GUTTING THE U.S. MILITARY: CLINTON D.O.D. DIRECTIVE ON SOCIAL WELFARE PROJECTS SHOULD BE THE LAST STRAW

(Washington, D.C.): According to a front-page story in
today’s Washington Times, the Clinton Defense Department
is poised to authorize “a broad new role for the [U.S.]
military in domestic social programs.” Such activities would
include “an open-ended array of community jobs ‘in areas
such as health and human services, education and job training,
and infrastructure building and rehabilitation.'”

A draft memorandum entitled “Civilian-Military
Programs” now in circulation to the military services for
their coordination says, in part:

“The Department of Defense may devote resources to
the extent that readiness is not adversely affected and
contributes to meeting the domestic needs of the nation in
areas such as health and human services, education and job
training, and infrastructure building and rehabilitation. Such
activities may be as a byproduct of training or incidental to
training, as a result of dedicated missions, or the result of
specifically authorized and funded programs …. Resources
may include DoD personnel, equipment, materiel, facilities
and installations.” (Emphasis added.)

Invitation to Waste, Fraud and Abuse?

The Times quotes retired Colonel Bob Magannis, a
former Army Inspector General (IG) who decried such a policy as
an invitation to waste, fraud and abuse. The paper reported that
he had “investigated cases in which base commanders diverted
manpower for civilian programs as a quid pro quo for a
civilian job after retirement. This directive, he said, could
legalize such illegal arrangements.”

“‘[These commanders] always wanted to have more
discretion over the use of military resources to promote
their command’s interest and their personal interest. They
build roads, build buildings. You scratch my back and I’ll
scratch yours. Now [the Clinton Pentagon is] opening a
Pandora’s box in allowing generals to do what they want. It’s
going to make IG investigations much more difficult.'”

The Bottom Line

The Center for Security Policy believes that it is contrary
to good order and discipline to place U.S. military personnel in
positions that may compromise them or their commands in ways
described by Col. Magannis. The draft directive should be
scotched on that ground alone.

An even more compelling reason for opposing it, however, is
the fact that it represents but the latest Clinton
Administration effort to mutate the American military in ways
that are contrary to and injurious of the military’s primary
mission: to defend the United States, its people and
interest through force of arms. The Defense Budget is already
funding by some accounts as much as $13 billion worth of
non-defense activities. International peace-keeping and
humanitarian missions are sapping the armed forces’ resources,
training and readiness even as they transform the uniformed
services’ missions into those of constabulary forces rather than
war-fighters.

Congress has properly become increasingly alarmed at the
implications of such initiatives for the morale and power
projection capabilities of the U.S. military. It should
categorically reject the Clinton Administration’s latest effort
to convert the Pentagon budget into a slush-fund for public
works, social projects and other non-defense initiatives.