After Threats, AF Reservists Spark IG Probe

By Paul Connors

Throughout the past year, I have written about the deteriorating morale among reservists and Air National Guardsmen called to active duty in the Air Force since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, most recently in a DefenseWatch article on Sept. 11, 2002, reviewing events of the past 12 months (“Reservists: A Year of Plummeting Morale”).

The issue today remains the same as a year ago: The Air Force is involuntarily extending the active-duty tours of mobilized reservists and Air National Guardsmen while allowing active-duty personnel to separate from the service or retire as their obligations end. The situation is particularly acute in Air Force security forces units, where many part-time reservists and Guardsmen are sworn law enforcement officers in their civilian lives.

These troubling events directly stem from the personnel drawdown in the active component forces in the decade after Operation Desert Storm. The Air Force in 1991 had 60,000 cops (including ANG and AFRC). Today, there are only 30,000, and they are being forced to perform four times as many missions. 

But last week just when I thought things couldn’t possibly get worse – they did.

Several members of an Air National Guard security forces squadron whose identity I will not reveal, disclosed to DefenseWatch that their commanding officer has physically threatened anyone who writes to the press, to his congressman or any other agencies in regard to the involuntary active-duty extensions. Specifically, this 21st–century Napoleon vowed to “kick the asses” of anyone so disloyal as to complain about the way the Air Force has treated reserve component personnel.

DefenseWatch has also learned that a number of personnel in this same squadron in turn have filed Inspector General complaints against the unit commander, and a formal investigation is underway despite attempts by the wing commander (to whom the squadron reports) has attempted to quash the probe.

Ham-handed threats of physical abuse and desperate attempts to stifle any IG review of the worsening morale situation will not work: The latest Air Force personnel statistics reveal that retention among first-term security forces personnel in the active-duty Air Force has dropped to an unbelievably low 9 percent. Yet, they are being allowed to separate, the Air Force is refusing to increase the training pipeline, and both ANG and AFRC security forces are being kept on active duty against their will while senior leaders in personnel management and the security forces do nothing.

The large number of emails I have received from DefenseWatch readers in the security forces community – both here at home and overseas – further confirms that this is not an isolated problem confined to one particular command.

While some of the allegations DefenseWatch has received pertain to conditions in individual Guard and reserve units, others revealed a systematic pattern where reserve component personnel are now being used to provide manpower where none is needed or to serve as a quick fix to the Air Force's broken personnel system.  Despite the best efforts of senior leaders at the National Guard Bureau and Air Force Reserve Command, the active-duty Air Force has not redressed the inequities of keeping mobilized reserve component personnel on active duty while permitting active-duty personnel to leave the service.

DefenseWatch has learned that Col. Tony West, Chief of ANG Security Forces, in recent weeks has been briefed by several wing commanders who expressed concern for their reserve/Guard security troops, voicing the same litany of issues: loss of time away from family and careers, financial hardships, the double standard between active and reserve component forces, and the overall effects on recruiting and retention.

It is obvious to those familiar with the overall situation that Col. West, bombarded with requests for assistance and guidance, has received little or none from Secretary of the Air Force James G. Roche, whose office authorized the involuntary extension of reserve component personnel while canceling earlier “stop/loss” orders that had kept active-duty personnel in the service past their obligation dates.

For the foreseeable future, reserve component security forces will remain on extended active duty. While no one can doubt the integrity and professionalism of these Guardsmen and reservists, those who have written to DefenseWatch all share a common view: a perception that they have been betrayed by their commanders, by the secretary of the Air Force, and by the politicians. In desperation, many have decided to take matters into their own hands and have written to elected officials, newspapers, radio and TV stations. Several have publicly posted their opinions in the letters section at the Air Force web portal, “Air Force Link.”

They are doing so despite a climate of fear that has grown within their units. When asked by DefenseWatch if it is okay to use the letter writer's names for attribution, almost all decline, citing fear of retaliation by their commanders and senior non-commissioned officers.

The Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve have long been a part of the total force. Yet even reserve component commanders are starting to realize that the concept is a one-sided one as the active component fulfills its needs without any regard for the needs of reserve component personnel and the units affected. 

