Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1973


Operational Forces

The Army's operational situation began to stabilize in fiscal year 1973 as the Vietnam War ended and the lines of postwar adjustment began to take shape. Over-all strength, which had been declining sharply as the war abated and U.S. troops were withdrawn, now leveled off at 800,000. The strength and readiness of the thirteen divisions in the force structure gradually improved as the year progressed.

With the Army out of Vietnam, major forward deployments included four and a third divisions in Europe and one in Korea, with special mission brigades on station in Alaska, Panama, and Berlin. There were seven divisions in the continental United States and two-thirds of a division in Hawaii. These 13 active Army divisions, backed by 8 divisions and 21 combat brigades of the Reserve Components, comprised the Army's base-line force in June 1973.

The Pacific and the Far East

The major change in Army forces during fiscal year 1973, one that substantially affected the operations of U.S. Army, Pacific, was the liquidation of the Vietnam commitment. U.S. Army withdrawal from the peak deployment there in mid-1969 took place over the course of three and a half years in fifteen redeployment increments, the last three of them in fiscal year 1973. In the thirteenth increment spanning July and August 1972, approximately 10,000 U.S. military personnel were withdrawn, including two infantry battalions that were the last Army combat units in South Vietnam. The fourteenth increment brought another 12,000 troops, primarily Army combat service support units, back to the United States by 30 November 1972.

At that point, with only 27,000 American military personnel left in Vietnam, 15,000 of them Army members, redeployment was suspended as the result of a breakdown in diplomatic negotiations in Paris. Finally, on 23 January 1973, President Nixon announced that agreement had been reached in Paris, that a cease-fire would take effect on 27 January 1973, and that all U.S. military personnel would be withdrawn from Vietnam by 28 March 1973. By that date all remaining troops had been withdrawn in four phases of the fifteenth increment, leaving only a small number of military personnel assigned to the Office of the Defense Attache, Saigon, and with the Four Party Joint Military Commission.


Following is a summary of Army redeployments from Vietnam in fiscal years 1970-73:

Fiscal Year

Number of Increments




Major U.S. Army Combat Units






9th Inf Div; 1st Inf Div; Elements, 4th Inf Div; 82d Abn Div






4th Inf Div; 25th Inf Div; 1st Cav Div (Airmobile); Elements, 9th Inf Div; 199th Inf Bde; 11th Cav Regt






23d Inf Div; 101st Abn Div (Airmobile); Elements, 5th Inf Div; 1st Cav, 173d Abn Bde, 196th Inf Bde













During the final months of U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, other allied nations were pulling out their forces as well. The Australian Army assistance group departed from Vietnam on 18 December 1972, and on 2 March 1973 the contingents from Thailand and the Philippines left. Between 30 January and 23 March the two Republic of Korea divisions were withdrawn, and on 26 March the Republic of China completed the departure of its contingents. The removal of these elements relieved the United States of a major support mission which it had fulfilled over an extended period of time.

As fighting in South Vietnam and peace negotiations in Paris continued, the United States accelerated the delivery of tanks, howitzers, small arms, vehicles, communications equipment, and ammunition to insure that the Republic of Vietnam would have the means of defending itself upon implementation of the cease-fire agreement. Under the agreement, arms and other materiel importation into South Vietnamese territory would be limited to one-for-one replacement. Deliveries were completed by 20 November 1972, and U.S. advisers, until their withdrawal from regimental levels in February 1973, helped the South Vietnamese develop their capability to use the new materiel.

Beginning in July 1972, the number of U.S. advisers decreased steadily, from about six thousand to zero in March 1973; district and regimental teams were first withdrawn as advisory efforts shifted from day-to-day operational support to consultation on program management and staff co-ordination. By March, contract or Department of Defense civilian specialists had replaced military men in the few remaining areas where technical knowledge or administrative skill was required.

Although it had been freed of certain support requirements by the withdrawal of allied contingents, the United States acquired a new general support mission with the arrival of the International Commission of Control and Supervision (ICCS). On 28 January 1973, representatives of Canada, Hungary, Indonesia, and Poland began arriving in South


Vietnam, and U.S. Army, Vietnam /Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (separate commands which had been combined on 15 May 1972), provided initial support including billeting, communications equipment, messing, and medical facilities. As an example of the magnitude of that support, the Army provided 8 teletypewriters, 171 FM radios, 148 sedans, 136 scout vehicles, 85 jeeps, 55 3/4-ton trucks, 30 helicopters, and 3 U-21 aircraft to backup the ICCS and the Four Party Joint Military Commission. Support for the latter continued until its termination on 31 March; support for the ICCS continued for another month, when Vietnamese and civilian contractors assumed the burden. Without U.S. support, neither of these bodies would have been able to function with any effect in the critical sixty-day period between the start of the cease-fire and the withdrawal of remaining non-indigenous forces.

The attainment of the cease-fire and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam led automatically to the disestablishment, on 29 March 1973, of the major Army field headquarters in Southeast Asia—United States Army, Vietnam/Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

In Thailand, meanwhile, U.S. Army Support Command, Thailand, continued to provide primary logistics support for military assistance in Thailand and Cambodia and on 1 July 1972 acquired responsibility for storage and stocks connected with the Army portion of military support to neighboring Laos.

