Compass Points - Multiplying MAGTFs?
Focus on MAGTFs not islands.
Compass Points - Multiplying MAGTFs?
Focus on MAGTFs not islands.
April 4, 2025
.
The question for the Marine Corps is, islands or MAGTFs?
In their article in the National Interest, authors Wilson Beaver and Anna Gustafson argue that, "The Army’s Newest Units are Needed in the Indo-Pacific."
.
------------------
------------------
.
. . . the Army deserves praise for having quickly researched, developed, tested, and ultimately fielded novel capabilities within brand-new unit structures known as Multi-Domain Task Forces (MDTFs) since 2017.
MDTFs focus on specific targets within their designated theater by orchestrating capabilities across air, land, water, space, and cyber fields. This specialization enables each unit to precisely tailor its capabilities to the unique demands of each combatant command.
Yet all MDTFs share the same priority: to defend against our adversaries’ anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) initiatives. That is, their mission is to counter enemies’ attempts to deny or limit U.S. access and freedom of action in operational areas—a mission MDTF task forces have pursued thus far by developing capabilities in effects, fires, protection, and sustainment.
Currently, the U.S. Army has three MDTFs located across the globe. These three units already aid efforts to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific—but more can and should be done.
-- The National Interest
.
------------------
------------------
.
The authors go on to argue that the Army's MDTFs should be installed quickly in Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines in permanent bases.
.
------------------
------------------
.
. . . the Army needs to deploy additional forces closer to strategic locations like Taiwan and the Senkaku Islands.
By placing an MDTF in Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines (all countries with established U.S. military relationships), the Army could bolster deterrence in the Western Pacific and protect key U.S. and ally military assets.
. . . The case for expanding MDTFs in the Indo-Pacific is clear. Their rapid development, operational successes, and unique ability to counter China’s A2/AD strategy make them indispensable in securing the region.
-- The National Interest
.
------------------
------------------
.
The US Army deserves credit for the rapid progress they have made with their MDTFs. They have accomplished more than the Marine Corps has. But while the authors say the "case for expanding MDTFs in the Indo-Pacific is clear" it apparently is not clear to South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. None of those nations want US missile units trained on China based on their territory. Why not? It comes down to both the military power of China and the importance of trade.
China is a powerful nation and South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines do not want to risk China's anger. But there is more. Part of the issue is trade. For virtually every nation in the Pacific, China is their largest trading partner. If a smaller nation loses trade with China, their economy could crash. For example, the web site, Worlds Top Exports, shows that the Philippines trades most with the US, China, and Japan -- roughly 10 billion each for a total of 45% of Philippine annual exports. The Philippines want US military help. The Philippines want trade with the US. The Philippines stand up to China every day in the waters off of the Philippines. But the Philippines also needs continued trade with China. Basing US missile on Philippine territory risks crashing trade with China and neither the Philippines, nor Japan, nor South Korea want that to happen.
If US missiles are not the answer, what is? The answer is South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines can expand their own military units on their own territory. It is much harder for China to object to a nation's own military taking up positions on their own territory. On the other hand it is easy and expected for China to object strongly if any Pacific nations allow US military missiles to be based on their territories.
Would South Korea, Japan, or the Philippines think about beefing up its military units on their own territory? The nations are beyond just thinking about adding new military units, they are moving forward. For example, Japan is building up its military facilities on islands between southern Japan and Taiwan.
.
------------------
------------------
.
In recent years, Japan has been increasingly becoming concerned about a Taiwan contingency. It is currently strengthening its transportation capabilities to deploy troops and transport fuel, ammunition, supplies, and vehicles to front-line bases, especially in the nation’s southwestern Nansei island chain, which spans about 1,200 km from Kagoshima to Okinawa, stretching southwest towards Taiwan.
-- Naval News
.
------------------
------------------
.
With both the US Army's growing number of operational MDTFs and the willingness of Pacific nations like South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines to grow their own military units, why should the US Marine Corps continue with its own misguided missile plan? The Marine Corps missile plan was based on the idea that before open conflict erupted with China, US Marine missile units would be installed on Pacific islands near China. So far, there are no operational US Marine units on islands near China and no indication that any Pacific nation would grant permission to the Marines.
Beyond those issues, the Marine Corps needs to re-think its whole approach to helping to deter and defeat China. The Marine Corps would have more impact not by stranding units on Pacific islands, but by putting more Marine MAGTF, combined arms, units on ships around the globe.
.
------------------
------------------
.
The Corps will have little to no role in a West Pac war. Where we will have, maybe the decisive role, is in our ability to threaten globally, PRC’s worldwide B&R infrastructure. For example the PRC still has a quasi-military presence in Panama. A MAGTF on either side of the canal will force the PRC to make a choice, do we (PRC) commit our nascent blue water navy halfway around the world in the U.S.’s backyard or do we sacrifice that facility. The same goes for the multiple facilities that the PRC has in Africa, the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean, the Arctic, etc. The PRC CURRENTLY has little ability to sail a true blue water navy. At some point the PRC will have to commit on our terms, or pull back to the first island chain, at which point the U.S. then has the ability, like we did in WW II, set the time and place of the next battle and the one after that.
If we use the Corps as intended in our strategic plans and not like the FD foolishness, the Corps has the ability to help the rest of the military perform their missions.
-- Greg Falzetta, Comment on Compass Points - Battle for Taiwan
.
------------------
------------------
.
Compass Points salutes all the peaceful Pacific nations who are balancing everyday between defending against China and trading with them, and also salutes all those working today to rebuild, restore, and enhance the Marine Corps' global, combined arms, 9-1-1 crisis response force. It is time for the US Marine Corps to get back to focusing on multiplying MAGTFs.
.
- - - - -
.
The National Interest - 04/03/2025
The Army’s Newest Units are Needed in the Indo-Pacific
By: Wilson Beaver, and Anna Gustafson
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-armys-newest-units-are-needed-in-the-indo-pacific
.
- - - - -
.
Naval News - 03/24/2025
Japan establishes new Maritime Transport Group with Taiwan contingency in mind
By Kosuke Takahashi
The folly of FD2030 knows no bounds... VISION2035 is a MUST to restore our Corps' MAGTF lethality, viability, and capabilities!
Greg is absolutely correct!