To add insult to injury is the arrogant attitude of many of the active Air Force's major command leaders, who have reserved to themselves the right to retain reserve component members. Most notable among these princes is Gen. John W. Handy, commander of Air Mobility Command. At a recent AMC Support Group commanders’ conference, Handy was asked about the abuse of reserve component personnel who were involuntarily extended on active duty after completing initial 90-day tours. In addition, the questioner pressed the general on a dual standard: while the Air Force allows active-duty personnel down-time with their families to recuperate and regroup after returning from deployments, the service does not allow reserve and Guard personnel the same relief.

Handy's answer: “They are my assets and I will use them as I see fit.”

That was an illuminating remark: “assets,” not “people.” 

Gen. Handy appears to have forgotten that people are the prime ingredient in any organization, and these reservists and Guardsmen – whose patriotism and sense of duty is every bit as strong as their active-duty counterparts – have lives outside of the service. It is this type of uncaring, unknowing and unfeeling attitude that is felt all the way down the chain to the lowest-ranking airman with an M-16 doing fence-line patrols. Is it any wonder so many plan to leave the service as soon as possible?

Morale in reserve component security forces squadrons here and overseas has sunk to a new low. 

Those who have written to DefenseWatch have stated unequivocally that they will not remain in an organization that cares so little for their needs, desires and welfare.  Members of these units in other career fields have watched how the “cops” have been treated, and are sure to consider whether it is advisable to remain. Rest assured, when demobilization comes, recruiting and retention will plummet.

Something has to give and sooner or later, this very badly managed fiasco will fail. Given their refusal to face reality today, one wonders what Air Force leaders will do when the morale crisis becomes a genuine retention emergency.

Are you listening, Secretary Roche?

Table of Contents

A Case of Over-Reaction by MPs

Two friends are quietly eating lunch on an afternoon break, sitting in the warm sunshine at one of the food concessions at the U.S. military community in Heidelberg, Germany. 

Peci Dush and Faruk Sahiti men share a common background. Ethnic Albanians, both fled the deprivation and killing in war-torn Kosovo eight years ago in order to make a better life for themselves and their families in Germany.

Dush is a barber in the American Barber Shop, centrally located on the main shopping center facility in Heidelberg. Sahiti is married to an American civilian who is employed by the U.S. Army at V Corps Headquarters on Campbell Barracks, about two miles away.  

But Friday, Sept. 6, 2002, would prove to be like no other day for the two men.  Their day was about to take a radical turn for the surreal and frightening, which has left many unanswered questions.   

As Sahiti recalled earlier this week, suddenly a group of military policemen “came running up, yelling and screaming. I thought something terrible must be happening. I looked behind me, I thought they must be looking for someone else.”

It was not “someone else.” What the two Albanians were about to learn was that they had just been drawn into the middle of an international terrorism investigation.  

Dush and Sahiti found themselves “rushed and overwhelmed” by the MPs, who surrounded them with drawn weapons, Sahiti said. As onlookers gathered and watched, the MPs handcuffed them and announced that they were under arrest.

Sahiti persisted in trying to determine why he had just been arrested. As he later told the military newspaper The Stars and Stripes, “I begged them, ‘Please, tell me what’s going on, I haven’t done anything wrong’.”  One MP laughed at him, saying, “If you haven’t done anything wrong, you don’t have anything to worry about.” 

After about 15 minutes, German police officials arrived on the scene and both men were taken to the Heidelberg Police Station, the standard practice when MPs arrest with non-Americans. While there, German authorities separated the two men and interrogated them for hours. Mr. Sahiti described the German police officials as being “very professional.”

This whole incident occurred because the German police had received information -- later proved unreliable – that Sahiti was an associate of arrested terror suspect Osman Petmezci. German police the day before had arrested Petmezi and his fiancée for allegedly plotting to attack U.S. military facilities in the Heidelberg area, as I reported in DefenseWatch last week (“Far from U.S. Soil, Americans Still Targeted”).

German authorities apparently wanted to interrogate Sahiti and Dush in hopes that the two men could assist the police as possible witnesses regarding the alleged terrorist plot. Therefore, they had requested that the American MPs detain the two men.  

Apparently, the distinction between “witness” and “terrorist” got blurred along the way.

According to Command Sergeant-Major Charles E. Guyette, the senior noncommissioned officer of the 18th Military Police Brigade headquartered in Mannheim, Germany, the MPs who detained Sahiti and Dush followed correct procedures. (The MPs who made the arrest were from a different unit, Guyette noted in an email to me.)