There were several other developments in the U.S. Army, Pacific, region during the year. In Korea the Eighth Army continued as the major U.S. ground headquarters; Army field elements were assigned to the I U.S./ROK Corps Group headquartered at Uijonbu. Conditions in Korea were stable during fiscal year 1973. On 4 July 1972, following a series of discussions between representatives of the two Koreas, a joint announcement was issued in which the parties agreed to work for reunification and to take other steps toward stability and peace. Infiltration and incidents dropped off to such a degree that hostile-fire pay for U.S. personnel serving along the demilitarized zone—authorized in April 1968 in a period of high tension and frequent clashes—was terminated. In one of the few significant developments concerning U.S. Army forces, an assault helicopter company, equipped with the CH-47C craft, was activated, organized, and trained in the United States and shipped to Korea in February 1973.

In Japan the U.S. Army, Japan/IX Corps headquarters continued in operation at Camp Zama, along with the subordinate commands listed in last year's report. One incident of some note involving U.S. operations occurred in Japan on 4 August 1972 when Japanese demonstrators, supported by local government officials, blocked the road from the U.S. Army depot at Sagami to the U.S. North Pier at Yokohama to prevent


the shipment of five M48 tanks to Vietnam. A later movement of armored personnel carriers was stopped, and other attempts to move equipment were subjected to harassment by demonstrators. Although equipment had been moved from the depot to the pier for several years without incident, local Japanese officials, including the Socialist mayor of Yokohama, now imposed strict compliance with an ordinance of April 1972 which required permits to move overweight and oversize vehicles over roads and bridges.

The U.S./Japanese Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) provides that all U.S. vehicles, including armor, have the right of unimpeded access between U.S. facilities and Japanese ports; it also provides that U.S. forces will observe all relevant Japanese laws. On 17 October 1972, the Japanese cabinet resolved the problem by amending the existing vehicle restriction order to exempt U.S. forces from local permit requirements to move large vehicles. Thus 168 armored personnel carriers were moved from Sagami to the North Pier, the Chidori Bridge in Yokohama was reinforced, and M48 tanks were cleared for movement to the port. The impasse in Japan, however, required that M48 tanks be shipped directly from the United States to Vietnam to meet delivery schedules there. Consequently, Anniston Army Depot at Anniston, Alabama, had to accelerate its M48 rebuild program to insure adequate stocks to meet Vietnam requirements; materiel programed for shipment from Vietnam to Japan was diverted to other locations; and U.S. Army, Pacific, was alerted to anticipate and take steps to avoid possible further disruption in Japan or Okinawa, recently transferred to Japanese control. All in all, the tank-delivery impasse emphasized the need for contingency plans to keep logistics lines functioning.

Following the reversion of Okinawa to Japan on 15 May 1972, the Japanese Defense Agency took over the mission of defending Okinawa. By 31 December 1972 Japan had deployed some 3,200 personnel to Okinawa to take over ground and air defense, maritime defense patrol, and search and rescue operations. In March and April 1973 another 3,600 Japanese ground and air defense personnel were deployed for missile defense and to operate control and warning systems. By the close of the fiscal year about 6,800 Japanese Self-Defense Force personnel were stationed on Okinawa. Existing U.S. Hawk and Nike missile elements and aircraft control and warning systems were purchased by Japan. U.S. air defense units were phased out and the personnel were reassigned.

Because of various consolidations and reorganizations, principally resulting from termination of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam and Japanese assumption of the defense of Okinawa, U.S. military strength on Okinawa dropped from about 52,000 in 1969 to 40,000 by the end of fiscal year 1973. Base facilities were also cut back; 12 of 134 installa-


tions were transferred to Japanese forces, 34 were transferred to civilian use, and 88 were retained by U.S. forces. The Japanese government now serves as intermediary between U.S. forces and prefectual officials on Okinawa. Over the next few years further reductions are anticipated in U.S. holdings in both Okinawa and Japan.

In Hawaii, Governor John A. Burns announced on 9 February 1973 that in future wartime mobilization the 25th Infantry Division would be rounded out by the Hawaii Army National Guard's 29th Infantry Brigade and the U.S. Army Reserve's 100th Infantry Battalion of the 442d Infantry Regiment. This arrangement, worked out by Department of the Army, U.S. Army, Pacific, and the state adjutant general, required readjustments in the Hawaii Army National Guard and restructuring of the 29th Brigade. The action, a major change in the Reserve Component employment concept, enhances the mobilization readiness of Reserve elements and permits the immediate expansion to wartime strength of an Army combat division.

The 29th was restructured from a separate brigade of eleven units and 3,358 personnel to a divisional brigade of nine units with a strength of 2,710. Its effectiveness has been improved in both its state and federal roles. The 25th Infantry Division commander will share responsibility for the brigade's training, and each commander will be familiar with the other's procedures. The general officer position in the 29th is retained, and the incumbent becomes the 25th's assistant division commander upon mobilization.

The 100th Battalion required no reorganization under the new arrangement and will continue its training assemblies as in the past. Both the 29th Infantry Brigade and the 100th Battalion will continue to wear their respective distinctive insignia and carry all of the battle honors and credits to which their lineages entitle them.


