Editorial: Territorial benefits

New Zealand forces thrust into battle at Gallipoli, and a generation later in Greece, shared a common woe: a perilous shortage of well-trained officers. The troops' initiative and courage did much to camouflage this shortcoming. But they could not conceal the deficiencies of command that played an important role in the eventual failure of both campaigns.

Men, it was again established, could be shaped into effective soldiers relatively quickly, but officers required far more training to be ready for combat. It is a lesson not lost on those who have formulated the new "one-Army" drive. Equally fortunately, they have recognised that the Army, particularly its Territorial Force, must meet the needs of modern society.

Territorial numbers have dwindled from 4000 to 1550 over the past decade as slimmer workforces have made employers reluctant to give staff time off for military service. The Army hopes that integrating Territorials into Regular Force training will appeal to employers by offering them back workers with valuable leadership skills. In return, of course, the Army will have a far greater reservoir of well-trained officers - and a far more effective Territorial Force. The Army hopes the training will even be sufficient to qualify part-time soldiers to serve overseas.

Its initiative is worthwhile, even as the Regular Army prepares for a $500 million equipment and personnel upgrade. An effective Territorial Force increases the flexibility of the Army, allowing a more open mind on the eventualities to which it may have to respond.

It was no coincidence that the Army chose Auckland to introduce its new strategy. The Army has a peculiar problem there, prompted mainly by the shift south of most Regular Force soldiers, a process largely concluded with the closure of the base at Papakura. Now it has almost no presence in Auckland. Compare that with the high profile of the Army in, say Palmerston North, because of the proximity of the base at Linton.

The Army's present location makes little sense, given the country's population spread and potential civil-defence respon-sibilities. And that lack of visibility may be a reason Auckland employers show a particular reluctance to allow their staff to go soldiering. Whatever the reason, the Army struggles to recruit from the area that should be its greatest manpower source. Even more significantly, it should provide the biggest pool of officers, given the number of tertiary educational institutions in Auckland.

The Army could help itself further. It might, for example, reinstitute military tattoos in the city. It need look no further than Edinburgh to see the sustained popularity and charisma of such events. It could be an occasion, annually or biennially, to advance the Army's keenness to use Territorials to forge closer links with the community. And lift the profile of the Army in the community and, more particularly, the eyes of employers.

A greater pool of well-trained leaders has obvious advantages for both parties - and for the nation if Territorial Force officers are again called upon to lead troops into battle at little notice.