Saturday, February 02, 2008

Service Leaders Report on Recruiting Success

By Sgt. Sara Moore, USA
American Forces Press Service

Feb. 1, 2008 - Despite a challenging recruiting environment, all four branches of the
military have met with significant recruiting success in the past year and are on target to continue that success, the services' recruiting chiefs told a Congressional committee yesterday. In fiscal 2007, the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps all exceeded their active-duty enlisted recruiting goals, and only the Air Force fell slightly short of its goal on the reserve-component side, the officers in charge of recruitment for the four services said at a hearing of the personnel subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The
Army's success came after two years of reinforcing the recruiting command with additional manpower, resources and incentives to bring up numbers that lagged in 2005, Army Maj. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, commander of U.S. Army Recruiting Command, said in prepared remarks to the committee. He noted that this success came at a time of persistent combat.

In fiscal 2007, the active-duty
Army met Defense Department goals for the percentage of recruits scoring high on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test, but fell short of the goal of 90 percent of recruits holding a high school diploma, Bostick said. Only 79 percent of active-duty recruits for 2007 had high school diplomas.

Acknowledging this shortage and an increase in the number of waivers granted for recruits with convictions, Bostick said commanders in the field are pleased with the quality of the soldiers serving in their units. He emphasized that all applications for waivers are reviewed thoroughly, and those for individuals with felony convictions are reviewed by 10 different people and must be approved at the general officer level.

"The Army is reviewing the long-term impact of the less number of high school diploma graduates (and) the increased waivers on the effectiveness of an
Army at war," Bostick said in his testimony. "But in talking to soldiers and drill sergeants and our Army leaders, there's a common theme that the quality and the skills of our initial entry training graduates remains high."

Fiscal 2007 marked the ninth consecutive year the
Navy achieved its overall active-component mission, while exceeding Defense Department recruit quality standards, Navy Rear Adm. Joseph F. Kilkenny, commander of Navy Recruiting Command, said at the hearing. The Navy's top recruiting priority in 2007 was naval special warfare and special operations, programs that require exceptionally bright and physically fit recruits, he said.

To boost recruitment for these elite communities, the
Navy hired former naval special warfare and special operations personnel to assist in selecting, testing and mentoring new recruits, Kilkenny said. This effort, coupled with $40,000 enlistment bonuses, improved recruiting in these communities and increased physical screening test pass rates for recruits at boot camp from 28 percent to 78 percent.

The Navy met with mixed success in officer recruiting in 2007, Kilkenny said. Nineteen of the 23 officer communities met their goals, but the chaplain corps, chaplain student program, naval reactor engineers and programs for students in the medical profession all missed goal. As a result, the
Navy has increased its efforts in officer recruiting and is making medical officer recruiting its number one goal for fiscal 2008, he said.

The
Air Force's success in 2007 marked its eighth consecutive year and 77th consecutive month of meeting enlisted recruiting goals, Air Force Brig. Gen. Suzanne M. Vautrinot, commander of Air Force Recruiting Service, said in prepared remarks to the committee. The quality of Air Force recruits remains above DoD standards, with 79 percent scoring above the 50th percentile on the ASVAB test and 91 percent entering without needing a waiver for moral, drug or criminal issues, she said in her testimony.

Vautrinot noted that the Air Force's critical warfighting career fields, such as pararescue and linguist, have consistently been filled, thanks largely to enlistment bonuses provided by Congress. Officer recruitment programs, with the exception of the medical corps, have met with continued success, as well, she said.

Last year, the
Air Force recruited just fewer than half of its target for fully qualified health care personnel. To address this shortfall, the Air Force is increasing its health professions scholarships and realigning recruiters to major medical education centers, Vautrinot said.

The
Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard both face significant recruiting challenges because of the impact of the Base Realignment and Closure initiatives, which will bring about personnel reductions and mission changes, Vautrinot said. However, in both the reserve and active-duty components, the Air Force relies on the examples of its current members and high-quality recruiters to send a positive message and boost recruitment, she said.

"The Air Force attracts recruits with a simple but powerful message: We're a well-trained, highly technical force, a global team defending the nation in the war on
terrorism while simultaneously executing humanitarian missions around the globe," she said.