With the downturn of the Vietnam War and the redeployment of U.S. forces from the Pacific region, the Atlantic area became the focus once again of the largest overseas deployment of U.S. Army elements. U.S. Army, Europe, continued to operate as an instrumentality of the United States in fulfilling its obligations to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. With only minor organizational changes during the year, U.S. Army, Europe, discharged its mission with 2 corps, 4 1/3 divisions, and 2 armored cavalry regiments. Major subordinate elements included the Theater Army Support Command, the Southern European Task Force in Italy, and the Berlin Brigade.

To improve conventional combat forces in the European area, four combat support units, comprising about a thousand men and new-


model equipment, were deployed during the period. The Chaparral/ Vulcan Air Defense Battalion of the 1st Infantry Division was deployed along with a supporting Ordnance detachment and two attack helicopter companies equipped with AH-1G Cobras; these units were organized, trained, and deployed from 13 November 1972 to 24 January 1973. Five forward area alerting radar platoons were also organized, trained, and deployed to Europe to augment the capability of existing Chaparral/ Vulcan air defense battalions, and an assault support helicopter company with CH-47 craft and two medical helicopter air ambulance platoons with UH-1 H helicopters were also deployed.

Under Project FENDER, the ratio of combat units to support units was improved without increasing U.S. Army strength in the theater. This so-called "tooth-to-tail" relationship was achieved through mergers, reductions, inactivations, and an aver-all streamlining of headquarters and logistical functions. Personnel economies were used to improve the combat forces, two tank battalions and an airborne battalion combat team were activated, and a 105-mm. artillery battalion was converted to a 155-mm. battalion.

Exercise REFORGER IV was conducted in Germany during 9 January-22 March 1973. This exercise, the fourth in a series begun in 1969, is conducted annually in accordance with U.S. obligations to NATO, the United Kingdom, and the Federal Republic of Germany and is designed to test procedures for receiving, equipping, and assembling deploying U.S. Army troops assigned to reinforce NATO. About 10,000 troops from the 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort Riley, Kansas, the 3d Brigade, 2d Armored Division, Fort Hood, Texas, and eight nondivisional support units deployed from bases in the continental United States to Rhine-Main, Ramstein, and Echterdingen airfields in Germany, requiring 109 C-141, 4 DC-8, and 6 C-5 airlift missions by the Military Airlift Command. On arrival, troops drew prepositioned heavy equipment stored at several locations in Germany and moved immediately to assembly areas where combat-loading, final maintenance, and inspections were performed. The units then moved to a major assembly area to open a five-day field training exercise. CERTAIN SHIELD, as it was called, was conducted in an area south of Wuerzburg, with REFORGER, U.S. Army, Europe, and German and Canadian units participating. The continental U.S. units then moved to the major training area at Grafenwoehr to test-fire all major weapons and perform heavy equipment maintenance; the main body of troops then flew out of Nuremberg to return home, while the remainder of the force returned the heavy equipment to storage before exiting from Ramstein Air Force Base. The exercise was considered by all commands to have been highly successful, and the German press commented favorably on the continuing U.S. commitment to NATO.


Alaska and Panama

In the northernmost of the fifty United States and the one closest to the Soviet Union, the U.S. Army, Alaska, is the Army component of the unified Alaskan Command, and in fiscal year 1973 it continued its mission of providing ground defense of Alaska. During the report period the military manpower reductions announced last year were completed; the organizational modifications are proving equal to the unique requirements of the Arctic area. The command's infantry brigade, aviation battalion, and support forces participated in two major exercises, and the air defense battalion continued to contribute to Alaska's air defense.

In the Panama Canal Zone, U.S. Army Forces Southern Command continued its defense mission during a period of sensitivity due to difficulties stemming from U.S.-Panama treaty negotiations, and to an earthquake in Nicaragua on 23 December 1972. In the latter instance the command responded by providing civil affairs and medical units, the 518th Engineer Company, and demolition teams. This military aid extended to mid-January 1973.

The Southern Command carried forward some organizational adjustments during the period, worked to improve over-all readiness, acquired responsibility for developing the Army's doctrine for jungle operations, and established a training program for company-size units in this special field. The first continental U.S. companies began training at the command's jungle Operations Training Center in October 1971; by February 197/3, forty-four units had requested jungle training and twenty-two were scheduled for fiscal year 1974.

In August 1972, three helicopters and one fixed-wing aircraft were loaned to Venezuela to carry out mapping, charting, and radar imagery interpretation in southern Venezuela. The Southern Command provided an aviation support team to service the three UH-1H and one U-1A aircraft.

Continental United States

There were no major changes during the fiscal year in the status of Army forces allocated to the defense of the continental United States. The forty-eight Nike-Hercules batteries defending nine urban /industrial complexes remained at that level. But three significant issues pertaining to the air defense of the United States were addressed.

The first concerned modified air defense objectives for continental United States, announced by the Secretary of Defense on 15 February 1972. This had triggered a major study by the joint Chiefs of Staff' to develop a modernized continental U.S. air defense concept of operations and the modernized forces required to implement it. The Army contributed to the study by analyzing not only Army modernized forces but also those of the Air Force. The Joint Chiefs approved and forwarded


on 14 September 1972 a concept of operations and recommended force and activity levels to fit the modified objectives for the United States. Elements of the modernized force included the Army's Surface-to-Air Missile Development (SAM-D) and the Air Force's Over-the-Horizon Backscatter Radar, Improved Manned Interceptor, and Airborne Warning and Control System.

