Army Reserve Chief: Have Reservists Do Homeland Missions

WASHINGTON, April 6, 2011 — The Army Reserve’s top offi­cer made the case today for leg­isla­tive changes that would allow his troops to respond to home­land dis­as­ters or attacks when fed­er­al mil­i­tary capa­bil­i­ties are need­ed.
Army Reserve Chief Lt. Gen. Jack C. Stultz made clear dur­ing a round­table dis­cus­sion at the Her­itage Foun­da­tion here that he has no inter­est in under­min­ing state gov­er­nors’ author­i­ty or step­ping on the toes of the Nation­al Guard that cur­rent­ly pro­vides home­land sup­port under their state gov­er­nors’ orders.

But in light of bud­get con­straints and vast improve­ments in the Army Reserve’s readi­ness and capa­bil­i­ties dur­ing the past decade, Stultz said it does­n’t make sense to be able to use these capa­bil­i­ties only dur­ing over­seas missions. 

“The pri­ma­ry focus of the Title 10 reserve has always been on the expe­di­tionary,” he said. “We have been say­ing for some time is: ‘We should be play­ing a role in the home­land.’ But it is going to require leg­isla­tive change.” 

Cur­rent law, he said, allows an invol­un­tary call-up of the Title 10 reserve for a home­land mis­sion only for crises involv­ing weapons of mass destruc­tion. In the event of nat­ur­al dis­as­ters such as hur­ri­canes or floods or an out­right attack on the home­land, local first respon­ders — police, fire­fight­ers and emer­gency med­ical tech­ni­cians — are like­ly to be the first on the scene, Stultz said. 

State gov­er­nors also have author­i­ty to mobi­lize their Nation­al Guard forces if needed. 

“But at the point where that gov­er­nor, that state says, ‘We need fed­er­al assis­tance now. This is beyond our capa­bil­i­ty,’ ” Stultz said. Cur­rent law, he added, requires the active com­po­nent to be employed as the default fed­er­al force. 

Tes­ti­fy­ing March 30 before the House Appro­pri­a­tion Committee’s Defense Sub­com­mit­tee, Stultz used his home state of Flori­da as an exam­ple of how the cur­rent law requires that fed­er­al assis­tance be pro­vid­ed dur­ing a home­land emergency. 

“It makes no sense to me when Hur­ri­cane Andrew hits and we have to have fed­er­al response, that the 82nd Air­borne comes from Fort Bragg, North Car­oli­na,” in light of vast Army Reserve resources already in Flori­da, he told the panel. 

“The Army Reserve has an engi­neer bat­tal­ion sit­ting in Mia­mi with scrap­ers, with buck­et-load­ers, with bull­doz­ers, with dump trucks … I’ve got [mil­i­tary police] units in Ocala and Tam­pa and Fort Laud­erdale… I’ve got hos­pi­tal units in the south Flori­da area, Jack­sonville and Tam­pa area… I’ve got a [med­ical evac­u­a­tion] unit … with Black­hawk heli­copters sit­ting in Clear­wa­ter, Flori­da. And I’ve got trans­porters, trucks sit­ting around the state,” he said. 

These units are made up of “cit­i­zens of Flori­da … who want to help, and yet we don’t have the author­i­ty,” he said. “Now, we do not want to try to take the job of the Nation­al Guard,” Stultz said. The Nation­al Guard, he told the House pan­el, responds “mag­nif­i­cent­ly” when called to the scene. “What we’re say­ing is when the fed­er­al response is need­ed,” he con­tin­ued, “cur­rent­ly you go to the active force, when you have Title 10 Reserves sit­ting there inside the state that are ready, avail­able, and in a lot of cas­es, more capable.” 

Stultz told reporters today the Army Reserve’s make­up, which includes a major per­cent­age of the Army’s med­ical, engi­neer­ing and trans­porta­tion units, makes it the more logis­ti­cal fed­er­al choice. 

“The capa­bil­i­ties that you real­ly need for the home­land response reside in our force much more than they reside in the active Army,” he said. Stultz’ con­cept isn’t new. Leg­isla­tive changes need­ed to use the Army Reserve state­side have been pro­posed at least twice on Capi­tol Hill, only to get push-back from gov­er­nors and oth­ers who Stultz said did­n’t ful­ly under­stand the intent. 

“They are look­ing at it as the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment try­ing to usurp the state,” he said. “This is not about the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment tak­ing over the state’s author­i­ty. This is not about the state hav­ing the author­i­ty to call up the fed­er­al reserve [forces], either. This is about when the state requires fed­er­al assis­tance, what force do we employ? “Do we employ that active force that comes from Fort Bragg with a bunch of infantry sol­diers,” the gen­er­al con­tin­ued, “or do we employ the Army Reserves who hap­pen to be present with­in the state with the capa­bil­i­ty [need­ed]?”

Stultz said he’s see­ing more open­ness today to leg­isla­tive change. Defense Sec­re­tary Robert M. Gates and the admin­is­tra­tion are inter­est­ed, he said. Paul N. Stock­ton, assis­tant sec­re­tary of defense for home­land defense and Amer­i­c­as’ secu­ri­ty affairs; and Richard Reed, spe­cial assis­tant to the pres­i­dent for home­land secu­ri­ty, are explor­ing the issue. And in a promis­ing devel­op­ment, Stultz said the Nation­al Gov­er­nors’ Asso­ci­a­tion has expressed an inter­est in mov­ing the mea­sure forward. 

“I don’t think it is going to hap­pen overnight,” Stultz said of leg­isla­tive change. “But I think you have both sides now, from the state and fed­er­al lev­el, say­ing, ‘Why aren’t we doing this? What is get­ting in the way?’ ” 

U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →