|
US military
may not be ready for attack
Forign Desk Report
WASHINGTON—The U.S. military isn’t ready for a catastrophic attack on
the country, and National Guard forces don’t have the equipment or
training they need for the job, according to a report.
Even fewer Army National Guard units are combat-ready today than were
nearly a year ago when the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves
determined that 88 percent of the units were not prepared for the fight,
the panel says in a new report released Thursday. The independent
commission is charged by Congress to recommend changes in law and policy
concerning the Guard and Reserves.
The commission’s 400-page report concludes that the nation “does not
have sufficient trained, ready forces available” to respond to a
chemical, biological or nuclear weapons incident, “an appalling gap that
places the nation and its citizens at greater risk.”
“Right now we don’t have the forces we need, we don’t have them trained,
we don’t have the equipment,” commission Chairman Arnold Punaro said in
an interview. “Even though there is a lot going on in this area, we need
to do a lot more. ... There’s a lot of things in the pipeline, but in
the world we live in — you’re either ready or you’re not.”
In response, Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, chief of U.S. Northern
command, said the Pentagon is putting together a specialized military
team that would be designed to respond to such catastrophic events. “The
capability for the Defense Department to respond to a chemical,
biological event exists now,” Renuart told. “It, today, is not as robust
as we would like because of the demand on the forces that we’ve placed
across the country. ... I can do it today. It would be harder on the
(military) services, but I could respond.”
Over the next year, Renuart said, specific active duty, Guard and
Reserve units will be trained, equipped and assigned to a three-tiered
response force totaling about 4,000 troops. There would be a few hundred
first responders, who would be followed by a second wave of about 1,200
troops that would include medical and logistics forces.
The third wave, with the remainder of that initial 4,000 troops, would
include aircraft units, engineers, and other support forces, depending
on the type of incident.
Punaro, a retired Marine Corps major general, had sharp criticism for
Northern Command, saying that commanders there have made little progress
developing detailed response plans for attacks against the homeland.
“NorthCom has got to get religion in this area,” said Punaro. He said
the military needs to avoid “pickup game” type responses, such as the
much-criticized federal reaction to Hurricane Katrina, and put in place
the kind of detailed plans that exist for virtually any international
crisis. He also underscored the commission’s main finding: the Pentagon
must move toward making the National Guard and Reserves an integral part
of the U.S. military.
The panel, in its No. 1 recommendation, said the Defense Department must
use the nation’s citizen soldiers to create an operational force that
would be fully trained, equipped and ready to defend the nation, respond
to crises and supplement the active duty troops in combat.
Pointing to the continued strain on the military, as it fights wars on
two fronts, the panel said the U.S. has “no reasonable alternative”
other than to continue to rely heavily on the reserves to supplement the
active duty forces both at home and abroad.
Using reserves as a permanent, ready force, the commission argued, is a
much more cost effective way to supplement the military since they are
about 70 percent cheaper than active duty troops.
Asked how much it would cost to implement the panel’s recommendations,
Punaro said it will take billions to fully equip the Guard. The
commission is going to ask the Congressional Budget Office to do a cost
analysis, he said.
In perhaps its most controversial recommendation, the panel again said
that the nation’s governors should be given the authority to direct
active-duty troops responding to an emergency in their states. That
recommendation, when it first surfaced last year, was rebuffed by the
military and quickly rejected by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
|