“The MP’s were ordered to apprehend the two suspects believed to have both vocalized and demonstrated remarks that were contrivental (sic) to the force protection of Americans overseas,” Guyette added. He added, “better to inconvenience a couple of people than to have been complacent and have had a devastating blast kill several people or worse.”

As it quickly turned out, however, the authorities’ suspicions about the two men were groundless.

Dush works in a barbershop in the same shopping center as Petmezci’s fiancée, Astrid Eyzaguirre. This reality, coupled with the information that the German Police had that both Sahiti and Dush supposedly knew a man named Osman, led them to the two detainees, triggering the heavy-handed actions by the Heidelberg MPs. 

Within a few hours, the German authorities released both Dush and Sahiti without charges or indictment, describing the incident as “all a big mix-up,” Sahiti said. Neither the Germans nor Americans bothered to apologize for the public take-down and detention.

Officials at U.S. Army Europe Headquarters (USAREUR) have been tight-lipped in spite of repeated requests for information from the news media on the incident.

USAREUR spokesman Col. Carl Kropf released an official statement which asserted that the matter is strictly under German jurisdiction, even though American MPs arrested the two “witnesses” with the expressed threat of deadly force if they resisted.

When a reporter for The Stars & Stripes newspaper sought an explanation from  the German police, they in turn referred all questions back to U.S. military officials.  One German police official privately said that the MPs overreacted when they arrested the two men. “We just wanted to talk to them,” the official said. 

So, back to USAREUR and Col. Kropf’s carefully written statement: “The MPs are trained to use only the minimum force required by the situation; in this case no force was used,” Kropf said.

Allow me to say, for the record, that sticking a loaded 9-millimeter pistol in someone’s face – someone who is offering no resistance and who is clearly not an “imminent” threat to the life of the MP, goes far beyond Col. Kropf’s assertion and declaration that “no force was used.”

Unfortunately, this case of the jitters by armed MPs is far from an isolated incident. The overwhelming response by Florida police on I-75 last week following an alleged threatening statement by three Muslim medical students gripped the entire country for more than eight hours and was broadcast live on all TV networks – before the three men were released without charges – and again, without the slightest apology.

Law enforcement personnel must be, and are paid to, remain clear-headed and less than over-reactive in time of stress.

And it is no threat to U.S. national security for officials who happen to detain innocent people on unfounded charges, to publicly confirm their innocence and to offer a simple human apology afterwards. Certainly that’s the least the MPs and German police could do for Peci Dush and Faruk Sahiti.

Table of Contents

The ‘Rogue Wave’ Syndrome at NOAA

By Robert G. Williscroft

Following is the verbatim text of a message issued by the Director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, Rear Adm. Evelyn Fields, on Aug. 14, 2002.

From: “Director OMAO”

Organization: NOAA

To: OMAO HQ all Personnel

Yesterday afternoon, August 13, while running hydro lines off Point Elrington in Prince William Sound, AK, NOAA Ship RAINIER's survey launch RA3 was hit by a train of rogue waves which capsized the launch. Aboard the launch were Ensign Jennifer L. Johnson, Able-bodied Seaman (AB) Eric S. Koss and Survey Technician (ST) David E. Fishman. I am deeply saddened to report that AB Koss did not survive this most unfortunate accident.

AB Koss came to work for NOAA September 1, 2001, as an Ordinary Seaman. He was temporarily promoted to AB June 2, 2002. Eric loved his work as a launch coxswain aboard RAINIER and planned to return to school to major in oceanography. RA3 was running survey lines in 4-foot swells when it was hit by three unexpectedly large waves, resulting in the capsizing. All three individuals escaped the launch, but Eric did not make it ashore. Neither Coast Guard rescue swimmers nor Eric's shipmates were able to get to him due to dangerous surf conditions. His body was finally recovered by RAINIER personnel last night. Eric was a dedicated employee who loved his work, was liked and admired by all who knew him.

He is survived by his parents and siblings of Woodinville, WA.

ENS Johnson and ST Fishman were flown by Coast Guard helicopter to Seward, AK, where they were treated and released from the hospital. They are back aboard ship this morning.