The second issue, Program Budget Decision 271 of 4 December 1972, proposed three alternative force structures for the defense of continental United States. Upon consideration, the Deputy Secretary of Defense elected to maintain the currently approved force structure.

The third issue concerned a proposal submitted by the commander in chief of the Continental Air Defense Command (CINCONAD) to the joint Chiefs of Staff on 18 December 1972, that his headquarters elements be consolidated with those of the Aerospace Defense Command and the Air Force Component Command. The Joint Chiefs approved the consolidation, designated the commander of the Army Air Defense Command as the deputy commander of the Continental Air Defense Command, and directed a study of the possibility of consolidating Headquarters, Army Air Defense Command, and its subordinate headquarters into the combined Continental Air Defense /Aerospace Defense Command.


Army unit readiness improved during fiscal year 1973 as the turbulent conditions associated with the withdrawal from Vietnam subsided and stabilization became the rule rather than the exception. Of the thirteen active Army divisions, ten were rated as combat ready. The 9th Division at Fort Lewis, Washington, and the 25th Division in Hawaii, both recently constituted, had their personnel undergoing either basic or advanced training, with most of the advanced training being done in the divisions. The 4th Division at Fort Carson, Colorado, while further along in the cycle, had still not completed its training. The Army focused attention upon and allocated resources to training, discipline, organization, and techniques to attain a thirteen-division combat-ready force.

While unit readiness was improving during the year there was a small but measurable decline in logistics readiness, which could be attributed to unit activations, inactivations, and reorganizations. Units were hampered by shortages of qualified personnel and by fund constraints. But the general readiness posture of Army units worldwide was excellent. A number of management programs were in progress to improve logistics readiness, including one designed to insure that Strategic Army Force units in the continental United States attained a readiness condition matching their authorized levels of organization, another to


insure the levels and serviceability of materiel prepositioned in Europe, and a third to improve the status of equipment on hand in the Eighth Army in Korea.

Command and Control

The Worldwide Military Command and Control System consists of the National Military Command System, the command and control systems of the unified and specified commands, the subordinate unified commands, service and service component command headquarters, the management information systems of the service headquarters, and the command and control support systems of Department of Defense agencies. The National Military Command System is the primary subsystem and directly supports the National Command Authority and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In fiscal year 1972 a contract was awarded to Honeywell Information Systems, Inc., for computer systems, and the Army was assigned responsibility for seven of thirty-five approved systems and a terminal for the U.S. Army Forces Southern Command. During fiscal year 1973, the first three systems were installed at Headquarters, Department of the Army, in the operations and intelligence areas, and in the U.S. European Command and U.S. Army, Europe. The Army's remaining systems will be installed in fiscal year 1974. Within the Army Operations Center System, software was converted to insure compatibility with the new computer system.

In another command and control development, the joint Chiefs of Staff published a Worldwide Military Command and Control System warning plan for the 1970s providing for the orderly development and employment -of systems for tactical warning of strategic missile attacks on the continental United States. Also, the Army's Operation Center briefing team was disestablished on 15 June 1973 following the Vietnam cease-fire and the withdrawal of Army forces from Southeast Asia.


Annually the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in conjunction with the unified and specified commands, develop a five-year exercise program. Army components of unified commands support the unified command exercise program to the extent permitted by resources, providing Army personnel—active and Reserve—to staff joint headquarters, funds for Army forces, and administrative and logistical support. In fiscal year 1973, Army participation amounted to $8.096 million, an amount that was not adequate to provide unified and specified commands with the size and number of joint training exercises requested, although the Army did participate in twenty-eight JCS-directed and co-ordinated exercises.


The Joint Chiefs of Staff' sponsored Exercise HIGH HEELS 73, a worldwide command post exercise to test the plans and procedures that would be employed during a period of deteriorating worldwide politico-military relations leading to strategic nuclear war. The exercise was conducted in March 1973, concurrently with a NATO dual-phase command post exercise called WINTEX 73. No conclusions or implications concerning current or estimated capabilities, vulnerability, or combat effectiveness were to be drawn from exercise play, nor were politico-military decisions made during the exercise. Major participants in HIGH HEELS 73 included the Department of State, Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, military services, unified and specified commands, Office of Emergency Preparedness, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Federal Aviation Agency, and other Defense agencies. Department of the Army headquarters participation included augmentation of the Army Operations Center on a 24-hour basis from 7 to 13 March; staff agencies manned response cells in their normal operating areas to support their representatives in the Army Operations Center. The Continental Army Command, Army Security Agency, Army Materiel Command, Criminal Investigation Command, Strategic Communications Command, Intelligence Command, Military Traffic Management and Terminal Service, Military District of Washington, continental armies, III Corps, and XVIII Airborne Corps participated in the exercise.

Tactical Nuclear Weapons Policy

The events of the year underscored the need for a choice of options that would allow the President to deal with a wide range of threats. Realistic deterrence requires that the United States be prepared to respond to various threat levels with conventional, tactical nuclear, and strategic nuclear capabilities. A realistic and effective range of tactical nuclear options, combined with a strong conventional capability and backed by strategic forces, provides the United States with the means to deter conventional and nuclear aggression.

While the all-out retaliation role of theater nuclear forces is generally understood, selective employment of such forces has not been well articulated. Although the deterrent effect of nuclear-capable forward deployed general purpose forces is recognized, there have been divergent views in the United States and among allied nations concerning the role and utility of tactical nuclear weapons.

