Army Guard leaders urge civilian leaders to plan for domestic operations during war

National Guard Bureau:

"WASHINGTON — As the Army shifts from the predictable mobilization models of the past to the demands of future large-scale combat, the Army National Guard’s more than 329,000 Soldiers must be prepared to mobilize at scale for war while also serving governors to meet needs at home.

That was the core messaging Army Guard leaders delivered during the Director of the Army National Guard Seminar at this year’s Association of the United States Army expo and annual meeting.

If a peer or near-peer conflict erupts, the Army Guard will almost certainly be federalized en masse, not only to fight alongside the Army and Army Reserves overseas, but also to protect the homeland and respond to threats such as cyberattacks, attacks on critical infrastructure, and natural or man-made disasters.

During the seminar, panelists warned that this “simultaneity,” as they called it, could strain the Army National Guard and complicate governors’ responses to state emergencies in the future.

“Hurricanes will not take a break for great power war,” said Lt. Gen. Jonathan Stubbs, director of the Army National Guard and host of this year’s seminar panel. “Bad days and natural disasters will still happen… and our governors will need a capability and… a response.”

Maj. Gen. Larry Muennich, adjutant general of the Indiana National Guard and seminar panelist, echoed Stubbs’ sentiment on governors’ concerns.

“A governor is wondering… when these forces get pulled away in this environment of a partial mobilization... what’s left for the governor in a contested homeland?” said Muennich. “The governor will call me and say I need state active-duty forces because I need to go do X, Y, and Z,” he added, emphasizing that critical infrastructure will be a priority for his governor, especially when operating in a contested homeland with a diminished National Guard.

However, simultaneity was only one of the concerns the panelists raised during the DARNG seminar. The panel also discussed competing resources that arise from it.

“The joint force headquarters in your state will be absolutely stressed,” said Muennich, whose home state, Indiana, runs Camp Atterbury, designated as an Army Mobilization Force Generation Installation. “That joint force headquarters is going to stand up… the MFGI. But only a small portion of the Soldiers who operate that MFGI at Camp Atterbury come from Indiana. They’re going to have their own challenges getting out the door to get to Camp Atterbury to stand up Camp Atterbury,” he added.

Muennich also added additional challenges like mobilizing state formations.

Muennich said Camp Atterbury and many Indiana Joint Force headquarters personnel would also be responsible for mobilizing Indiana’s own 38th Infantry Division and 76th Mobile Brigade, creating even more friction and requiring state adjutants general to figure out how to fill any state/federal gaps.

Maj. Gen. Bob Carruthers, seminar panelist and commander of the Florida Army National Guard, provided the audience with his state’s solution to some of the problems simultaneity has presented.

“To mitigate that… we have re-stood up the Florida State Guard,” said Carruthers. “It’s been on the books since World War 2… and we had talked to [governor] about reactivating it because we knew…as more and more mobilizations are occurring.”

Carruthers emphasized reactivating the Florida State Guard, with up to 1,500 volunteers trained and equipped by the state for domestic response, is an ideal solution to fill any possible state response gaps.

Maj. Gen. Jack James, seminar panelist and deputy commanding general of the Army National Guard, U.S. Army Transformation and Training Command, suggested additional solutions, such as establishing an arbiter between the Army Guard, the 54 states, territories, and the District of Columbia, and the Active Army to prioritize force allocations and avoid conflicts quickly.

“The framework in the process is so critical. Essentially what I’m talking about is a broker…,” James said. “We need… a brokering function…, an arbiter for how resource allocations are going to be made in a quick, timely manner so we can get after it for the country.”

Muennich agreed with his fellow panelists on possible solutions.

“We have to look at how to improve the resilience within the state,” said Muennich. “What other things can we look at? What other options do we have within the state? To improve resilience, to respond, whether they’re things like your state force, whatever you might have within each individual state, or civilian cyber corps for response,” he added.

Maj. Gen. Brey Hopkins, deputy commanding general, U.S. Army Western Hemisphere Command, Reserve Component, whose command plays a central role in mobilizing, training, and validating Army National Guard formations, also offered solutions from the force providers viewpoint, such as decentralizing the mobilization process for specific mission sets.

“There is a solid argument that if you’re mobilizing for homeland defense, defense of critical infrastructure, static security of multiple different locations, or roving patrols within a state, do you need to go to an MFGI?” Hopkins asked.

According to Hopkins, solving these issues effectively is not merely an administrative matter but also a vital component of national security and, itself, a deterrent.

“If you don't think our adversaries are looking at how we do things and how quickly we can mobilize the nation for war and you don't think they have a stopwatch on it … you got another thing coming,” said Hopkins. “Demonstrated mobilization proficiency is a component of strategic deterrence.”

Hopkins doubled down and repeated his sentiment, saying, “If we can demonstrate the ability, whether that is through prepositioned forces, prepositioned stocks, or our ability within the National Guard and the Army Reserve to quickly mobilize, defend the homeland, and project power from the United States, that ties directly to deterrence.”

Following the seminar, Lt. Gen. Stubbs shared sobering insights, emphasizing that the transition to large-scale operations leaves no room for error.

“We’re a fight-tonight force in the homeland, meaning we can do the things in the homeland to support our governors, support law enforcement, other federal entities and agencies, but then we can rapidly pivot and deploy overseas to support our geographic combatant commanders,” said Stubbs. “But make no mistake, the Army National Guard of today is the combat reserve of the United States Army. If the nation fights, the Army will fight. If the Army fights, the Army National Guard will fight. This is a no-fail mission.”