Final Thoughts

— By Lt. Gen. Jon A. Jensen (Ret.)
Editor's Note: The author retired Aug. 5.

Digital Version

As my time as the 22nd director of the Army National Guard draws to a close, I hope I’ve positively impacted the Army Guard and the men and women I have been entrusted with advocating for.

I am amazed at what we have accomplished over my last four years as director. From our COVID-19 pandemic response to fostering successful cross-state collaborations in Army Guard division realignment and further solidifying our place as the active Army’s fully integrated combat reserve, I am humbled by our accomplishments and proud to have served the more than 325,000 men and women who consistently give their all to their communities, their states and territories and their nation.

They are the best of the best and deserve the very best leadership.

I also reflect on the Army Guard’s unbroken line of service since 1636 and what it means to be a citizen-soldier.

What does it mean today to be a citizen-soldier in the era of “persistent competition,” where the lines between peace and war are more obscure? As I depart, our history department is updating I Am the Guard, a book by Michael Doubler that covers our history. It says, “The National Guard is a dynamic institution that constantly adapts to the political, social, and economic conditions that shape American society.”

I have had the privilege of seeing that in person, and it has been amazing.

As the Global War on Terrorism changes and the Army restructures for large-scale combat operations, the ARNG’s institutions must reflect on who we are, who we have been and who we need to be to continue meeting the needs of our nation, our states and our commitment to our service members.

As the 22nd Army Guard director, communicating and setting clear priorities remained the two most important things I tried to do for our leaders across the 54 states, territories and the District of Columbia, as well as senior Army leaders.

The Guard is unique in the Defense Department because we are two overlapping organizations: the National Guard of the United States and the National Guard of each state or territory. With no single commander of the Guard, we are a peer-led organization that functions most effectively when we have a consensus on what we need to do.

More importantly, the Army Guard is fully integrated at every level of the Army and vital to the mission to fight and win America’s wars. Known in Army circles as “Compo 2” and comprised of more than 325,000 soldiers, the Army Guard makes up nearly 40% of the Total Army. The Army Guard also represents more than 2,360 communities nationwide, making it the bridge to the so-called civil-military divide.

Since I took over as the Army Guard director, we have performed with distinction. With nearly 32 million individual domestic-response days since 2020 and more than 690,000 individual mobilizations supporting combatant commands worldwide since 9/11, the Army Guard continues demonstrating it is an integrated operational reserve. Additionally, with consistent top showings in the annual best of the best competitions like the Army Best Squad, the Sullivan Cup, the Best Sniper and Best Ranger, the Army Guard consistently demonstrates it is nearly indistinguishable from its Compo 1 counterparts.

As the decades-old debates regarding the identity of the Army Guard and where it fits have re-emerged, and before transitioning out as the DARNG, I want to emphasize some crucial things, including re-educating the audience on what the Army Guard is, what it is capable of, where it came from and where it is going.

What is the ARNG? An Enduring American Institution with Intrinsic Value

The Army Guard was established Dec. 13, 1636, with the formation of existing militia companies from the Massachusetts Bay Colony into three regiments. Since then, the Army Guard has formed a nearly indistinguishable identity with the Regular Army as the core of America’s identity and security, representing both the state and federal government’s shared responsibility to protect liberty from foreign and domestic threats.

The ARNG’s many enduring qualities continue to defend that ideal and provide added value to the nation during crisis. Today, the nation increasingly leverages the Army Guard to provide additional value in global power competition as well as on the home front through partnerships like the State Partnership Program, the Department of the Army’s campaigning activities and its partnership with its local, state and federal emergency partners.

As the ARNG emerges into an era of strategic competition and an ever-changing climate, it is essential that it adapt its institutions and modernize on par with its active-duty counterparts to meet current and future national demands as an enterprise.

