By Doug Bandow
The leading presidential candidates disagree on what to do in Iraq, but all want to expand the military. Last January the Bush administration proposed increasing the Marine Corps by 27,000 and the Army by 65,000.
Active and reserve Army, National Guard, and Marines currently number 1.2 million, with 500,000 of them in combat arms. Combined force levels exceed 2.2 million.
That's more than enough warriors to defend America. It's just not enough to police the globe.
Rather than add more cannon fodder for unnecessary misadventures like Iraq, Washington should retrench. The U.S. should not be overthrowing decrepit dictatorships and attempting to forcibly spread democracy.
Moreover, America's major allies face few significant security threats. All could defend themselves.
In short, Washington's problem is too much policy, not too few troops.
Moreover, where do policymakers expect to find additional recruits? Notes a new report from the Congressional Budget Office: ``all three components of the Army (the active Army, the Army National Guard, and the Army Reserve) have had trouble achieving their recruiting goals in one or more recent years, although they were able to meet or nearly meet their targets for 2006.’’
The active Army has filled its ranks only by lowering its standards. Fewer new recruits are high school graduates and have scored in the upper quintiles of the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT). Moreover, over the last four years the Army has granted 125,000 so-called moral waivers, including for felony convictions.
The All-Volunteer Force (AVF) remains a smarter and better trained military than the draft service it replaced. The AVF's recruits are brighter, join voluntarily, and reenlist in greater numbers.
Nevertheless, the U.S. military is losing some of its combat edge. If the Army is having to reduce standards to attract sufficient enlistees, how will it add more personnel? Recruiting will grow more difficult the longer the unnecessary Iraq war lasts.
Some legislators advocate conscription. Although compulsion might be the simplest way to acquire additional bodies, it would not be the simplest means to create an effective armed services.
Explains the CBO: ``The military's success in completing its missions rests partly on its ability to get and keep intelligent, capable individuals while maintaining required force levels.’’ In this way the AVF has proved far more effective than America's previous conscript force.
Notes the CBO, the volunteer force enjoys greater retention rates, resulting in a more experienced military. Moreover, ``the AVF has attracted a greater proportion of recruits with high school diplomas or with AFQT scores at or above the median than in the youth population as a whole or than the services obtained through the draft during the Vietnam War.’’
The most pernicious argument for a draft is that it is cheaper _ for the government. But Washington could save even more money by conscripting Medicare doctors, postal workers, food inspectors, and FBI agents. Conscription shifts rather than reduces total social costs.
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) has contended that only a draft can deliver a military representative of America rather than an underclass force. But he is simply wrong in his characterization of the AVF.
Before the Army began dropping its standards, nearly one-third of American youth weren't eligible to join the military. Even today, enlistees are more likely to have graduated from high school, score better on the AFQT, and read at a higher level than their civilian counterparts.
The CBO reported that the services are ``racially and ethnically diverse.’’ Blacks ``composed 13 percent of active-duty enlisted recruits in 2005 and 19 percent of the entire active-duty enlisted force in 2006, compared with 14 percent of the 17-to-49-year-old U.S. population.’’ Hispanics actually are underrepresented.
While the children of the rich are underrepresented, so are the children of the poor. The AVF is overwhelmingly middle class. It is college-capable if not college-graduated (though 97 percent officers possess college degrees).
Moreover, CBO puts the lie to the argument that minorities are dying disproportionately in Afghanistan and Iraq. Concluded the CBO: ``white service members have a higher representation in combat occupations (75 percent) than in the force as a whole (68 percent), whereas black service members have a lower representation in those occupations (13 percent) than in the overall force (19 percent).’’ As a result, ``fatalities of white service members have been higher than their representation in the force (76 percent of deaths in [Afghanistan and Iraq] through December 2006).’’
The U.S. doesn't need a bigger military. It needs a smaller foreign policy. In any case, conscription would be counterproductive.
Voluntarism works. And voluntarism is most consistent with America's heritage of liberty. Especially at a time like today, when the government is pursuing an unnecessary and increasingly unpopular war.
Doug Bandow served as a special assistant to former President Ronald Reagan, and he worked with the Military Manpower Task Force. He is the author of several books, including Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire (Xulon Press) and Military Manpower and Human Resources (National Defense University).