Our heartfelt sympathy goes out to Eric's family, friends, and shipmate    

Rear Admiral Evelyn Fields

Let's put this message in context. First, some history of this little-known uniformed service:

President Thomas Jefferson established the “Survey of the Coast” on Feb. 10, 1807, by signing legislation to “cause a survey to be taken of coasts of the United States.” Using officers detailed from the Navy for the seagoing portion of charting and from the Army Topographical Bureau, the “Survey” conducted its early activities under the U.S. Department of the Treasury where it shared vessels with the Revenue Cutter Service, forerunner of the Coast Guard. In 1836, the service was renamed the “U.S. Coast Survey,” and it produced its first nautical chart in 1839. 1853 saw the first issue of “Tide Prediction Tables.”

In 1871, President Ulysses S. Grant signed legislation establishing a one-man, U.S. Fish Commission which became the Bureau of Fisheries in 1903, and eventually the National Marine Fisheries Service.

In 1891, the Weather Bureau was transferred from the Army Signal Corps to the Department of Agriculture, and in 1940 to the Department of Commerce.

The U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Commissioned Officer Corps was formed in 1917. It consisted of engineers and survey specialists.

All these elements except the National Marine Fisheries Service were combined into the Environmental Science Services Administration in 1965 by President Nixon, and then they were all reorganized into the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 1970, along with many other diverse environmental elements of the government.

The NOAA Corps evolved from the original U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Commissioned Officer Corps, so that today this small corps of uniformed commissioned officers forms the seventh uniformed service of the United States.It consists of approximately 275 officers, ranking from ensign to rear admiral.

It is useful to put this small group of officers into a wider perspective. While I was stationed in Seattle, Washington, several years ago, a U.S. Navy task force entered Puget Sound. A Navy rear admiral was in charge of the task force, which consisted of an aircraft carrier, several smaller ships of the line, a couple of submarines, several support ships and nearly 10,000 personnel. The commanding officer of the carrier was a Navy captain with over 5,000 shipboard personnel under his command.

Compare this to the entire 275 or so officers in the NOAA Corps, which includes two admirals, a handful of captains, a much larger group of commanders, even more lieutenant commanders – well, you get the picture. The NOAA Corps is a dramatically top-heavy organization. To its credit, the NOAA Corps has improved somewhat in the last decade: it used to sport five admirals instead of its present two. Nevertheless, its ratio of top brass to snugs is completely upside down.

Unlike the other uniformed services, NOAA has no “enlisted” personnel. Officers function much like the commissioned officers of the other services, but their shipboard personnel – the “troops” – consist of unionized wage-marine employees. At sea, corps officers function much like members of the Merchant Marine service, except that they also have distinct scientific duties, as technicians for junior officers, and as supervisors for more senior officers.

Their training, from a traditional “military” perspective is nearly non-existent. For example, Ensign Jennifer L. Johnson, who commanded the survey launch RA3 in the incident related at the beginning of this article, was essentially without any meaningful small boat experience at all. Normally, one would expect such an inexperienced officer to receive training under the guidance of a more experienced officer, but apparently this is not how the NOAA Corps conducts business.

Several years earlier off the coast of Southern California, NOAA was operating a 52-foot fiberglass Navy patrol boat it had acquired and adapted for its own use in the Channel Island Marine Sanctuary. This boat also capsized and sank, as a result – according to NOAA Marine Operations – of a train of rogue waves.

Fortunately, this incident resulted in no serious injury or loss of life. On August 13, unfortunately, things did not go very well, especially for Able-bodied Seaman Koss. It turns out that Koss was not really a qualified AB. He had just recently joined the NOAA ship Rainier and had been temporarily promoted to AB. He had never operated a launch in heavy surf, and was completely unqualified to handle RA3 in the existing conditions.

So what we had was a survey technician (basically a “techie” without any particular launch operating knowledge), an inexperienced coxswain without the ability to handle any kind of unusual water conditions, under the command of a completely untried, green female ensign.

In my book this is a recipe for disaster.

You don't need a “train of rogue waves” to get into trouble in a four-foot swell. All you need is to turn your launch sideways to the swell. Physics will take care of the rest.