In the last year the Army made substantial progress in the review of tactical nuclear operational concepts begun in the previous year. The Interagency Advisory Council was of great assistance to a study on tactical nuclear operational concepts completed in March by the Army War College. During the fiscal year a five-day politico-military war


game was held in the Pentagon to evaluate the options of a defender and an aggressor and to determine the military and political circumstances under which a particular option would likely be implemented. Blue and red teams playing the roles of national command authorities were staffed by personnel from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Nuclear Agency, Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, service staffs, Department of State, Central Intelligence Agency, Atomic Energy Commission, U.S. Army Combat Developments Command, and overseas commands and various research institutions.

The exercise provided valuable political and military insights into tactical nuclear weapon employment and contributed substantially to a DA deployment and employment policy for tactical nuclear weapons, which was approved by the Chief of Staff in May 1973.

Special Forces and Special Assistance Forces

All active and Reserve Component Special Forces units are now organized under the "H series" tables of organization and equipment, and Special Forces organizational terminology is the same as that for conventional units. The former Special Forces "C," "B," and "A" detachments have been redesignated as battalions, companies, and operational detachments, respectively.

Active Army force structure includes four Special Forces groups with major units within the United States at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and Fort Devens, Massachusetts, and overseas units in Germany, the Panama Canal Zone, and Okinawa.

The Army Reserve has two Special Forces groups which have units located throughout the United States. The Army National Guard has two groups and one separate company. Unlike the active Army and Army Reserve Special Forces units, each with three operational battalions, the Army National Guard has four Special Forces battalions and the headquarters that would be required for a fifth.

In 1963 the Army formed some Special Action forces by attaching engineer, medical, intelligence, psychological operations, civil affairs, military police, and signal elements to a nucleus of a Special Forces group. Special Action forces were oriented toward Asia, Europe, Latin America, and Africa/Middle East/South Asia, and mobile training and technical advisory teams assisted various countries. In the spring of 1972, Special Action forces were redesignated Security Assistance forces and remained oriented to geographical regions. The Security Assistance Force (Asia) was the first to deploy a Disaster Assistance Relief Team (DART), which had its operational test in the Philippines; details of its flood assistance mission appear in Chapter XII.


Civil Affairs and Psychological Warfare

In fiscal year 1973 the Department of the Army's Committee for Civil Affairs Development met twice—in October 1972 and May 1973—to examine the Army's civil affairs interests and develop recommendations on organization and management of civil affairs units and personnel. The meetings were attended by representatives of staff and field agencies from stateside and overseas.

Active Army civil affairs units began the transition to new tables of organization and equipment during the year, a restructuring intended to improve their readiness. The changeover of Army Reserve units, however, was deferred pending a review of civil affairs doctrine and force structure. Conversion should take place in fiscal year 1974. Under revised doctrine, units would assist and support host government institutions where U.S. military forces are deployed rather than restructure political institutions as in World War II. On 1 February 1973, Reserve civil affairs units were reduced 10 percent to meet a revised strength ceiling.

All Army Reserve civil affairs units participated in a comprehensive survey of officer attitudes, future intentions as to Reserve participation, and training and capabilities, both civilian and military. Some 2,500 officers, approximately 90 percent of those in Army Reserve civil affairs units, participated, and the survey indicated that officer recruitment would be required within the next few years to replace those who intend to retire or who will be released.

In the field of psychological operations (PSYOP), development of a computerized information retrieval system advanced during the year. The PSYOP Automated Management Information System is designed for the collection, collation, and analysis of information needed to plan, develop, implement, and evaluate PSYOP programs in various environments. The Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff provides computer and software support, and the Army provides research and development, management, and analysis of system output. The first system component, the Foreign Media Analysis Subsystem, was supplied with a one-year data base which will be analyzed in the early weeks of fiscal year 1974. Research for the Foreign Area Data Subsystem was completed in June 1973; computer programs will be developed and field testing of the subsystem will be conducted in fiscal year 1974.

Military Support to Civil Authorities

The Army has broad governmental responsibility for military support operations. Through its Directorate of Military Support, the Army controls the military resources committed to civil disturbance operations, monitors the employment of Department of Defense resources provided


to civil authorities during natural disasters, supports the U.S. Secret Service in its statutory protective duties, assists the District of Columbia in anticrime activities, and directs the Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic Program. Many, if not most, of these responsibilities were exercised in fiscal year 1973.

Based on an agreement between the Department of Defense Executive Agent for Civil Disturbances and the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, the Directorate of Military Support planned the prepositioning of federal military forces during the 1972 national conventions. The initial objectives were to identify and develop a police end National Guard capability sufficiently strong so that federal forces would not have to be used, and a police capability sufficiently strong so that neither federal nor state military forces would have to be employed. Since the state of Florida, where both the Republican and Democratic conventions would be held, lacked experience in civil disturbances, it was concluded that approximately 5,000 federal troops would be required. Army liaison officers worked with Florida's police and National Guard officials to develop state capabilities and integrate state and federal planning. Approximately 2,700 troops were prepositioned at Homestead Air Force Base, Florida, from 9 to 15 July 1972 for the Democratic Convention and from 19 to 26 August for the Republican Convention. Conditions were stable on both occasions, and federal forces were not used.