Enduring Attributes Equals Added Value

The Army Guard as an institution has unique and enduring attributes essential to its success that must be preserved and considered as the foundation of its strategic direction to ensure success at home and abroad. The Army Guard has been fundamental to the American national security strategy since well before our nation’s founding and was cemented into its very DNA when our nation’s first commander in chief, George Washington said on May 1, 1783, “A peace establishment for the United States of America [requires] four [elements]: First, a regular and standing force. Second, a well-organized militia similar in their maneuvers, exercise, and arms. Third, arsenals of military stores. Fourth, academies for instruction in the military art, particularly engineering and artillery are essential and difficult to learn.”

These enduring attributes include its unique authorities, which it draws from the U.S. Constitution’s Article 1, Section 8, which allows a state ARNG to function in a law-enforcement capacity and as a force for the governors when in state active duty. These authorities are rooted in its constitutional requirement “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” They also include the Army Guard’s parallel command structures, its persistent partnerships with local, state and federal agencies as well as civic organizations, the geographic dispersion of its facilities and members, its overall cost-effectiveness, the civilian acquired skills its members bring to the fight and unit focused deployment and training. These qualities make the Army Guard unequally qualified to answer the call and successfully navigate complex challenges at home and abroad.

The Army Guard’s parallel command structure is similar to that of its active and Reserve counterparts in that civilians control the Army Guard. However, unlike its active and Reserve counterparts, the ARNG is unique in that it has two chains of authority.

According to Article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, when called into federal service of the United States, the president is commander in chief of what is now called the Army National Guard of the United States, with civilian control flowing from the president to the secretary of defense and the secretary of the Army.

The chief of the National Guard Bureau reports to the secretary of defense. As a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the NGB chief delegates authority for all Army corporate matters to the Army Guard director, who coordinates with the secretary of the Army and the Army chief of staff on these issues. This vital distinction allows the Army Guard to mobilize to support combatant commanders and fight and win America’s wars.

When called into service by their state or territory, elected governors provide civilian control over the ARNG of their state or territory. In this situation, the governor’s authority flows through the adjutant general, who is a state employee and often a federally recognized general officer. During state active-duty periods, Army Guard members and units can be called to duty to support a range of missions from support to local law enforcement to disaster-response support.

Responsible to their state, territory, or district first, and with many members serving and training together in the same communities they were born and raised, this community-minded, uniquely Guard mentality translates to strong long-term, highly interconnected internal and external relationships built over many years. This unique Guard dynamic frequently translates to highly effective interoperable partnerships with leaders at the state, territory, district, federal and international levels.

These examples can be seen locally with Youth ChalleNGe academies and counterdrug programs as well as with each local, state and federal response conducted over the last several decades. The Army Guard’s overwhelmingly successful rapid response to numerous national emergencies, including the COVID-19 pandemic, where the Army Guard performed nearly 15 million man-days throughout the 54 states, territories, and the District of Columbia, is a true testament to its ability to forge strong relationships nationwide. This success has also been demonstrated internationally with the Army National Guard’s highly successful partnerships with former Soviet bloc countries like Ukraine.

The Army Guard also brings valuable civilian-acquired skills to the fight. As the largest reserve component, the ARNG often performs civil and military missions, allowing Guardsmen to apply those civilian skills learned and practiced out of uniform more regularly in uniform. Additionally, with the highest percentage of combat arms specialties in the RC, the Army Guard is uniquely suited to serve as the Army’s premier fully integrated operational reserve.

Where does the Army Guard shine or provide added value regarding cost-effectiveness and stability in reference to its federal mission? The ARNG has provided the Total Army’s consistent foundation for decades. Due to its geographic dispersion and unique authorities, the ARNG changes purposely slower than the Regular Army. The ARNG’s deliberateness enables the Army’s rapid expansion and experimentation while preserving a solid support base of Citizen-Soldiers in the event of significant contingency requirements but at a fraction of the cost of its active-duty counterparts.