The officer's primary job was to command – to make the necessary judgment decisions for safety first, and job accomplishment second. Why was RA3 in the surf under those conditions? Why didn't Ens. Johnson order her launch back into open water? Why didn't the operations officer  aboard Rainier order the boat back when he (or she) saw that the launch skipper had not taken the correct action? What was the commanding officer of the Rainier doing, and why did he not override his operations officer and launch skipper?

AB Koss died because these officers lacked the ability to make quick judgments under adverse operational conditions. Of course, since a “train of rogue waves” was really at fault, these guys are clear. They lost a man, but it wasn't their fault.

Rogue waves – once … maybe; twice … ?

It makes me wonder if the United States really needs a 275-member commissioned officer corps with more chiefs than indians.

Seaman Koss did not deserve to die. His leaders and the organization they so zealously protect should be held accountable.

Robert G. Williscroft is DefenseWatch Navy Editor. He can be reached at dwnavyeditor@argee.net.

Reflections on a Year of DefenseWatch

By Matthew Dodd

“Looking back is the surest way of looking forward,” said J.F.C. Fuller, the noted military historian. With the one-year anniversaries of the 9/11 attacks last week and the founding of DefenseWatch this week, I found myself reflecting on one of my most turbulent, dynamic and exciting years ever, and would like to share some of those reflections as this online defense magazine begins its second year.

First of all, I have truly enjoyed the privilege of being a contributing editor for DefenseWatch magazine. I am very proud to be a part of such a fine group of professionals who are dedicated to doing what is right for those who serve their country in uniform, those veterans who did serve, and those young people who are considering military service.

Besides the deep satisfaction of seeing my thoughts and words in print (or in cyberspace), the opportunity to share with and learn from all the Soldiers for the Truth members has broadened my perspectives and made me a much better and more informed military professional.

Reader feedback has been tremendous. I never expected the quality and quantity of the feedback I regularly get from so many different readers. I am truly humbled when people take the time to read my articles and to share their thoughts, comments and experiences with me. I am just a Marine trying to pass the word on what I know, think and have learned. I consider my efforts to be a partnership with the readers, who keep me honest, on my toes, and on the edge of important and emerging issues. I appreciate the positive and negative feedback I get and know that I have a much deeper understanding of the issues I have covered because of what you, the readers, have taught me.

By far, the most reader feedback I received stemmed from articles that dealt with money issues, such as “Pentagon Failure to Manage Funds Is a Disgrace” (Apr. 10, 2002). Many readers shared my frustrations about the incompetence of Pentagon comptrollers to efficiently manage and account for millions of dollars, ala Enron.

The heaviest volume of feedback centered on my articles on the “concurrent receipt” issue, “A Matter of Simple Fairness to Disabled Vets,” (July 17, 2002), and  “Concurrent Receipt Update: I'd Fire Dov Zakheim,” (July 24, 2002). I discovered that I had touched a nerve as I heard from many disabled veterans who were upset and disillusioned by governmental doubletalk and double standards with regards to earned retirement pay and VA disability compensation.

With Congress reconvening for the fall session and with the 2003 National Defense Authorization Bill in a House-Senate conference to iron out the differences between the two versions, the issue is still very much alive: Both versions defy a threatened presidential veto and would for the first time make concurrent receipt of retirement pay and VA compensation a reality for some, if not all, of our deserving disabled military retirees. 

The most intense feedback I received concerned the subject of my article on Jan. 2, 2002, “A Commander’s Careless Words.” The officer in question responded directly to me from Afghanistan explaining that he had been misquoted in The Wall Street Journal article that originally inspired my article criticizing his remarks. The commander was upset for he felt I misrepresented him. I offered to write a follow-up article about him being misquoted, but I respected his decision to not trust me enough to cooperate with me. I learned from this encounter how delicate and powerful the press is, and how careful a writer must be to stick to the facts as known and make clear references to his sources (both of which I did).

About ten of my articles dealt with homeland security and transformation of our armed forces. I believe those are two critically important issues for our military and our nation. Homeland security is a short-term and immediate concern, with long-term implications. Transformation is a long-term concern, with short-term implications. Either one of these issues, taken by itself, would be difficult.

Taken together, and pursued simultaneously, they are a big challenge. Add our global war on terrorism to the mix and you should see the need for patience and persistence from all Americans at all levels.