The Army supported the U.S. Secret Service during the national political campaigns. In mid-June 1972 the support requirements were co-ordinated with the Secret Service for presidential and vice presidential candidates; 204 personnel were involved in such areas as security, transportation, and explosive ordnance disposal and in providing a small standby civil disturbance task force with thirteen helicopters and crews. On 7 July 1972 the Secret Service asked for an additional backup of 300 troops (two 150-man teams) to be used if the civilian resources were exhausted. These forces were not used.

Before the 1973 presidential inauguration, the Directorate of Military Support was designated as the Army staff co-ordinator for inaugural activities and charged with carrying out civil disturbance contingency planning based on the Department of justice's assessment of the threat of civil disorder that might occur during the ceremony. On 20 December 1972, the Under Secretary of the Army and the Director of Military Support joined the Attorney General and representatives of local and federal police and public safety officials at the Department of justice for the first meeting of the principals from involved agencies.

The Department of justice requested the Secretary of Defense to provide for troop participation in the ceremonial and security aspects of the inauguration, to employ the District of Columbia National Guard,


and to preposition up to 2,000 active Army troops. On 18 January 1973 a Marine civil disturbance battalion from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and the Army's 1st Squadron of the 6th Armored Cavalry Regiment and 519 Military Police Battalion from Fort Meade, Maryland, were prepositioned as standby civil disturbance units, but they were not employed. The 3d Brigade of the 82d Airborne Division from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, was designated as the ceremonial Capitol Cordon unit. The commander of the Military District of Washington was designated as commander of Task Force MDW.

The Department of justice estimated that 25,000 demonstrators might assemble in Washington. These demonstrations took place in the inaugural period without major incident. Although there were several confrontations, they were insignificant, and only thirty-six arrests were made by the Metropolitan Police Department.

From 27 February to 15 May 1973, the Department of Defense provided logistical support to a Department of justice civil law enforcement task force employed on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota against militant members of the American Indian Movement (AIM) who occupied the hamlet of Wounded Knee, site of the last battle of the Indian wars in 1890. The Army's Directorate of Military Support co-ordinated the movement of supplies, munitions, equipment, and observer and instructor personnel authorized by the Department of Defense to support the federal civil law enforcement task force at the scene. The National Guard made clothing and equipment available to the civil enforcement officials and trained them to operate military equipment; Guard technicians maintained the tracked and wheeled vehicles. The following major items of clothing and equipment were on loan:

Item Amount
M 16 rifles


Steel helmets


Protective vests


Pistol belts




5.56-mm. ammunition

5,040 rounds

.30-caliber ammunition

15,624 rounds

Field jackets


1.5-kilowatt generator


Protective masks


Public address set


Sniper rifles


Carrier, command post


Truck, 2 1/2-ton, cargo


Truck, 1 1/4-ton


Truck, tractor, 5-ton


Semitrailer, 25-ton


Xenon searchlight


Carrier, personnel


Truck, fuel-servicing, 5-ton


In February 1973 the Directorate of Military Support was assigned staff responsibility for Army support to the U.S. Bureau of Customs, Department of the Treasury, and Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Department of the Army assistance was also provided to other


federal agencies, such as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Department of justice, to help suppress illicit drug traffic into the United States. Army support has been primarily in the form of aircraft, radios, electronic sensors, and radar. Also approved on a reimbursable basis were emergency evacuation and subsequent medical treatment at Department of Defense installations for Bureau of Customs agents and their prisoners.

The Army also assisted the government of the District of Columbia in its program to combat crime by training helicopter pilots, providing aircraft hangar facilities, assisting in the acquisition of excess helicopters, and training a polygraph operator at the Army's Military Police School at Fort Gordon, Georgia.

The Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic (MAST) Program continued to operate at five test sites during the year. Because of reductions in U.S. Air Force aerospace rescue and recovery service, the operation at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona was terminated, but operations continued at Fort Lewis, Washington, Fort Carson, Colorado, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, and Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho. By the end of the year, 2,064 missions consuming 4,270 hours had been flown, and 2,372 patients had been airlifted. Legislative authority would be required to expand the program to other sites. A bill authorizing Department of Defense participation passed the House of Representatives and was referred in May to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Pending legislative authorization, plans for ten additional MAST sites were approved by the Executive Group.

Explosive ordnance disposal is another element of the Army's military support mission. Army personnel are trained to find and dispose of hazardous explosive ordnance. The Army continued to support the Secret Service during the year, providing specialists to eliminate explosive hazards in vehicles and at facilities used by key government officials and other dignitaries, including the President, Vice President, immediate family of the incumbent and former Presidents, and foreign visitors.

The Army in fiscal year 1973 responded to over 4,000 requests from civil authorities for assistance in dealing with bomb threats, deactivation of homemade devices, disposal of war souvenirs, and accidents involving the transportation of explosives. The volume of requests was about 15 percent lower than in 1972 as a result of Army training of civil law enforcement agencies; 400 students per year receive Army instruction in how to deal with bomb threats. In the coming fiscal year it is planned to organize explosive ordnance disposal units into teams so that personnel with special skills may be used more effectively while technical proficiency is improved.


