guard. They are the National Guard, not the Army. They need to be here, at home, to help at home, not in Iraq.

We need the National Guard to secure, protect and help the victims of Katrina, here at home. Had the administration not weakend the National Guard by deploying them to Iraq, they could be protecting lives and property here at home. That's what they are for.

Well, no...not exactly. The Army National Guard has a dual mission which is expressed in terms of national and state responsibilities. Here's a description of the National Guard's mission, straight from its website:

During peacetime each state National Guard answers to the leadership in the 50 states, three territories and the District of Columbia. During national emergencies, however, the President reserves the right to mobilize the National Guard, putting them in federal duty status. While federalized, the units answer to the Combatant Commander of the theatre in which they are operating and, ultimately, to the President.

Even when not federalized, the Army National Guard has a federal obligation (or mission.) That mission is to maintain properly trained and equipped units, available for prompt mobilization for war, national emergency, or as otherwise needed.

The Army National Guard is a partner with the Active Army and the Army Reserves in fulfilling the country's military needs.

This clearly shows that (1) the President has the right to deploy the National Guard in the best interests of the country, and that right supercedes the states' rights, and (2) even when not "federalized," the National Guard's primary responsibility is to stay prepared for war or national emergency.

But, why don't we ask an active member of the National Guard how he views its mission? Here's what SSG. Will had to say on the issue via an email I received just yesterday:

I have read that some people think that Louisiana was/is in more jeopardy by not having the 256th BCT home instead of in Iraq. I am often puzzled by peoples’ perception of what the Guard is and what our mission is. We are trained and equipped to meet the enemies of our country on the field of battle. The filling of sandbags and the clean up of disasters is simply a bonus for having us around, when we are available.

And Guard personnel are seldom given the ability to stop looting as that falls within the jurisdiction of law enforcement personnel. Was Texas in more danger from hurricanes during WW II when the 36th ID was deployed? Or how about Oklahoma’s ability to cope with tornadoes while the 45th ID was deployed for both WW II and Korea? Maybe it is just me, but I don’t recall that ever being brought up as a reason to cut those wars short.

So, if you disagree with the war that's being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, that's your prerogative. And you're certainly entitled to your opinion as to where America's troops should be deployed. But please don't try to substitute those opinions for facts. And the fact of the matter is that the National Guard is currently being deployed precisely in the ways that correspond to its official mission.

Technorati tag:

Permalink
Comments

You're absolutely correct about the dual mission of the National Guard, Eric.

I believe the letter writer fell into a common misconception about the National Guard's role, a misconception I had, and one I've personally seen Guard recruiters encourage.

Up until very recently, the general perception of the National Guard was as a strictly home reserve. That perception was constantly underscored in the TV ads and the recruiting materials seeded through the high schools.

The Guard's dual role may have been buried in the their official mission statement, but it wasn't something emphasized, especially to prospective recruits. It certainly wasn't pointed out as often as "We'll help pay for college", that's for sure.

In fact, if it wasn't for one accidental slip from General Norman Schwarzkopf, I'd probably be down there myself.

A long while back, college was looming and I wasn't sure how I was going to pay for it. Like most high schoolers, I'd seen the Guard recruiters waving college aid under my nose and I was seriously considering it.

I understood that nobody gets a free lunch and that for the next umpteen years, long after college was over, I'd be spending a lot of my time fulfilling my service.

Then Saddam invaded Kuwait, and America went in to shoo him out. Initially, there were all sorts of dire predictions on how tough the Iraqi military was going to be and those turned out to be exaggerated.

General Schwarzkopf was giving a press conference about how smoothly the counter offensive was going and then he said something to the effect that, "During planning, there was some concern that if resistance proved stronger we'd have to call up the National Guard to supplement our forces."

Huh? When did the National Guard bail out foreign countries? None of the recruiters or their brochures ever talked about that. They always stressed the guard was for disaster relief, domestic peace-keeping, and home defense during wartime.

So, first chance I got, I buttonholed the Guard recruiter about it. I'll never forget how much he downplayed the possibility of the National Guard ever serving overseas. The way he sold it, short of WW III, the Guard stayed at home. The Guard defended America. Period. I almost bought it. I know a bunch of my friends did.

The National Guard has apparently dropped their One weekend a month, two weeks a year slogan, along with what it implied.

I suggest the following replacement: "Read the fine print".

Posted by: Mr. Freen at September 4, 2005 04:28 PM

I guess that for years, the reality of the Guard did correspond with that rather idyllic description. Every prospective employer paints as rosy a picture as possible of its environment, especially when it really needs new "employees." Take it from me; I did corporate recruiting on college campuses for years!

Posted by: Eric at September 4, 2005 06:41 PM
Post a comment [Take your time...we're in no hurry.]
Note: You must provide either a website URL or an email address...but there's no rule that says you have to tell the truth. If you don't want your email address published on this site, just input a website URL, or make up an email address.









Remember personal info?