The Boston Globe February 20, 2003
Long wait may dampen morale
By Robert Schlesinger, Globe Staff, 2/20/2003
WASHINGTON - The official line from the Pentagon is that the military will be ready for war with Iraq whenever President Bush gives the order, be it in two weeks or six months. But defense officials and security analysts say that an extended deployment could take a toll on the armed forces.
A prolonged wait for action could interfere with the Defense Department's maintenance and training schedules. More immediately, there is concern about maintaining the fighting edge of the troops, whom several analysts compared to athletes preparing for a championship game that has yet to be scheduled.
''You get psyched up to go fight a war and then you just sit and lose your edge,'' said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute. ''You lose your sense of excitement, your enthusiasm, and that's another problem that you have when you're forward-deployed and not moving.''
Analysts say that if the United States goes to war within weeks, the ripple effects from the deployment could be minimized. But if the diplomatic process delays action into the summer or beyond, the effects could be serious.
''There's a huge domino theory that works there,'' said retired Rear Admiral Stephen H. Baker.
Aircraft carriers require maintenance, for example. And after a time, officers and enlisted soldiers alike want to return to their families.
Asked on NBC's ''Meet the Press'' last Sunday how long the United States could keep hundreds of thousands of troops at the ready in the Gulf, retired General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, said, ''Maybe not for months, but for another month.''
Clark noted, and military sources confirmed, that the United States is still moving forces into the region. The Third Infantry Division is in the region, as are elements of the 82d Airborne Division. The 101st Airborne - the Screaming Eagles - and the Fourth Infantry Division are en route.
US military officials maintain that the troops will be ready if the call comes.
''If the President decides to take action, our troops will win, regardless of when they get the call,'' said Jim Wilkinson, director of strategic communications for US Central Command. ''While deployment timing isn't an issue we discuss, our troops do have the best training and logistics systems in the world that allow them to be efficient and effective in the field as long as necessary to accomplish their mission.''
Roughly 150,000 US military personnel have been deployed to the Gulf region as part of the build-up for a potential war against Iraq, but they are not simply sitting and waiting. Many have been training, brushing up on their ability to fight in urban settings. To a point, that is helpful for the troops because it allows them to adjust to the climate and hone their skills.
Piers Wood, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and a senior fellow at GlobalSecurity.org, recalled that during the Gulf War, US soldiers ''got their edge by training 24-7 once they got there.''
Similarly, troops on the ground in the area will be able to adjust their day-to-day maintenance routines and figure out how to handle the fine desert sand.
But eventually, repetition dulls that training edge.
''There does come a point in time where you start to suffer a degradation in skill and there's got to be a point where morale becomes a problem, where you spend an extended period of time essentially doing nothing,'' said one military official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Another immediate time consideration is the weather. As the calendar creeps from spring into the summer, temperatures in the region rise into the triple digits, making it harder for US soldiers to operate, especially if they are wearing chemical protective gear.
Low morale could lead to problems retaining trained fighters and other skilled personnel.
''The big problem with leaving people in the field for a long period of time is it's a morale issue, and any time you have a morale issue it turns six months later into a retention problem,'' said Owen Cote, the associate director of the Security Studies Program at MIT.
An extended deployment would also have effects on standard rotations for both troops and equipment. According to Thompson, the standard practice is to match a forward-deployed force with one getting ready to deploy and one that has just returned from deployment.
''The problem we have in this case is that the forward-deployed force is going to be so big that there's no way we can have an equal-sized force getting ready to go and another force of similar size that has just returned and is being prepared for other things,'' Thompson said.
''That means that this force, as large as it is, forward-deployed for a long period of time, is going to create distortions and ripples throughout the force structure for a long time to come,'' Thompson added. ''Among the various things that will result is maintenance on equipment will be deferred, leaves will be deferred, and all sorts of other things that are essential to maintaining the force over the long run will be delayed until the operation is over.''
Aircraft carriers are a classic example. The USS Abraham Lincoln's battle group has been at sea since July 2002. The ships started steaming for the United States in mid-December, but before the month was out received new orders to return to station in the Gulf. The Lincoln battle group is one of five either in the area or en route. A sixth is headed toward the Korean peninsula.
Robert Schlesinger can be reached at schlesinger@globe.com
Copyright © 2003, Globe Newspaper Company.
