Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, July 16, 1995 TAG: 9507150008
SECTION: HORIZON PAGE: F-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JOHN DIAMOND ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: FORT HOOD, TEXAS LENGTH: Long
The dummy shell hurtles across the arid range toward its target, then skips along the ground like a stone on a still pond. Here at the largest installation of armored forces in the Western world, the vast array of military challenges that mean ``readiness,'' come down to this.
To both the untrained eye and to the military experts, this tank, attached to the 3rd Battalion, 66th Armored Regiment of the 2nd Armored Division - the legendary ``Hell on Wheels'' of World War II fame - stands ready to fight.
``I would feel comfortable telling mom and dad, `I will take your son to war and he will fight and win and there's a reasonable chance he will come back alive,''' said Col. James J. Grazioplene, commander of the 2nd Armored's 1st Brigade.
But 1,200 miles away in the basement of the Pentagon, on computer screens at the Army's Operations Center, the 2nd Armored Division is considered ``category 3,'' or C-3, the next-to-lowest rating on the military's four-step readiness scale.
The 2nd Armored Division was one of three combat divisions cited by the Army last fall for a decline in readiness.
Readiness refers to the ability of a ship, squadron or ground force to carry out all of its possible wartime missions. It encompasses manpower, training, and equipment condition and maintainability.
Some in the military give the term a wider meaning, including such intangibles as the quality of life, the adequacy of pay, benefits and recreational facilities, and time with family.
President Clinton repeatedly calls readiness his top priority. Defense Secretary William Perry says the critical problem is ensuring future readiness by modernizing and replacing aging equipment.
Perry rejects Republican criticism that the U.S. military has gone ``hollow.'' He told his top commanders that in budget negotiations ``they could trade off any other requirement that I've given in this budget in favor of readiness.'' They replied that they were satisfied with their readiness budgets.
The Army got an extra $3 billion from the Clinton administration, most of it to improve readiness this year.
For next year, the House added $2.8 billion to Clinton's $92 billion request for operations and maintenance, a key readiness-related account that pays for training and equipment upkeep. And the administration is seeking a new ``readiness protection authority'' to enable it to cope with the costs of unexpected deployments without having to dip into training accounts.
Clinton also has added $25 billion to his own long-term defense spending plan and the House favors spending $50 billion more. Already, spending per soldier, a key measure of military readiness, now stands at historically high levels.
Military critics contend readiness is being used to whip up support for greater defense spending. Said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.: ``If anyone wanted to invade the United States the best time to do it would be in November because that's when the military every year says they're in bad shape.''
But the military's supporters say the problem is real.
Low readiness, said Army Gen. Gary Luck, the commander in South Korea, ``translates usually into more territory and battle damage and more lives lost.''
Gen. Gordon Sullivan, who just retired as the Army chief of staff, warns that the military is at ``the razor's edge'' of readiness.
``Everyone wants to know where the edge is: Where do you break readiness,'' Adm. Richard Macke, the U.S. Pacific commander told the House National Security Committee earlier this year. ``To be honest, I can't tell you. But I think we're near the edge of the envelope.''
Those asking if the force is ready to fight are missing the point, cautioned Carl Mundy Jr., who retired last month as Marine Corps commandant. ``The critical question is ... will we be ready to win?''
Investigations by Rep. Floyd Spence, the South Carolina Republican who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., turned up an array of problems. Among them:
At Fort Hood, tank crews walk across the dunes and hillocks in groups, pretending to be in tanks.
Deployments to Haiti, Somalia and elsewhere required Marines in some units to be away from their families for more than six months at a time. In the 2nd Marine Division at Camp Lejeune, N.C., seven of the division's 17 battalions were given the next-to-lowest readiness grade because of personnel shortages.
The 2nd Marine Air Wing at Cherry Point, N.C., ran out of money needed to continue training flights.
The readiness of surface ships in the Atlantic fleet had declined. Adm. Jeremy Boorda, the chief of naval operations, said the fast pace of overseas operations combined with tight budgets force the Navy to cut into ship maintenance. In addition, the slow pace of base closures has saddled the Navy with costly overhead.
The Air Force said its force has been reduced by 30 percent over the last seven years while deployment obligations have increased fourfold. A reduction in force can increase readiness because there is less to maintain.
Time spent on missions over Bosnia and northern Iraq meant crews missed regularly scheduled combat training and required waivers to continue flying, Air Force Brig. Gen. John Dallager reported.
The Clinton administration says these problems are more anecdotal than systemic and can be attributed to unexpected deployments over the past year.
Since the fall, two of the three Army divisions cited as having below-par readiness have been phased out and the 2nd Armored is expected to be back up to speed by fall.
Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said it would be a waste of money to keep the entire force fully ready all the time. Units such as the 2nd Armored Division are designed to reinforce front-line forces 60 to 90 days after fighting begins. Those two to three months provide adequate time to prepare a reasonably well trained and equipped unit, Nunn said.
Lt. Col. Scott Feil, overseeing the shooting at the Fort Hood tank range, agrees that the ``fire hose technique'' of throwing money at readiness problems isn't the answer.
``I'd rather have everybody be at a B or B-plus range than have some straight-A's and some D's,'' Feil said.
His boss, Maj. Gen. Robert Coffey, takes issue with Republican descriptions of ``walking'' tank crews. At $100 an hour, an M-1 tank is an expensive machine to operate, Coffey notes. Before sending crews out on the range, he wants them to know exactly what they will be up against, and so crews walk through ``sand box'' models of the battlefield.
``I would tell you, no matter how much money you give me we're still going to walk our tanks,'' Coffey said. ``That's a good way to train.''
Coffey says the poor rating he gave his own division had nothing to do with Haiti or other foreign deployments.
``I said, `We are not as good as we could be. We are not bad, but if I had more money I could train more and we could be better,''' Coffey recalled. ``But I could still go whip anybody in the world.''
by CNB