My most gratifying experience was telling the story of the heroic Marine security guard defenders of the U.S. Embassy in Bahrain. Piecing together information from personal e-mails and official reports to make a coherent account of courage under fire to share with appreciative readers was a challenge. I am proud to say that I got word from official sources that the Marines who risked their lives defending the embassy against hordes of radicals on Apr. 5, 2002, subsequently received medals for their actions.

Besides my SFTT colleagues and readers’ feedback, another great source of ideas and perspectives was my personal and professional reading program. Relying on public transportation for an hour commute to and from the Pentagon every day gives me an opportunity to read. Here’s a list of the most influential books I read over this past year:

After my deepening interest in and selected readings from The Bible, probably the two most important books for me were Phantom Soldier and One More Bridge to Cross by John Poole. Poole’s message about returning to individual and small-unit tactical excellence is simple and transformational in concept, yet frightening in its application to the masses that worship at the altars of technology and the status quo. I recommend everyone concerned about our military forces read these books. I encourage everyone who reads these books to share your thoughts with me, and with others who need to read and heed Poole’s message.

With our global war on terrorism approaching its second year, and the realization that fighting terrorists (not necessarily the state-sponsors of the terrorists) is a very nasty and personal affair, I read again three “classics” I first read when I was just beginning my military service: Robert A. Heinlein’s Starship Troopers, C.S. Forester’s Rifleman Dodd, and Elbert Hubbard’s A Message to Garcia. I found these books have a lot of connections to each other, and they fit in well with Poole’s message about individuals and small-units.

The most entertaining book I read is one that I would call an “instant classic” – Gates of Fire by Steven Pressfield. If you have not read this book yet, you are missing out on a great experience into the hearts and minds of warriors who epitomized honor, courage, and commitment in a desperate fight against unbeatable odds.

Another journey into warriors’ perspectives was Ted McKeldin’s From the Horse’s Mouth (available from the Marine Corps Association bookstore). This collection of personal recollections of warriors from many different campaigns contains many truisms about combat, training and leadership that should never be far from our collective consciousness.

My “think tank” readings included five very different thought-provoking books. The Center for Defense Information published two strategic books of particular note: A Swift, Elusive Sword: What if Sun Tzu and John Boyd did a national defense review? by Chester W. Richards, and, Reforging the Sword: Forces for a 21^st Century Security Strategy by Col. Daniel Smith (ret.), Marcus Corbin and Christopher Hellman.

Stephen L. Carter’s Integrity, Robert K. Greenleaf’s Servant Leadership, and Jim Stockdale’s Thoughts of a Philosophical Fighter Pilot close out my year’s most influential books list.

Lastly, I would be remiss if I failed to mention two very important and meaningful movies in the past year. While action-packed and entertaining for the general public, they contain many lessons for all military and political leaders at all levels: We Were Soldiers and Black Hawk Down. Like my “think tank” books, these movies were thought-provoking and well worth the cost and time to get through them.

Much has changed in the world since Sept. 18, 2001, and no doubt much will change between now and Sept. 18, 2003. Looking back, we were suddenly confronted by many uncertainties on this date last year. 

I look forward to be a part of the DefenseWatch magazine team as we start our second year.

Contributing Editor Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd is the pen name of an active-duty Marine Corps officer stationed at the Pentagon. He can be reached at mattdodd1775@hotmail.com.         

Table of Contents

Editor’s Note: As DefenseWatch magazine reaches its first anniversary with the Sept. 18, 2002, issue, a number of team members offer their personal reflections:

An Incredible Year

What an incredible year it has been! DefenseWatch magazine, the voice for the common soldier, sailor, airman, Marine and Coast Guardsman, premiered shortly after one of the most horrendously tragic events in our nation's history. Much has been written about that horrific day and much will continue to be written, but I think it is safe to say that DefenseWatch will focus on its mission, which is to provide a forum for the concerns of our military personnel and to keep a close watch on the perfumed princes and their political allies who may be tempted to betray the trust placed in them.

While the nation began to heal in the aftermath of 9/11, we at DefenseWatch came together as a team. And what a professional team we are! Our inspiration comes from Col. David Hackworth, who had the excellent judgment to hire Ed Offley as our Editor.  Ed has provided the leadership and journalistic skills that have honed away some of the rough edges of our writing and he has maintained the focus that has allowed all of us who write here to better serve our audience, the Americans defending our country.