The bottom line? The Army Guard allows for flexible, cost-effective force structure and operations that meet an ever-evolving federal requirement for less money. As approximately 16% of the uniformed DoD Joint Force, the Army Guard executes roughly 30% of the overseas missions, deploying about 10% of its force annually while receiving only about 10% of the annual Army budget. In a nonmobilized status, ARNG units cost approximately 20% of an active-duty unit while generally remaining on par with active-duty costs when mobilized.

The future of the Army Guard: The Army Guard in an emerging competitive era and the case for enterprise functioning

The Army Guard has turned a corner and entered the era of great power competition. For the Army Guard and its partners, this means reacting to an emerging international competitive paradigm that transcends peace and war and directly affects our operations and sustainability.

As the ARNG continues to adapt to meet national requirements, this new competitive paradigm means that the ARNG must be a part of all future Army and DoD planning. The Army Guard is no longer a “strategic reserve” or “operational reserve” but rather an integrated reserve providing operational capability in competition, campaigning, and strategic depth for contingency and conflict. As a result, in the future, the Army Guard will need to seriously consider a variety of trends that directly affect that ability.

Societal changes, trends in global competition like the growing influence of nonstate actors, interruptions in supply chain networks, changes in the economy, intensifying environmental pressures, disasters and crises, including water issues and rising threats to the homeland, are but a few that directly affect the Army Guard’s ability to provide that needed operational capability and strategic depth.

These trends all influence four key environmental factors for the ARNG including increasing competition between autocracy and democracy, which results in a need for the ARNG to provide operational capacity and strategic depth as an integrated reserve, increasing cost and scale of natural disasters, increasing political divisiveness and tension and decreasing resources in terms of reduced financial resources and labor resources available.

This new competitive era also creates opportunities and threats for the Army Guard. Specific opportunities that present themselves include the chance to build or maintain the generational readiness needed to strengthen its ability to provide operational capabilities while also providing an inexpensive and reliable strength base for the Army. Furthermore, considering the need to mitigate threats like societal and political polarization, the Army Guard, with its dual state/federal mission and deep connection to their communities, makes the ARNG uniquely suited to build and retain the public’s trust.

Rooted in our foundation as a nation and in the DNA of its security and defense, the Army Guard continues to make a compelling case for applying enterprise functioning in the Army Guard.

Starting with the need for increased full-time manning, the ARNG must improve its enterprise functioning to be effective in the competitive era. The nation needs the ARNG because its enduring and unique attributes make it a key institution in national security and resilience, and its practices must reflect that.

The ARNG must balance its diverse interests and priorities around common goals to be most effective while encouraging divergent and critical thought and problem-solving throughout the organization. Understanding the complexities related to ARNG full-time manning demonstrates why this is the case and sets the stage for the Army Guard’s strategic direction. The ARNG must balance its diverse interests and priorities with common goals to be most effective while encouraging divergent and critical thought and problem-solving across the organization. Understanding the complexities related to ARNG full-time manning demonstrates why this is the case and sets the stage for its strategic direction.

As the ARNG moves forward, it is imperative that it sees, understands, and behaves as an enterprise. This shift in perspective is key to successfully shaping the ARNG beyond 2030. It involves developing enterprise-level professionals and processes, creating a sustainable strategic narrative, and enhancing transparency and accountability.

Adapting governance and institutions is a critical step for the ARNG to meet the demands of the new competitive era. This adaptation is necessary to enable communication, identification of shared interests, and strategies grounded in the commitment to nation, state and citizen-soldiers. The ARNG beyond 2030 must be an institution that draws on its unique lineage and identity to empower enterprise-level adaptation to seize opportunities, mitigate threats and build military forces to meet its dual national security and domestic resilience missions in an era of persistent competition.

So, with that, I say farewell! It has been my absolute honor and privilege to serve my community, my home state of Minnesota, the Army Guard, my nation and the American people for more than 41 years. This assignment has been one of my most challenging yet rewarding professional experiences. On behalf of my wife, Cindy, and our three children, thank you again for your heartfelt support during my time as the director and for your selfless service to our great nation.