In 1971 the Secretary of the Navy was designated as the single manager for military explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) technology and training, and a Department of Defense Explosive Ordnance Disposal Program Board was established with a senior officer from each of the four military services. An EOD Military Technical Acceptance Board was created with similar representation to approve newly developed tools, equipment, and procedures for joint use. The EOD Program Board signed policy agreements and ruled that live chemical agents be used to train EOD personnel. Army training is conducted by the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command.

Military Engineering

There were a number of developments in the field of military engineering during fiscal year 1973, relating to organization, equipment, materials, and techniques. Field evaluation of a functionalized engineer construction battalion began in April 1973, the culmination of more than three years of planning to capitalize upon centralized project management and the pooling of key equipment and skills. In a continuing effort to modernize engineer heavy equipment, 25-ton hydraulic cranes were procured under the commercial construction equipment program. Fourteen tool sets used by engineer troops were reviewed; infrequently used hand tools will be eliminated, archaic tools will be replaced, and new tools in common use by civilian craftsmen will be added as a result of this review.

Future combat engineer unit capabilities will be improved through the development of a new Family of Military Engineer Construction Equipment (FAMECE), which includes a common power module that can be quickly connected to each of eight work modules to form pieces of construction equipment. Each module weighs less than 15,000 pounds to permit movement by medium-lift helicopter. The construction equipment in the family will be used in engineer combat units, primarily in airmobile and airborne engineer units. The modules will perform scraping, dozing, bucket-loading, hauling, grading, watering, and compacting. Contractors continued to develop prototype power, scraper, and grader modules during the year; prototype design was completed and fabrication begun. Prototype delivery and testing will begin in fiscal year 1974.

In April 1973, a Combat Engineer System Program Review was conducted at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Chaired by the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff and attended by high-level military and civilian officials, the review group discussed ways to increase the mobility, survivability, and combat effectiveness of the Army and then developed guidance on engineer actions. The review covered doctrine, personnel, repair parts, base development, barrier operations, tactical mobility, engineer force structure, and foreign engineer developments.


At the same time that these actions on military equipment were going forward, there was progress in a program to introduce construction equipment of standard commercial design into Army construction units. In addition to contracts placed last year for dump trucks and bituminous distributors, a contract was let in fiscal year 1973 for 25-ton hydraulic cranes, and procurement planning was completed on ten additional items, including self-propelled compaction equipment, mobile concrete mixers, water distributors, utility and heavy tractors, scoop loaders, and low-bed trailers.

In some phases of the conflict in Vietnam up to 70 percent of U.S. tank and vehicle losses and 30 percent of personnel casualties were due to enemy mines and booby traps. In light of these losses, the Army has undertaken a fully integrated effort to solve the problem posed by enemy mine warfare. New and improved mine detection and neutralization equipment incorporating the microwave phenomenon into a man-portable mine protector and the use of fuel-air-explosive munitions to neutralize buried mines will improve breaching capabilities. A simple mechanical mine planter has replaced hand emplacement and improved the Army capability to conduct defensive operations and deter enemy vehicular movement.

In the field of bridging, the Army's tactical mobility and capacity to move quickly across rivers and other terrain gaps will be materially improved by the recent addition of a new medium girder bridge. A prefabricated, modular, hand-erectable aluminum bridge developed in the United Kingdom, it was designed to carry the Army's heaviest vehicles and can be erected faster and with less personnel than the Bailey panel bridge which it will replace.

The Army's capability to use camouflage effectively was advanced during the fiscal year with the introduction of a new version of a lightweight camouflage screening system. Work was also done on camouflage pattern painting, glare covers for vehicles and aircraft, and other materiel in tests of experimental equipment and troop organizations. The Corps of Engineers helped the U.S. Air Force develop a camouflage scheme for an aircraft shelter complex. The Modern Army Selected Systems Test, Evaluation, and Review (MASSTER) facility was assigned a leading role in evaluating camouflage materiel, concepts, and ideas, and the U.S. Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Center was designated the primary laboratory in camouflage technology.

During the past year improvements were made in the Army's system of expedient airfield surfacing, which consists of prefabricated landing mats, prefabricated waterproofing membranes, and dust control materials. Testing was completed on an extruded aluminum truss-web, heavy-duty landing mat and an aluminum honeycomb-core, sandwich-


type, medium-duty landing mat to support tactical and cargo aircraft. Testing continued on a dust control system of polyvinyl-acetate, water-emulsion material along with a sectionalized liquid distributor to emplace the material.

Security Assistance

In December 1972 the Department of Defense issued a revised directive covering policy and responsibilities for security (military) assistance. Under the new directive the military departments are provided wider latitude in making recommendations concerning policy, planning, and programing.

Fiscal year 1973 was a year of adjustment in the field of military assistance. Increasing competition among friendly nations for U.S. materiel had to be balanced against U.S. requirements to modernize U.S. forces—active and Reserve—and meet the obligations of Vietnamization. The initial effects of postwar austerity began to be felt, and as available stocks dwindled, the question of priorities in materiel allocation and distribution assumed greater importance.

The Department of the Army's Master Priority List and Logistics Priorities publications control the allocation and distribution precedence for materiel; foreign country standings, determined by the joint Chiefs of Staff, are meshed with U.S. Army active and Reserve priorities in these lists. During the year these publications were revised, the correlation of foreign beneficiaries to the joint Strategic Objectives Plan was studied, and the Army staff considered the issues involved in providing security assistance to allies under the Nixon Doctrine.

