Preserving the Role of the Citizen-Soldier

The National Guard has always stood as a pillar of American democracy — a force of citizen-soldiers who balance the rigors of military service with the rhythms of civilian life. But over the past two decades, this balance has been shaken, as the Guard has been transformed from a strategic reserve to an operational one. This transition, which many believe was rooted in strategy, was in fact shaped by ambition and politics.

As someone who has served in the National Guard through these changes, I’ve seen firsthand the effects on both individuals and the institution. And I believe the story of this transformation, and the role that courage and leadership play in preserving the citizen-soldier concept, deserves to be told.

Ambition Over Strategy: The Push for Operational Status

When the Global War on Terror (GWOT) began, the U.S. military found itself stretched thin. With wars raging on two fronts, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld looked to the National Guard for reinforcements. At first glance, this decision seemed to be born of necessity. But beneath the surface, there was something else at play — ambition.

Generals across the country, eager for career advancement, volunteered their units for deployment at an unprecedented tempo. One such general commanded the 45th Infantry Brigade in Oklahoma. He rose quickly through the ranks, going from colonel to two-star general by consistently offering his brigade for every available deployment. This wasn’t an isolated phenomenon; across the National Guard, generals were making similar moves, hoping to prove that their units were as capable as active-duty forces, positioning themselves for operational command experience overseas.

This wasn’t about strategy — it was about ambition. The drive to transform the Guard into an operational reserve allowed these generals to push for greater influence, ultimately seeking a seat on the Joint Chiefs and a coveted four-star rank for the National Guard. While this created opportunities for professional growth, it came at the cost of the Guard’s true purpose.

The Citizen-Soldier Concept Under Siege

The shift from a strategic reserve to an operational reserve fundamentally altered the National Guard’s role in American life. Historically, the Guard was a force of last resort — a strategic reserve designed to be mobilized in times of national emergency. This preserved the citizen-soldier concept, where ordinary Americans could serve their country without giving up their civilian careers.

But as the operational tempo increased, the Guard became a perpetual presence on the frontlines. State generals volunteered their units not because it was necessary, but because it provided a path to promotion. And while this gave the Guard more recognition on the global stage, it eroded the checks and balances that had once governed its deployment.

General Creighton Abrams' "Total Force" doctrine was designed to ensure that National Guard units could not be deployed overseas without the consent of state governors, creating a safeguard that required broad public support before the nation could commit to war. But the Perpich v. Department of Defense decision gutted that safeguard. The result? The President could deploy National Guard units indefinitely without seeking additional congressional approval, prolonging wars that the public had lost faith in.

Obama’s Courage: A Standoff with the Military

Amid this transformation, I found myself questioning my future in the National Guard. By 2010, the relentless deployment cycle, combined with the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, made it nearly impossible for me to balance my professional civilian ambitions with my service. I was coming to terms with my sexuality and finishing law school, but the Guard’s new role as an operational reserve left little room for citizen-soldiers like me.

Then President Obama did something remarkable. He went toe-to-toe with the military leadership — a rare and courageous move. He repealed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, ensuring that I and others could serve openly. But he didn’t stop there. He set a firm timeline for troop withdrawal from the Middle East, despite immense pressure from military brass who sought to keep a larger presence overseas.

Generals had packed battalions into the Kuwaiti desert, ready to flood the theater with troops and force Obama’s hand. But Obama stood firm. “No,” he said. “I don’t care what you do with those units in the pipeline, but they’re not going in-country.” His resolve preserved the possibility for me — and many others — to continue serving as citizen-soldiers while pursuing professional civilian careers.

The Legacy of the Citizen-Soldier: Still Under Fire

Obama’s courage preserved something vital — the citizen-soldier concept. This idea, that ordinary Americans can serve in the military without becoming detached from civilian life, is a cornerstone of our democracy. It ensures that the military remains connected to the society it protects, preventing the rise of a detached, professional military class with its own interests.

Yet, this concept remains under siege today. The shift to an operational reserve opened the door to continuous deployments, eroding the balance between military service and civilian life. It weakened the democratic principle that going to war should require broad public support and instead allowed conflicts to be prolonged without sufficient accountability.

The Future of the National Guard: A Return to Balance

As we reflect on the evolution of the National Guard, we must ask ourselves what we want this component to be. Do we want a force that is constantly engaged, or one that serves as a true strategic reserve — a force of citizen-soldiers who stand ready to serve in times of national need, but who also maintain strong ties to civilian life?

The answer to that question will shape the future of the National Guard and, more importantly, the future of our democracy. We must be cautious not to let ambition and political maneuvering erode the foundations that have made the citizen-soldier concept so powerful. It is a concept worth fighting for — a concept that ensures the military remains accountable to the people, and not the other way around.

About the Author: Nick Harrison served for three years on active duty as an infantryman in the U.S. Army, followed by twenty years in the Army National Guard, with deployments to Afghanistan (2006-2007) and to Kuwait and Iraq (2011-2012). Between these deployments, he earned his JD/MBA. Now based in Washington, D.C., Nick is a licensed attorney, and he continues to serve in the JAG Corps.