The Total Force Policy: What's Wrong in the Army
Jeffery W. Hammond
Abstract
Jeffery W. Hammond
Abstract
Abstract : The purpose of paper is to examine relations between the active Army and Army National Guard (ARNG) as members of the Total Army subsequent to the Total Force Policy. Relations between components have long been uneasy dating back to the founding of the nation and opposition to the idea of a large federal standing Army. However, relations have significantly deteriorated since the Gulf War in 1991 and release of the Quadrennial Defense Review in 1997. Efforts to adapt to post Cold War realities have ignited disputes between active Army and ARNG leaders causing one to question roles, missions, and the relevance of Total Army components.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract : The purpose of paper is to examine relations between the active Army and Army National Guard (ARNG) as members of the Total Army subsequent to the Total Force Policy. Relations between components have long been uneasy dating back to the founding of the nation and opposition to the idea of a large federal standing Army. However, relations have significantly deteriorated since the Gulf War in 1991 and release of the Quadrennial Defense Review in 1997. Efforts to adapt to post Cold War realities have ignited disputes between active Army and ARNG leaders causing one to question roles, missions, and the relevance of Total Army components.
Key concepts: Opposition (politics), Guard (computer science), National guard, Political science, Cold war, Military policy, Law, Civil–military relations