The
Marine Corps' recruiting success in 2007 cut across the active and reserve components, including officers, Marine Brig. Gen. Richard T. Tryon, commander of Marine Corps Recruiting Command, said in his prepared remarks. The recruiting mission was increased as part of an effort to grow the overall force, he said, and the recruiting command stayed on track to build an active component with an end strength of 202,000.

In his testimony, Tryon attributed the recruiting success to a quality recruiting force that is screened, well-trained, and properly resourced. He noted that every
Marine assigned to recruiting duty is evaluated thoroughly before attending a seven-week training course, and they continue to receive training while on recruiter duty.

Marine recruiters find they must invest considerable time with parents, teachers, guidance counselors, and other "influencers" to attract men and women qualified to serve, Tryon said. Recruiters mostly rely on the
Marine Corps values and its reputation as an elite force for enticing people to serve, Tryon said.

All four leaders agreed that they are facing an extremely challenging recruiting environment today. The propensity among young people to serve is the lowest it's ever been, and key influencers, like parents and teachers, are not always supportive of military service. Also, the
military is competing with the private sector for talented young people, many of whom see a college degree and high-paying job as the path to success.

Despite these challenges, all the leaders expressed optimism about meeting recruiting goals for fiscal 2008. All the services are adding new initiatives this year to better take advantage of
technology and education programs to boost recruiting efforts, the leaders said.

Military Law Library Expands

The Federal Research Division (FRD) of the Library of Congress is pleased to announce that the FRD Web site, sponsored and funded by the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's Legal Center & School (TJAGLCS) Library, has been updated with Volumes 12 through 15 of the series: Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals, http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/NTs_war-criminals.html

In addition, the 1917, 1918, and 1921 Manuals for Courts-Martial are now available:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/CM-manuals.html

The Fall 2007 (Vol. 193) issue of
Military Law Review http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/Military_Law_Review/pdf-files/193-fall-2007.pdf and the October 2007 issue of The Army Lawyer http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/10-2007.pdf have also been added.

Our Home Page is:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/military-legal-resources-home.html

If you would like to receive additional information on these or other documents, or have suggestions to offer, please feel free to contact us.

Roberta W. Goldblatt, Project Manager rgol@loc.gov
Federal Research Division, LA-5245
Library of Congress
Washington, DC 20540-4845
Voice: (202) 707-1184
FAX: (202) 707-3920

National Defense Authorization Act Empowers National Guard

By Staff Sgt. Jim Greenhill, USA
Special to American Forces Press Service

Feb. 1, 2008 - The position of the chief of the National Guard Bureau has been elevated to a four-star billet 100 years after the bureau came into existence. The chief of the National Guard Bureau also became a principal advisor to the secretary of defense through the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a result of a Jan. 28 stroke of the president's pen that triggered the most sweeping changes for the National Guard in 100 years.

The Division of Militia Affairs, the precursor of the modern National Guard Bureau, came into existence in February 1908, according to Michael Doubler, a retired colonel who is one of the Guard's preeminent historians.

The first chief was Col. Erasmus Weaver, who served from 1908-11. The stature of the chief's office has been progressively increased during the century since.

On Jan. 28, President Bush signed the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2008, which includes provisions that:

-- A bipartisan council of governors advises the secretary of defense, the Department of
Homeland Security, and others on National Guard matters.

-- The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff determines the feasibility of increasing the number of U.S. Northern Command reserve-component members.

-- Up to 15 reserve-component general officers serve at combatant commands, an increase from 10.

-- The National Guard Bureau becomes a joint activity of the Department of Defense. Previously, it was a joint bureau of the Army and the Air Force.

-- The bureau's chief becomes a principal advisor to the secretary of defense through the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

-- The grade of the position of the chief of the National Guard Bureau increases to a four-star general.

A driving force behind many of the changes in the NDAA is the transformation of the National Guard from a Cold War strategic reserve to today's operational reserve.

The vast bulk of the major reforms of the National Guard included in the bill were derived from the National Guard Empowerment Act of 2007.

The provisions of the NDAA that affect the National Guard are among many others that affect the nation's armed forces.