We are a widely dispersed group of writers who are brought together by our shared interest in military people. When not on book tour, Col. Hackworth lives in Connecticut. Jeff Galland serves with the U.S. Army in Germany. Veterans Editor Andrea West lives and writes from Montana. Our able Webmaster, Chris Humphrey, and Navy Editor Robert Williscroft live and work in southern California. Patrick Hayes hails from New Mexico. I live in New Jersey.

We have active-duty Marine Officers and serving Army and Navy officers who regularly appear as part of our forum. They bring with them an immense love of country, pride in their profession and their own skills and an intense desire to fix what has been broken. And we have articulate enlisted people who voice their concerns on poor leadership and planning, wasteful social experimentation and the dismantling of combat capability and readiness.

Personally, I am very honored to be included in this company. To those of you in uniform protecting us, always know that we are here for you. We will watch out for you, just as you do for us.

--Paul Connors, Air Force Editor 

Our Mission Is to Serve the Troops

It has been my honor to serve as Deputy Editor of DefenseWatch magazine over the past 12 months. My personal thanks to the DW team, and to each one of our readers who take time to follow, comment, contribute and write us with their thoughts, experiences and impressions.  Please keep them coming.

It has been highly rewarding to share discussion and frequent debate with a group of gifted authors and researchers. Each contributes time and effort by consistently displaying his or her care and concern for our country, our soldiers and veterans.

The coming year holds many challenges for America and its armed forces both at home and abroad. To those of you in uniform, remember that you are not alone – DefenseWatch is dedicated to looking after you and your families.

--J. David Galland, Deputy Editor

The Year Ahead

I have spent the last year researching various topics: the Department of Veterans Affairs, Russia, North Korea and the Middle East. These projects have given me one great blessing: the acquaintance of so many wonderful people who are devoted to our country and to those who wear the uniform. To them I wish, may the coming year bring all of you good fortune, and a secure future.

--Andrea West, Veterans Editor

Glad to Be Part of DefenseWatch

Defense of the nation is the most critical function our government performs, and our defense posture since the Vietnam War has worried me greatly. I have felt the need for many years now to express my opinions in writing, and being a member of the DefenseWatch team has allowed me to express my concerns to what is hopefully a relevant audience. 

--Jim Simpson, Contributing Editor

A Noble Cause

On the wall in my study at home, I keep a portrait of George Washington kneeling in prayer at Valley Forge. On that cold winter night he prayed for help for this nation in the face of an implacable foe. He prayed that his voice would not be silenced as it called out for a free nation where citizens could enjoy liberty and justice. But his voice was not alone; it was bolstered by the voices of patriots from all thirteen colonies. Therein lied the greatest strength of the Continental Army, the indomitable American fighting spirit.

Contributing articles for DefenseWatch has enabled me to add my voice to ensure that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Coast Guardsmen and Marines receive the respect and treatment they so honorably earn and deserve.

--Christian M. Weber, Contributing Editor

Closing the Gap

“When we assumed the soldier, we did not lay aside the citizen.”

The words of Gen. George Washington still resonate today as the basic premise of SFTT and DefenseWatch magazine, although in a way that Washington himself perhaps never intended.

Despite the outburst of patriotism and national pride in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, a dangerous gap still divides the U.S. armed forces from the civilian society they are sworn to protect. It is a gap born of unintentional consequences, the ending of conscription a quarter-century ago, and a divide that promotes mutual misunderstanding and ignorance.

For the past year, we at DefenseWatch have worked to create a new form of journalism specializing in military, defense and veterans issues. Rather than “explain” the ways of the military to an uninformed civilian audience, or to “inform” military people of the arcane ways of civilian life, we are dedicated to identifying and shedding light on critical issues and trends affecting the military and veterans communities, but in a way that both military and civilian readers will recognize and comprehend.

We look forward to another year of service to you.

--Ed Offley, Editor

Table of Contents

Guest Column: Fighting Terrorism – and USAF Apathy

By Mike Murphy

As the one-year anniversary of Sept. 11th approached, I found myself reflecting on the past year. If it is possible to have “good” things come out of the tragic attack on America, I believe that one of them is that we all were forced to take a closer look at our freedom, and what it sometimes costs to keep it. 

