"Commander: Cut to Guard an error," The Capital, June 2, 1997 <p> The Capital (Annapolis, MD.), June 02, 1997 <p>Copyright 1997 Capital-Gazette Communications, Inc. <p>June 02, 1997, Monday <br>SECTION: Front; Pg. A1 <br>HEADLINE: Commander: Cut to Guard an error <br>BYLINE: By BRADLEY PENISTON Staff Writer <p>Annapolis could be stripped of the kind of aid that cleared roads and delivered medical aid during the blizzard of 1996 if a proposed 10 percent cut in the Army National Guard is approved, according to the state Guard commander. <p>Lt. Gen. James Fretterd, adjutant general of the Maryland National Guard, called Pentagon plans to shrink the Guard a strategic mistake _ and a false economy. <p>"Instead of removing structure from the Army National Guard, they ought to be adding it. The National Guard is the best defense bargain going," he said. <p>The proposal comes as part of the recently released Quadrennial Defense Review, which outlines how the Pentagon plans to fight two regional conflicts on an annual budget of $ 250 billion. <p>In coming months, Congress will debate the report's recommendations, including the proposal to pay for better weapons by cutting troops in all of the armed services. <p>Gen. Fretterd said the National Guard, which has shrunk from 457,000 to 367,000 troops since 1989, is becoming too small to handle its dual mission. The Guard provides the Pentagon with a strategic troop reserve, as well as serving under the command of the nation's governors during disasters or other crises. <p>"We're down to our bare bones," he said. <p>A panel of Army, Army Reserve, and National Guard generals is meeting through Wednesday to determine how the Reserve and Guard would split up the proposed 45,000-man cut in reserve forces. <p>The fate of the Guard's 1/157th Cavalry, headquartered just outside the city on Hudson Street, is unknown. Given the choice, Gen. Fretterd said he won't touch the scout squadron, which was named the nation's most combat-ready reserve unit in November. <p>A 46-year veteran, the general fears that budget-driven cuts may leave the nation short of reserve troops in wartime. <p>Consuming just 2 percent of the Army's annual operating budget, the Guard is a more cost-effective way to maintain a reserve than paying active-duty Army soldiers, Gen. Fretterd said. <p>But Pentagon officials say the armed forces can be safely trimmed. <p>"During the Cold War, we really needed a deep strategic reserve. The feeling is we don't need that anymore," said Maj. Steve Shappell, a Pentagon spokesman. <p>Maj. Shappell said the Guard's soldiers, who train a minimum of one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer, might not provide the quick-response combat force necessary in a shrinking world. <p>Gen. Fretterd responded that a Guard combat unit can be ready in three to four months _ which was quick enough for Desert Storm _ and that Guard support units can deploy much faster than that. <p>The general says the active Army unfairly disparages the Guard's ef fectiveness _ an unusually bitter charge for a top military leader to level against superiors. <p>"I'm a soldier. I'm a team player. But when these kinds of cuts come, it's time to go political," he said, spreading his hands. <p>A congressional aide said such fights are nothing new. <p>"Every four years you have this running battle between the Pentagon, which is looking to protect active duty personnel, and Congress, which has many supporters of the National Guard," said Richard Cross, a spokesman for Rep. Robert Erlich, R-Baltimore. <p>Several other Maryland lawmakers are also keeping a close eye on the debate. <p>There's one more reason to support the Guard, Gen. Fretterd said. A dwindling citizen militia may dissolve the historic bond between the population and its armed forces. <p>"As an American, it worries the hell out of me," he said. <p>GRAPHIC: LT. GEN. JAMES FRETTERD