***** Army and recruits grapple with Iraq

By Michael Moran, MSNBC

For Robert, joining the Army last May was a no-brainer. With the job
market stagnant and his hopes for a college education hanging in the
balance, the Army's promise to trade tuition for a three-year stint
seemed like a good bet, especially since he was able to defer his
enlistment for six months. Now, as his December induction date
approaches, Robert is having second thoughts, like many other
recruits who deferred enlistment.

"BACK IN MAY I thought the war was over," says the 19-year-old Bronx
native, who asked that his last name be kept out of the story. "Now
I'm thinking what I may have to do in Iraq, and I'm worried."

Army recruitment figures have held up so far in spite of the steady
casualties being suffered in Iraq. For the fiscal year ended Sept.
30, the Army made its target of recruiting 73,800 new soldiers; the
Navy lured 41,000 new sailors and the Air Force added 32,000 new
recruits. The Marines drew 38,914 "good men" and women.

But Army recruitment officers and military analysts alike caution
that the true impact of the war on recruiting and re-enlistment is
only beginning to be seen. . . .

SIGNS OF STRESS

Experts say the first signs of trouble are surfacing now in the Guard
and Reserve, whose soldiers are generally older than their active
duty comrades, many of them with families. Even as the active duty
services and reserves made their recruitment targets in fiscal 2003,
the Army National Guard was behind in meeting its target of 60,000
new recruits by nearly 15 percent with only a month left. A huge
last-minute infusion of bonus money and other benefits helped close
the gap, but the warning signs were noted. Indeed, because of the
annual nature of the figures, many feel the dip the Army National
Guard experienced in fiscal 2003 may not even reflect the full impact
of Iraq's descent into guerrilla fighting.

There is real concern that 2004 could see retention rates drop
dramatically as the stress of long-term deployments and combat duty
on family-oriented Guard and reserve troops begins to show.

"Retention is what I am most worried about. It is my No. 1 concern,"
Lt. Gen. James Helmly, the head of the Army reserve, told USA Today
last month. "This is the first extended-duration war the country has
fought with an all-volunteer force."

On Tuesday, acknowledging the strains on the system, Rumsfeld vowed
to adjust the mix of specialties that reside in the Guard and Reserve
and move them back into the active duty force.

Since Vietnam, when a draft enabled the military to bulk up without
mobilizing large Guard and Reserve units, the Army has restructured
and given the Guard and Reserve tasks that would be central to any
major war. The idea was, in part, to ensure that no protracted
conflict could be waged, as were the Korean and Vietnam wars, while
the bulk of the American public proceeded as if the nation was at
peace. Now, Rumsfeld wants this "linkage" undone.

"We have people in the Guard and Reserve where we really need to have
those skills on active duty," Rumsfeld told Seventh Fleet sailors in
Tokyo. "And we probably have some skills on active duty that would be
better off in the Guard and Reserves."

Additionally, he touted the idea of shifting some support roles --
truck driving, cooking, maintenance -- to civilian contractors, and
ending a practice known as "up-or-out," which forces mid-career
officers who are passed over for promotions to retire.

A BILL COMING DUE?

None of the fixes proposed by Rumsfeld will be fast in coming,
however. Analysts suggest that if the Army does reach its "tipping
point" -- the point where retention and recruitment drops below the
ability to sustain current training and missions -- it may catch the
Pentagon by surprise. While current figures show no problems, as
Abell notes, he concedes it may be too early to say for sure.

"There is a data lag that we are working to reduce," says Abell.

The "lag" in numbers already is rather small -- a month at most. Yet
nothing in current figures will give the military any warning if an
entire "class" of soldiers -- troops whose commitment ends at the
same time -- decides they've had enough. The same is true of
officers, many of whom serve out obligations they took on in exchange
for tuition or attendance at one of the military academies.

"The way the Pentagon tracks this could be storing up trouble," says
Andrew Krepinevich, a military analyst who has testified before
Congress on retention and current force levels.

Because the military requires soldiers to sign fixed-term contracts,
any negative effects due to the bloody Iraq occupation are likely to
take up to a year to know. This fact runs across all three key
components of the military -- the active duty forces, the reserves
and the Guard.

"I think the problem is that nothing's going to show up until next
spring," Krepinevich says. "At that point -- about a year after the
beginning of the Iraq war -- it will become evident whether people
are voting with their feet."

Another factor skewing the numbers right now . . . is the "no out"
clauses the Army has imposed on some officers and specialists in
South Korea, meaning that, for the time being, they must remain on
active duty until further notice.

THE UPSIDE DOWNSIDE

A final complication for the military is the improving economy.

The Army and other services market themselves heavily to recent high
school graduates seeking college money through the "G.I. Bill," and
to men and women early in their careers seeking new job skills. The
military tends to thrive, reflected in an improved quality of
recruits, when the job market is tight in the civilian economy.

Krepinevich and other experts believe the years since Sept. 11, 2001
have been an anomaly -- a time when intense patriotism and a very
poor job market conspired to make it very easy for the military to
meet its recruiting goals.

"If the economy picks up significantly, that is going to complicate
things enormously," says Krepinevich. "The problem then becomes not
only in attracting new recruits, but that you are going to start
losing some of the best people to the civilian economy -- especially
those with high-tech skills."

Robert, the young recruit struggling over what to do about his
upcoming induction day, says he hasn't seen any change in the job
situation. "If I felt like I had a career path right now, my decision
would be a bit easier," he says. "What the papers are saying about
the economy picking up -- I'm not seeing it. I'm kinda hoping they're
wrong about what's going on in Iraq, too."

<http://msnbc.com/news/995062.asp>   *****
--
Yoshie

* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/>
* Calendars of Events in Columbus:
<http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>,
<http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/>
* Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/>
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>
* Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio>
* Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>

Reply via email to