The NDAA also:

-- Gives servicemembers a 3.5 percent pay raise;

-- Includes the Wounded Warrior Assistance Act to improve support for wounded troops and their families, including providing increased treatment closer to home rather than at the base from which the servicemember deployed; and

-- Lowers the eligibility age for retirement by three months for each 90 days a Guard member serves on certain types of active duty. The active duty must be served after the NDAA was enacted, and eligibility cannot be reduced below 50 years of age.

The act includes $650 million authorized for miscellaneous equipment for the
Army National Guard and $150 million for Air National Guard. Previously, National Guard and reserve equipment appropriation money has been appropriated without authorization.

It also includes end strengths of 351,300 for the
Army National Guard and 106,700 for the Air National Guard. The Army National Guard end strength increased from 350,000, while the Air Guard level is essentially unchanged. The secretary of defense can authorize the Guard to exceed end strength by up to 3 percent.

The NDAA does not authorize any additional
weapons of mass destruction civil support teams but instead refers the issue to an advisory panel to study.

(Staff Sgt. Jim Greenhill is assigned to the National Guard Bureau. The Day newspaper in New London, Conn., the National Guard Bureau's Office of Legislative Liaison, and other sources contributed to this report.)

Conditions Change, But U.S.-South Korean Alliance Remains Strong

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

Feb. 1, 2008 - The U.S.-Republic of Korea alliance has changed as conditions have changed, but it remains as strong as it has ever been, the commander of U.S. Forces Korea and Combined Forces Command said. In an interview,
Army Gen. Burwell B. Bell said the alliance has weathered some tough times, but "We Fight Together" is still the motto that U.S. and South Korean troops live by.

The U.S.-ROK
military alliance has strengthened significantly in the last decade, Bell said. "In the two years I've been there, I can measure the improvement in South Korea's military capability," he said. "I am very confident in the American military capability."

This is coupled with what he calls "an erosion" in North Korea's military capacity. The North Korean
military cannot launch a serious offensive against South Korea to defeat the alliance, destroy the South Korean democracy or eliminate the United States from South Korea -- objectives the North Koreans once aimed for, the general said.

"I believe they understand they can't do that now," Bell said. "If indeed North Korea attacked South Korea, we are there to deter and defend. We have no offensive motives. If they were (to attack), we would end it decisively and quickly, and we would end it on our terms."

The South Korean
military, which the general would command in the event of war, has grown in skill and capabilities, he said. With more than 500,000 soldiers, the South Korean military would shoulder the burden of ground combat. U.S. ground forces would stand with their South Korean allies, but the largest U.S. contributions would come via air and sea power, he added.

The U.S.
Air Force and Navy are "extraordinarily capable" in East Asia. Air assets on the peninsula would respond immediately. Aircraft from other areas in the Pacific would be available within hours. Worldwide air assets could be in combat in days, Bell said. "We are able to bring together a very capable air armada to execute a master air attack plan should North Korea chose to attack the South," he said. "And I assure you, that response would be devastating and extremely debilitating for North Korea."

On the seas, the South Korean and U.S. navies would eliminate the North Korean navy and would stop them from using their ports.

"I'm not going to tell you I don't need American ground forces, but on balance, the outcome of a future Korean War, should one transpire, the ground war would be borne on the backs of Korean ground forces, and they would do very well," Bell said. "It's an interdependent fight, leveraging American air and sea power and Korean ground power all put together in a warfighting mechanism that has been honed over 55 years."

Economic improvements in South Korea have changed the alliance, Bell said. When the alliance first came into being, South Korea was a ruined country mourning millions of dead from the
Korean War. Today, it is the 11th largest economy in the world.

"Korea is a magnificent first-world country of the highest order with an incredible infrastructure, a modern, superb quality of life, an advanced economy, medical institutions, universities -- everything that symbolizes a first-world country," Bell said.
He said South Korea has been able to grow behind its alliance with the U.S. "In an area fraught with wars and complexities for centuries, a peaceful environment for 55 years is something we all should claim as a success," Bell said. "We certainly should not take it for granted."

Bell said the NATO alliance is a perfect example of alliances changing to remain relevant. No one anticipated the North Atlantic alliance would survive the end of the Soviet Union.

"It is possible that, in the focus that we've had in other areas of the world for the last decade, that we in America might assume some things about Korea and Japan without understanding that an alliance takes management,
leadership, consensus and agreement every day between the partners and that alliance has to evolve and change," Bell said.

