U.S. National Guard leaders are making their case to expand their force while the rest of the Defense Department is tightening their purse strings, causing a rift between active-duty and Reserve leaders. Negotiations over shrinking resources have grown tense as Guard leaders -- especially those in the Air Force -- worry that active-duty leaders have unjustifiably targeted Guard accounts/…/
In peacetime, it costs less to fund National Guard and Reserve units because they only report for duty a few times per month for training, according to Todd Harrison, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
Moreover, Guard flying wings can stay just as ready as active-duty units, even though they have fewer pilots, Harrison said. That's because many Guard pilots spend much more time flying -- many are commercial pilots in their day jobs -- while active-duty pilots who alternate flying assignments with nonflying ones must undergo expensive refresher training throughout their career.
But it costs just as much to send the National Guard to war; moreover, personnel can take longer to mobilize and cannot deploy as frequently as active-duty troops.
Still, Harrison said, as deployment rates slow and fewer ground forces are sent to Afghanistan, it makes sense to place more Army force structure in the Guard.
"Especially looking out in the future, are we going to need an Army and Marine Corps anywhere near this size?" he asked. Adding force structure to the Guard and Reserve, he said, is "a way of hedging your bets where you keep that capability there and you can call it up in the future if you need it, but in the meantime, if doesn't cost you so much every year that we're at peace," Harrison said.