The armed services are in trouble in America—a fact acknowledged by their own spokesmen and widely discussed in the press. On the Army in particular, a number of sensational books and articles have appeared, most of them muckraking accounts by former officers. America's Army in Crisis is not one of these, but rather a thoughtful analysis of the problems facing today's Army and possible solutions to those problems. Lieutenant Colonel William L. Hauser is a career officer, vitally concerned with the future of the Army not only as one of its members, but also as a concerned citizen and scholar of civil-military relations. He therefore begins his study with the premise that America must have an army, and concludes that the Army must, in turn, be responsive to a changing America.

In his thoughtful and objective approach to the Army's problems, Colonel Hauser analyzes the comparable, and in some ways predictive, experiences of the armies of Germany since World War II, France after Algeria, and Britain at "the end of the empire." He shows that the American Army is undergoing a similar process of self-examination in response to the demands which a democratic society places on an authoritarian military institution in its midst.

This approach is unique among recent books on civil-military relations for two reasons. First, most examine the impact of the military on society rather than the converse. Second, all assume that American institutions lead those of other countries in coping with problems of modern social change. In fact, says Hauser, the U.S. Army has, for understandable reasons, lagged in this historical process. To illustrate his case, he discusses the social problems faced by the Army during the year 1971, in such areas as drug abuse, discipline, morale, and the Army's responses to those problems. He goes on to identify the various social forces with which the Army must come to terms if it is to survive as a vital organization in a democratic society. Three broad issues are developed: the proper degree of isolation from the mainstream of American society, recruitment of an effective force without the draft, and military professionalism in a traditionally unmilitary society. His suggested solutions to these problems are somewhat startling. In effect, he advocates the creation of two armies, one a specialized fighting force with spartan standards for barracks life, physical fitness, and military preparedness; the other a support army with many of the opportunities and incentives of a civilian organization. He also foresees the need for rapid implementation of a new career system for the officer corps in order to prevent a recurrence of some of the abuses which have made headlines recently.