The evolving situation in Korea -- notably the Six-Party Talks -- has also improved the U.S. ability to talk to North Korea. The talks deal with de-nuclearizing North Korea and involve North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and the United States.
"We have ways of bringing the parties together that we didn't have before," Bell said. "The Six-Party Talks are as much about the other five parties as it is about North Korea in terms of consensus and solidarity and common purpose and taking a common message to North Korea about the way they should behave in that part of the world," the general said. "As long as we have a solid consensus and agreement on how we should approach North Korea, then I think North Korea has fewer options."

While its
military capability is eroding, North Korea remains a threat, Bell said. The country is a military dictatorship that has a 1.2 million-man army, 70 percent of which is within 90 miles of the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea. Artillery could reach the South Korean capital, and North Korean missiles could range the peninsula.

"As long as you have a million men under arms right there, with all this artillery capable of shooting at Seoul, and while I am certain that North Korea would not win a war against the alliance, they still could cause enormous destruction if they chose to do it," Bell said.

The U.S. and South Korea are aware of the threat from North Korea, and both countries are prepared. "It takes solid leadership; it takes consensus. It takes political framework, diplomatic engagement and, as is always the case, it takes a security environment, and that's the business I am in," the general said.

Bell said he will retire this summer. The next commander will continue to help manage the alliance, because Korea is a strategic area, he said. "It is right in the middle of an area of vital U.S. interests," he said.

Officials Call Guard-Reserve Report 'Fundamentally Flawed'

By Fred W. Baker III
American Forces Press Service

Feb. 1, 2008 - Core elements of a congressional commission's report aimed at overhauling the U.S.
military's reserve forces are "fundamentally flawed," Defense Department officials said today. The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves yesterday delivered its final report to Congress and Pentagon officials. The report included 95 recommendations on transitioning the reserves into a feasible and sustainable operational reserve.

At the crux of the Defense officials' objection to the report is a recommendation that would in effect make the National Guard a domestic response force for civil emergencies, essentially eliminating its go-to-war mission.

"That is sharply at odds with the position that we have taken in our strategy for homeland defense and civil support," said Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and Americas'
security affairs, speaking to journalists at the Pentagon. "We believe that the National Guard has a primary role to play in domestic disaster response -- but that mission assignment should not be to the exclusion of National Guard's traditional war-fighting missions overseas."

The recommendation is that the Defense Department shift capabilities useful for state-controlled responses to domestic emergencies to the National Guard, and shift capabilities in the National Guard that are not required for state missions, but are required for its federal missions, to the
military reserve components or active-duty military.

This would in effect place nearly all civil support capabilities within the National Guard and move wartime missions to the federal
military.

"What the ... commission is recommending ... is that the National Guard become a domestic disaster response capability exclusively. We think that's wrong," McHale said.

Alongside McHale at the briefing today was National Guard Bureau Chief,
Army Lt. Gen. H Steven Blum. He said that the active-duty military could not feasibly fill the gaps left my removing the Guard from its wartime mission. Right now, the Guard makes up 40 percent of the combat power of the U.S. military. More than 355,000 serve troops in the Army National Guard and 106,000 in the Air Guard.

"We would unhinge the volunteer force, and we would break the total force," Blum said.

Department officials are also at odds with the recommendation to place active-duty
military forces under the command and control of the governors of the states in which they are deployed.

"Fifty different governors will command our active duty military forces in a patchwork quilt of command and control that would guarantee an inability to achieve unity of command and unity of effort in a crisis," McHale said.

That recommendation, he said, is at odds with the federal system of government and Article II of the Constitution.

"There can be only one commander-in-chief, and that is the president of the United States," McHale said. "To decentralize that command and control to 50 separate state governors invites confusion."

Another recommendation by the commission would cut reservists' drill pay in half. The commission recommends reducing the 29 duty status codes the reserves now have to only two – either on active duty or not.

The problem is that reservists now get four days pay for a two day drill period. The commission recommends one day's pay, for one day's work. The drilling reservist would receive, for the same duty, half the pay he is currently receiving. Or they would have to put in twice as many duty days to receive the same pay.