One of these good things is that we as Americans became more familiar with some of the Special Operations Forces whose job it has always been to protect our way of life, no matter what the sacrifice. The intense media scrutiny covering the invasion of Afghanistan, combined with the latest and greatest in technology, brought the unique capabilities of U.S. Special Operations Forces to the attention of the American public in almost real time as events unfolded. The protected learned more about their protectors in a few short months following 9/11 than in any previous period in history.

Some of these units, such as Air Force Tactical Air Control Parties (TACP), the only troops in the U.S. military whose full-time mission is to coordinate and control close air support, were not known previously to most people in the military, let alone the American public. For the last few decades, 99 percent of the American public had no idea that whenever they watched the news and learned about air strikes somewhere in the world that there were in many cases guys on the ground with “eyes on” the enemy, talking the pilots onto the target. If they did think about the players involved, most people thought of high-speed aircraft with bombing computers and visualized the business air strikes much like a video game, at best with a detached sense of appreciation for our ability to protect our nation and its interests.

The public almost never thought of the Air Force guys on the ground, humping rucksacks with over 100 pounds of radios, secure voice equipment, extra batteries, global positioning systems, laser target designators, weapons, ammunition, and if lucky enough, an extra pair of socks. 

They never thought about the guys whose job it is to infiltrate enemy territory without being seen no matter what the terrain, to observe the enemy while gathering target intelligence, to provide clear and secure communication capabilities in hostile environments while requesting and controlling terminal air strikes. Sometimes when the air strikes have been completed and all hell breaks loose, these Forward Air Controllers have to use their extensive training in escape and evasion to get themselves out of harm’s way and back to friendly territory or get themselves exfiltrated in a hurry.

Almost always in the shadows, these “quiet professionals” have given themselves to the cause of protecting our freedom without recognition for decades. One thing that the American public is learning from the extensive media coverage of our military action in Afghanistan after September 11th is that even though they get their paychecks from the Air Force, TACPs can go an entire career without ever being stationed on an Air Force base. They live and work directly with every combat maneuver unit that the U.S. Army has, whether it is the 82nd Airborne Division, the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, the 75th Ranger Regiment, Special Forces, the 10th Mountain Division, etc. TACP members have also served with many foreign military units including the French Foreign Legion.

Because of their detached duty locations, and their close integration with the ground forces they support, TACPs have often been forgotten by the U.S. Air Force when it comes to supporting them with the latest training and equipment needed to complete their mission. In the light of the attention they have received recently, this is hopefully beginning to change.

A perfect example of this occurred to me as I watched the news coverage of the night jumps the Rangers and Special Forces made while seizing an airfield in southern Afghanistan and another Taliban complex near Kandahar. I knew that the Air Force TACP members were parachuting in right alongside them to designate targets and control the air strikes that would be needed, just as they had always done, without recognition.

This made me think about a TACP member I knew briefly in Panama who had done such a great job for the Army that he was asked if there was anything the commander could do for him. This Air Force TACP member answered that he wanted to go to Ranger School. The Army officer told him, “no problem,” and secured a training slot for him. When the Air Force learned about this, they cancelled the TACP member’s slot to Ranger School because it had not come through normal Air Force channels (forgetting the fact that TACP members don’t work in normal Air Force channels). 

TACP members have always had to live the motto, “Improvise, Adapt, Overcome,” in an effort to scrounge equipment, attend training schools that increase their combat capabilities, and overcome the bean counters as warriors will always do. I happen to know that years later, that same determined TACP member found another way to get to Ranger school and he brought honor to all of us when he graduated. Through his determination in the face of stupidity and red tape, he was able to increase his combat effectiveness and thereby his ability to protect our freedom.

That is the caliber of men who were jumping into Afghanistan that night in an effort to make our children safer. That is the caliber of our military men that are constantly protecting us, whether they receive recognition or not. Those are the kind of men who the American people have become more keenly aware of since Sept. 11, 2001: the kind of men who are willing to do whatever it takes to protect our way of life, even if they have to fight just for the opportunity.

Murphy is an instructor of e-Commerce at the Illinois Institute of Technology and is a former TACP member and ETAC who served in Arizona and Panama from 1991 to 1995. He can be reached at Murph275@aol.com.

Editor’s Note: To read a first-person account of a U.S. Air Force TACP Member’s experience in Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan, please click on the above hyperlink.

Table of Contents