Plans, the poet Robert Burns told us, often work to the opposite of their intent. So could to be the case with a 1997 long-term plan to trim the size of the National Guard and armed forces reserve contingents.

The 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review — a tool intended to set the goals of the military in four-year blocks — advocates trimming the Guard and Reserve by 25,000 soldiers, sailors and airmen in the coming two fiscal years.

At first blush, that proposal seems reasonable. In 1997, the United States had 1.5 million men and women on active military duty and another 1.7 million in reserve capacity.

One can reasonably challenge the need for such a military force, considering that the chances of the United States engaging in a significant conventional war, even on the scale of 1990’s Gulf War, are minute.

But there is little question that the nation’s military philosophy clearly advocates not only increasing the role of the nation’s citizen-soldiers in operations, but that those citizen-soldiers will continue to be critical pieces of the world security puzzle — being asked to fit into parts of all shapes and complexity.

Our own Air and Army National Guard servicemen and servicewomen know how quickly the call to arms can come: Serving in Saudi Arabia, aiding relief missions in Kosovo, supporting far-flung operations at all corners of the globe.

Rightly, the Department of Defense has concentrated on maintaining a smaller active-duty force that can serve the nation’s permanent security and defense needs, calling upon the Guard and Reserve to fill special needs and to provide the brawn of a significant military commitment.

It is difficult to fathom how cutting 25,000 soldiers from the nation’s Guard and Reserve forces will allow the United States to continue with that philosophy, especially as our commitments as a world peacekeeper and stabilizing force only grow.

Consider the words of Lt. Gen. Russell C. Davis, chief of DOD’s National Guard Bureau: “We can only be as ready as we are resourced to be. I read that as a necessity to aggressively pursue the funding we need as a mission requirement. Yes, we must seek efficiencies, and yes, we must cut waste. But show me the money!”

Two years ago, trimming the Guard and Reserve probably appeared to be a wise way to trim defense spending, which consumes about one out of every five federal tax dollars. Given today’s realities, however, it seems beyond short-sighted; it could well be counterproductive.