Operation Iraqi Freedom: U.S. military readiness

The matter of U.S. military readiness during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom II, Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan appeared on the world scene December 6, 2003, the eve of the anniversary of Pearl Harbor Day, in a Washington Post article, "Army Will Face Dip in Readiness. 4 Divisions to Regroup After Iraq," by Vernon Loeb.

Loeb writes that, according to "a senior Army official,... Four Army divisions [the 82nd Airborne, the 101st Airborne, the 1st Armored and the 4th Infantry -- are to return from Iraq next spring, to be replaced by three others, with a fourth rotating into Afghanistan] -- 40 percent of the active-duty force -- will not be fully combat-ready for up to six months next year, leaving the nation with relatively few ready troops in the event of a major conflict in North Korea or elsewhere." This would leave "only two active-duty divisions available to fight in other parts of the world ... [and a] fifth division, the 3rd Infantry, which returned from Iraq in August, is still not fully ready to return to combat."

Previously, the Army has "been using 120 days as its standard for 'resetting' divisions returning from overseas deployments." Now, it is reported, "overhauling the divisions returning from Iraq could take as long as 180 days because of the extreme weather in Iraq and the unprecedented magnitude of the planned troop rotation. ... Once those divisions return from Iraq, Army readiness will be at its lowest point since the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Since then, Army officials have tried to keep divisions at the highest, C-1 readiness level."

Politically, Loeb suggests, the "dip in readiness could have political consequences" for President George W. Bush, who, during the 2000 campaign, criticized the Bill Clinton administration "for allowing two Army divisions to fall to the lowest readiness category in 1999 because of peacekeeping obligations in the Balkans."

This may signal that reinstituting the draft is imminent, as Loeb writes that "The Army's dip in readiness will almost certainly be used by both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill pushing for an increase in Army troops," which is said to be opposed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. "Critics of the administration respond that even the most optimistic military commanders believe 50,000 or more U.S. troops will be needed in Iraq for three to five more years, Loeb says.