By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson
The San Diego Union-Tribune
A Washington Post article

WASHINGTON – The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

Cpl. Westin Floeter, left, takes directions from Sgt. Roy Moreland (foreground) during a training exercise at Ft. Lewis, Wash., on Monday Nov. 3, 2008. (AP Photo/The News Tribune, Peter Haley)

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old U.S. law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

The Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response – a sevenfold increase in five years – "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

However, the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted “a fundamental change in military culture," McHale said.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor Renuart, commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide.

All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield-explosive attack.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.

Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the Pentagon's approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to U.S. Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

"This is a genuine recognition that this (job) isn't something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU's National Security Project. Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.

“There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green,” Healy said. “And that's at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace.”

McHale said the response units will be subject to the Posse Comitatus Act, that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care and logistics.

The one-year domestic mission does not replace the brigade's next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it also may face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families.

"We want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan," he said. The 1st Brigade's soldiers “will have some very aggressive training, but also will be home for much of that."

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

"It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's something else to make it happen,” he said. “It's time to put our money where our mouth is."

Copyright 2008 San Diego Union-Tribune