Evening star., 1962-09-04
Unison VS.. McNomoro

The effort of an exasperated and
powerful Congressman to deflate an
awesomely positive Secretary of Defense
could be an entertaining battle Of titans
If it did not threaten to sidetrack re-
organization of the National Guard and
Reserves. But the dispute may well
delay or halt much-needed reforms.
The two gentlemen, therefore, should
back off, cool down and start over.
1t is easy to see how Congressman
Vinson, chairman of the Armed Services
Committee, can be irritated by Secre-
tary Mcnamara. The Secretary's great
intellect and energy are admired by all.
But his impatience with people who
question the decisions Of his Depart
ment can irk knowledgeable Congress
men. Mr.. VinSon is extremely knowl-
edgeable about military affairs, and
his help and advice could probably i'm
prove the Mcnamara reorganization
plan.
Instead of helping, however, Mr..
Vinson has Endorsed subcommittee
report which is specified by the subcom-
mittee chairman, Representative Hebert,
to be in part blast" at Mr.. Mcnamara
personally. The report threatens con-
greSSional retaliation If Mr.. Mcnamara
goes ahead with the Pentagon's re-
organization plan. Furthermore, Mr..
Vinson indorSeS something that even
the subcommittee shows to be wrong
The report says on page 6671 that
'''it is not the subcommittee's intention
to question a military decision which
determines that eight Reserve and
Guard divisions are no longer required
in the Reserve Establishment. Nor does
the subcommittee question a military
decision as to the number of personnel
required by the Department of the Army
for mobilization" But on page 6673
the report recommends that the eight
unneeded divisions be retained, and on
page 6674 it tells the Army to keep
100000 men in the reserves $4,000 more
than Army officers are asking for) or
face a formal congressional order to
keep them. This contradiction makes
no sense.
Army officers testified before the
subcommittee that they arrived at their
the reserves in this logical way: They
looked at the contingency war plans,
counted the number and type Of Army
units needed, subtracted the units which
will be supplied by the active Army and
decided that the reserves must supply
the rest. They found that about TOO
little and large reserve units were sur
plus to the war plans, and these are
the units which are scheduled to be
dropped or converted. The eight divi-
sions which the Army says 1t does not
need are to be converted to eight battle
groups which 1t does need. At the same
time, six key divisions of the 20 to
remain, and their supporting units, will
be brought to higher level of training,
manning and arming.
Reserve and Guard spokesmen and
many local and State politicians ques-
ton these military decisions, however,
apparently because they believe simply
that more reServistS are always better
than fewer. The ArmyIs, and Mr.. Nc
NamaraS, reasoning seems sounder.
The subcommittee report is on good
grounds, however, when it recommends
lengthening OF six-month enliStments
(the Army can give more useful training
to potential reservists this way) and
quicker modernization of reserve equip
ment. These recommendation can be
added to the Pentagon reserve plan,
and testimony shows they will get full
Endorsement Of the military leaders.
A continued feud between the boss
OF the House Armed Services Committee
and the boss Of the Pentagon can only
hurt the country. There obviously is
room for a compromise on reserve re-
organization that will square with mill
tary recommendations :, Both sides
should make the effort to achieve 1t.