The sale of military equipment to foreign countries under military assistance programs is often a long process, in some cases requiring approval of the Department of State and the National Disclosure Policy Committee as well as elements of the Department of Defense. To improve the Army's ability to respond rapidly to proposals and requests for sales, the departmental staff initiated a study to establish an Army position on sales of major weapons systems; the first system selected was the Redeye air defense missile. The Army position statement will identify countries eligible for foreign military sales which are favored to receive the system, those not favored, and those for which an Army predisposition should not be determined before a decision is rendered.

Also in fiscal year 1973, the Army experimented with the concept of a single supply pipeline—a supply system for certain regions of the world where a single supply line could directly serve the needs of foreign countries as well as U.S. forces. The concept was tested in Thailand but was dropped when it raised too many problems related to security assistance program controls and funding.


The role of friendly countries and allies in total force planning continued to be examined during the fiscal year, for the part played by friendly as well as U.S. forces in various parts of the world is an ingredient of the Nixon Doctrine. Thus military assistance continued for various nations. In Vietnam, as noted above, the U.S. accelerated the delivery of military equipment to complete the Vietnamization program and lay the foundation for the post-cease-fire agreement condition of one-for-one replacement only. In Korea, meanwhile, a five-year plan to modernize the Republic of Korea's forces and improve stability in Asia, begun in 1971, was delayed by funding problems.

In the Middle East, security assistance continued to play an important role for the United States and the participating countries. Grant aid of $32.75 million was provided to Jordan, while Lebanon and Saudi Arabia each received about $230,000 for training. Foreign military sales credits were extended to Israel for $307 million and to Lebanon for $10 million. U.S. teams visited Jordan and Kuwait to review defense needs, and sales authority was granted to Bahrein, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Yemen Arab Republic.

The Army is also providing 280 military and civilian technicians and support personnel to assist Iran in the modernization of its ground forces. Of the total, 207 are to be deployed to Iran in eight technical assistance field teams in such major functional fields as engineering, logistics and maintenance, communications-electronics, air defense, aviation, automatic data processing, personnel services, and the TOW (tube-launched, optically tracked, and wire-guided rocket). The remaining personnel will augment the U.S. European Command Support Activity, which provides administrative and logistical support to Department of Defense agencies and activities in Iran. Army personnel for these teams began arriving in Iran in April 1973.

During March-April 1973, the Department of the Army negotiated with the Imperial Iranian Air Force a Foreign Military Sales agreement to train in Iran, from 1974 to 1978, some 2,700 personnel to operate the improved Hawk weapon system being purchased by that Middle East country. Their contract of about $32 million was the first of its type and magnitude negotiated by the Army with a foreign government.

On 19 March 1973, the United States and Saudi Arabian governments signed a Memorandum of Understanding covering the modernization of the Saudi Arabia National Guard. The Department of the Army was designated as the executive agent and on 27 April was assigned to manage the program.

Security assistance for Latin American countries continued to be hampered by legal and policy considerations concerning dollar limits and materiel restrictions imposed by legislation and Department of De-


fense policy. In the spring of 1973 some of the restraints were eased for selected countries with respect to the M16 rifle, medium tanks, and the Chaparral/Vulcan system, indicating more favorable trends in U.S. security assistance for Latin America.

Training is a major security assistance activity, one that involves preparing U.S. personnel to administer programs and train foreign nationals of recipient countries. In the spring of 1973, the Army Chief of Staff returned from ,a visit to Latin America convinced of the efficacy of the program in terms of U.S. national security and the need to improve the selection and training of U.S. officers for key positions in security assistance staffs and agencies. A Security Assistance Management Orientation Seminar was established at the Military Assistance Institute at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; the Washington, D.C., orientation for certain personnel being assigned to U.S. military assistance advisory groups was continued, with some forty-one senior designees, ranging from lieutenant colonel to major general and scheduled for duty in thirty-two countries, receiving the three-day briefing.

- The combined military assistance grant aid, service-funded, and foreign sales programs for training foreign personnel were smaller in fiscal year 1973 than in 1972. Table I shows the training support in fiscal year 1973 under the Foreign Assistance Act.


  Europe Area Pacific Area Latin America Area ABC Area 1 Total
CONUS School




Oversea School




Third Country








Mobile training teams (man-years)
Field training service (man-years)
Training for other departments




Total training dollar value
(in millions)







1Australia, Britain, Canada.


International Humanitarian Law

In February and March 1973 a number of government experts met to continue preparations for a 1974 diplomatic conference on International Humanitarian Law, scheduled by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Experts from eleven nations and four international organizations met in Geneva, Switzerland, from 5 to 9 February to deal with identification systems for medical transports. The primary discussions covered technical means to improve identification and marking systems for land, sea, and air medical transports and for medical facilities and installations. Recommendations were made to the Red Cross for improvements in identification and marking systems by use of visual, sonic, radio, and radar techniques. The International Committee will study these recommendations prior to submitting proposals to the Swiss Federal Council as the working draft for the 1974 diplomatic conference.

In March 1973 experts from twenty nations met at Geneva to discuss texts prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross concerning noninternational armed conflict and guerrilla and resistance movements.


Go to:

Previous Chapter

Next Chapter

Return to Table of Contents

Search CMH Online
Return to CMH Online
Last updated 9 August 2004