Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

Readiness – I/L – Unit Cohesion Key to Retention

Unit cohesion is key to morale, troop effectiveness and retention.
Hamilton 10 (Lieutenant–Colonel K.J. Hamilton, 2010 9–20 http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_12/iss_3/CAJ_Vol12.3_06_e.pdf)KM

Today, cohesion is still seen as a critical characteristic of military forces, with more emphasis being placed on its value. Achieving and maintaining cohesion affords the unit the opportunity for higher morale, increased effectiveness and hopefully greater retention. Its absence brings quick disintegration to the fi ghting force, low morale, and little desire to stay the course, a course fraught with high operational tempo and increasingly long periods of time separated from family and friends on dangerous missions abroad. Unfortunately, “…international and domestic realities have resulted in a paradox of declining military resources and increasing military missions.”2 Canada, like many nations, is being called upon to participate in many non–traditional operations that pose new challenges.3 Be it Haiti, Afghanistan or Sudan, these operations are calling more often upon our soldiers to work in a number of diverse locations under stressful and unfamiliar conditions, while simultaneously having to deal with government–dictated force structures for each mission. These force structures may be unsuitable for the tasks assigned.4 This operationallyfocused environment is the Canadian Forces (CF) of the future. With greater emphasis being placed on failed and failing states by many western governments, the CF, as one tool in the Canadian Government’s box of diplomacy options, will see ever increasing, high–risk operational deployments as Canada attempts to become a larger player on the international stage.
Cohesion is key to solvency – it’s required for unit strength and effectiveness.
Hamilton 10 (Lieutenant–Colonel K.J. Hamilton, 2010 9–20 http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_12/iss_3/CAJ_Vol12.3_06_e.pdf)KM

Cohesion is a characteristic that will enhance group effectiveness and is essential for combat forces to attain before being committed into harm’s way. This paper has suggested that there are variables that directly infl uence cohesion and which can be manipulated to enhance cohesion in units. “It is essential to strengthen unit cohesion because, during combat, isolation and loneliness assault the cohesive power of a unit.”62 With the introduction of MR, the Canadian Army is experiencing the challenges in building and fostering cohesion within the HR unit. Signifi cant attention has been focused on the Canadian Army’s plan of bringing together small groups of soldiers from across the country to form one cohesive task–tailored force for operations. Although the task is a diffi cult one, it is one that is achievable.

Readiness – I/L – Morale

Disparity in pay between US military and PMC’s hurts morale and reenlistment rates – it’s a disincentive to stay in the military.
Cotton et al 10 (Sarah K. Cotton, Ulrich Petersohn, Molly Dunigan, Q Burkhart, Megan Zander–Cotugno, Edward O’Connell, Michael Webber, “Hired Guns”, RAND, http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG987.pdf)KM

Th e question of morale is closely related to the debate about the eff ect of higher contractor salaries on retention. Should the pay disparity between private security contractors and members of the armed forces dampen military morale, this could fuel the argument that higher contractor pay has a negative eff ect on retention, because lower morale would understandably be a disincentive to reenlist. Th e military personnel surveyed—all of whom had served in Iraq—did believe that the disparity in pay had been detrimental to morale in their units while they had been in the Iraqi theater (Figure 3.4). Again, this was the majority view regardless of age or rank. But more lower–ranking and younger military personnel were of this opinion than their higher–ranking and older counterparts. Th e fact that older and higher–ranking military personnel seem less bothered by the pay disparity with private security contractors suggests that one’s own fi nancial situation and, possibly, comfort with career decisions over a longer time horizon, may play a role in shaping perceptions on this issue.

PMC’s risk desertion, destroy morale, and destabilize the military they support.
Beutel 5 (PRIVATE MILITARY COMPANIES: THEIR EMERGENCE, IMPORTANCE, AND A CALL FOR GLOBAL REGULATION by M. Dee Beutel A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Norwich University, June 2005, http://princess.digitalfreaks.org/thesis/beutelmdthesis.pdf )KM

PMC’s that focus on supporting national militaries come with their own complex issues. The US military, for example, has very advanced weapons systems that it contracts the maintenance of to PMC’s. It is cheaper to hire a firm than train its own maintenance specialists. David Young, a deputy commander at the Defense Contract Management Agency, notes the major problem inherent in this system. "When you take these weapons systems into a combat zone, is contract support still reliable, especially if you are facing weapons of mass destruction? It's a source of worry when you're talking about chemical or biological weapons.”193 This high level of dependency on contractors leaves armed service personnel without a way to maintain such machinery if the PMC reneges on the contract. Not only is desertion by the PMC a concern, but also the morale of the national soldiers. As the government hires contractors to do these highly technical jobs but does not educate its own soldiers, it creates a sense of resentment. The situation escalates since these PMC’s’ employees receive up to triple in compensation than that of the national soldier. This reliance on contractor support makes it appear like a government cannot trust its own military, and creates destabilization within the regime itself. Sierra Leone is a perfect example of this; Executive Outcomes was contracted to provide security, and the state’s soldiers felt disenfranchised and disempowered. This loss of face was a natural progression to yet another coup.194
PMC’s reduce military morale

Naing 10 (Eric, writer for Open Congress, 2/23, http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1624-Sanders-Schakowsky-Push-Military-Contractor-Ban)

Two liberal Democrats are teaming up to stop the government from hiring private military contractors like Blackwater in war zones. Rep. Jan Schakowsky [D, IL-9] and Sen. Bernie Sanders [D, VT] today announced the introduction of the Stop Outsourcing Security Act, which prevents the government from using private firms for security, law enforcement, rescue and intelligence purposes. However, the act does allow for the use of contractors if the president notifies Congress why the military is incapable of taking on those jobs. The two Democrats argue that hiring private contractors is an unfair use of tax dollars and that it harms the morale of those in the armed services who are often paid far less to do the same jobs: High pay for contract workers in war zones both burdens taxpayers and saps military morale, Schakowsky and Sanders said. While some soldiers who risk their lives for their country struggle to support their families, private security company employees are paid two or three times as much, sometimes pocketing as much as $1,000 a day.