"We believe that is a mistake," McHale said. "We believe it is precisely the wrong message to be sent to National Guardsmen and Reservists who at this point in our history are deserving of our appreciation and respect. Their compensation ought not be cut."

The pay cut could have also an impact on recruiting and retention, he said.

"We believe that this proposal moves in precisely the wrong direction in terms of encouraging reserve participation and expressing appreciation for the sacrifice that reservists and their families have made in support of our nation," McHale said.

Department officials disagreed with the harsh criticism leveled at the disaster preparedness of the nation yesterday by the commission chairman, retired
Marine Maj. Gen. Arnold Punaro.

McHale called some of Punaro's characterizations "unfortunate and inaccurate" and said that, while some plans are still being developed, the Department could respond to a disaster and has both trained personnel and up-to-date equipment in place.

McHale pointed to the National Guard's 53 certified civil support teams and 17 chemical emergency response force packages modeled after the
Marine Corps chemical, biological incident response force.

"Our department's catastrophic response capabilities are the best funded, best equipped, best trained in the world," McHale said.

The secretary said that most of these plans and resources didn't exist before the
terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The Defense Department is in the final stages of identifying and resourcing task forces made up of 15,000 department personnel trained and equipped to respond to a domestic detonation of a weapon of mass destruction.

"That kind of capability has never existed in such a task organization during the history of the Department of Defense," McHale said.

The department is developing plans to respond to nuclear detonations and multiple
dirty bomb, chemical and anthrax attacks, as well as hurricanes and earthquakes. They should be final in the next year, he said.

Blum addressed the equipment shortfalls identified in the report. Punaro said yesterday that nearly 90 percent of the National Guard is not combat ready, lacking adequate funding, training and equipment.

Blum said that the report was accurate, but did not account for what he called and "unprecedented" $45 billion in funding being channeled into the Guard to fix those problems. By next year 69 percent of the forces should be equipped and 77 percent by 2013.

"We didn't get into that problem overnight. And we're not going to dig out of it in one night," Blum said.

Also, Blum said, at the end of 2013 the Guard will represent an organization that is equipped as a fully modernized, mirror-image of the active force, for the first time in the nation's history.

McHale and Blum both acknowledged that some of the proposals by the commission had merit, and even validated some of the policies and changes made by the department in the past four years.

"There are many parts of this report that are of value," McHale said. "We are not rejecting this report out of hand."

Army Maj. Gen. Guy Swan III, director of operations for U.S. Northern Command, which is responsible for homeland defense, told the American Forces Press Service in an interview that he also feels that the report was "necessary" and is "of some utility," but he said it doesn't apply correctly to the current situation.

"The report paints a picture that, in my view, is more dated than anything else," Swan said. He mentioned that many in his command are disappointed at how critical the report has been "because much of what is in that report has been addressed through a variety of means over the past couple of years."

Swan said that "if you looked at the report two years ago or three years ago, it was probably quite accurate," but many of the reports' criticisms have been acted upon in the past year or two.

Over the past couple of years he has spent serving within NORTHCOM, Swan said he has "seen remarkable cooperation and improvements with the National Guard, with the Department of
Homeland Security and other federal agencies."

He said the command relies heavily upon the National Guard in order to accomplish its mission.

"We cannot do our mission at NORTHCOM without coordination and cooperation with the National Guard. It just can't be done," Swan said. "We see the guard as part of the broader friendly forces that might be involved in an operation, along with first responders, state emergency management personnel, and other federal agencies."

But Swan reiterated that the National Guard has a "viable, needed wartime mission." He said he does not think reducing the Guard's role simply to homeland defense would be a good move.

"I don't think we want to have a National Guard that is one dimensional. Frankly, I think the Guard is better than that," Swan said. "It has been demonstrated during operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans. They are a multidimensional force, and they can do the homeland operations as well."

Swan said he doesn't think the Guard should be limited to either a wartime mission or a homeland defense mission. He said there are shortfalls in resourcing, which the report has been helpful in identifying, and those issues are being dealt with in the appropriate Defense Department forums.

"I don't think it's an issue of either or. It is to some degree an issue of resources, and that is being addressed," Swan said. "In my view, the Guard needs to be part of the national defense establishment writ large."

(John Valceanu of the American Forces Press Services contributed to this article.)