COLUMBIA, S.C. - South Carolina's military bases play key roles in the nation's defense and could dodge the Pentagon's upcoming round of base closures, the state's top politicians and military experts say.

Air Force fighter jets from Shaw Air Force Base fly anti-terrorist patrols up and down the East Coast; super-secret Special Operations units train on blacked-out runways at McEntire Air National Guard Base; and Army and Marine Corps bases in the state churn out thousands of recruits every month to fight the war against terror.

Those missions mean South Carolina is "in a very strong position" to avoid major cuts, says Brig. Gen. George B. Patrick, the state's top Air National Guard commander.

As the Pentagon gets ready to announce which of the nation's 425 domestic bases it wants to close, Patrick said South Carolina's installations could take on new missions, people or equipment instead of being shuttered.

The stakes are high for the state.

University of South Carolina economist Donald L. Schunk reported last year that $7.3 billion in sales are accumulated annually by businesses in the state because of the military's presence. The armed forces directly support 142,000 jobs in the state, he said.

The state's elected officials aren't taking anything for granted before the Pentagon issues its hit list by May 16.

Last week, Gov. Mark Sanford led a delegation of South Carolina mayors to the Pentagon to make the case for the state's eight major military installations.

The Republican governor warned against complacency, given that Pentagon officials have said this round of closures could be greater than all other previous rounds put together.

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., says politicians can try to influence the Pentagon's decision, but the bottom line for keeping a base will be whether it can maintain forces that "contribute to the fight."

"I want to be as proactive as I can be," Graham says. "We can add facilities. We have potential."

Because South Carolina's bases have room to grow, they could be part of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's moves to transform the military from a Cold War-era force to one that can respond swiftly to threats around the globe, military experts and politicians say.

"South Carolina may not have much to worry about," says Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute in Alexandria, Va. "It has a long-term military tradition with bases that are well supported by its citizens. ... That's compared to places like the Northeast, where multiple bases are left over from the Cold War."

Thompson said the bases retained will be those "keyed to the concept of what the military needs in the year 2020." That means, for example, that the Army would be reorganized into smaller, lighter and quickly deployable brigades that can respond quickly to crises around the globe - and fewer forces in large, domestic bases.

South Carolina has installations that could be used to mold such units and increase cooperation among the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines in so-called "joint" missions, says U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C.

This is another feature Rumsfeld is looking for that would help keep bases from being axed, Wilson said.

"We could do more at Fort Jackson than train soldiers. We could have active duty forces stationed there - and instead of rotating every two to three years, they could be based there for seven years," Wilson argues.

Still, everyone involved in the process is admittedly uneasy. South Carolina was hit hard in the past two rounds of base closures - Myrtle Beach Air Force Base closed in 1993 at a cost of 3,900 military and civilian jobs; Charleston Naval Base was shut down in 1996, affecting 30,000 military and civilian jobs.

State Sen. John Courson, R-Columbia, a former Marine, said the state's leaders hope South Carolina's "rich tradition of military service" will carry some weight in Rumsfeld's closure decisions.

"Roughly 450,000 citizens have served on, or are currently serving, in the military" from South Carolina, Courson says. "This state is friendly to the armed services; you don't see demonstrations here against military forces."