Compass Points - Strong Enough?
Time for a Force Design redesign
Compass Points - Strong Enough?
Time for a Force Design redesign
July 11, 2025
.
Is the Marine Corps today as strong as it needs to be, not only in the Pacific but around the globe?
On July 6, 2025, the Washington Times published an article by Bill Gertz, "Marine Commandant: Corps To Focus On Advanced Weapons And Contested Logistics In Prep For War."
In his article Bill Gertz quotes the Marine Corps Commandant, General Eric Smith
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
Gen. Smith said the 33,000 Marines deployed in the western Pacific are the nation’s “expeditionary shock troops” that provide rapid and flexible military power to meet the threats of an unpredictable security environment, with China the main danger.
“The Chinese Communist Party’s aggressive military modernization, coercive economic practices, and actions in the South China Sea directly threaten the principles of a free and open Indo-Pacific,” he stated.
The Marines are ready to fight at a moment’s notice and can deter CCP aggression, protect vital seal lanes and safeguard U.S. interest, he said.
-- Bill Gertz, Washington Times
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
The Marine Corps has traditionally been a global crisis response, not a regional sensor node off China's coast. After nearly six years the Marine Corps has still never been able to establish a fully operational string of Marine sensor and missile units off China's coast. Can the Marine Corps genuinely, "fight at a moment's notice" in the Pacific?
On July 10, 2025, the Washington Times published a response from Gen. Charles Krulak and Gen. Anthony Zinni. In their article, ""More funding for the wrong programs won’t fix the Marine Corps" the authors make a persuasive case that the Marine needs to focus less on island missile units off China's coast and focus more on global crisis response.
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
We have a different perspective on the capabilities and capacity of the Marine Corps than the one expressed in Bill Gertz’s recent article, “Marine commandant: Corps to focus on advanced Weapons and contested logistics in prep for war,” (Wed, July 6).
The Marine Corps’s role in national security has always been as a global crisis response force, placed into law as an “expeditionary, combined arms force in readiness” that is “to be most ready when the nation is least ready.” Unfortunately, in response to the 2018 National Defense Strategy, the Marine Corps hastily reorganized and restructured from an effective and offensively oriented global expeditionary crisis force in readiness to a defensive, narrowly focused regional force.
This restructuring included an ill-advised move to fund the envisioned future capabilities by shedding a significant amount of combined arms warfighting capability, including armor, cannon artillery, bridging equipment, mine clearing equipment, aviation assets, logistics and — importantly — the “trigger pullers,” our individual Marines.
-- Gen. Charles Krulak and Gen. Anthony Zinni, "More funding for the wrong programs won’t fix the Marine Corps" Washington Times
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
In their article in the Washington Times, Gen Krulak and Gen Zinni go into detail how unwise decisions in recent years have done great damage to Marine Corps combined arms, units, equipment, and capabilities. The authors conclude:
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
Our nation requires a Marine Corps that is organized, manned, trained, equipped and consistently afloat, ready to respond to contingencies globally. In an uncertain world, the United States needs a certain force — to gain decision space for our national leaders, to reassure allies and partners with whom we will invariably fight, and to set conditions for the Joint Force to fight and win.
That certain force is a Marine Air-Ground Logistics Task Force — ideally aboard amphibious ships and poised for any contingency across the spectrum of conflict. While senior leaders rightfully remain laser-focused on the threat of China in the Western Pacific, we must not lose sight of the fact that China’s interests and capabilities are global. It is in this broader context where asymmetric opportunities exist to confront China in every corner of the world.
And this is where the agility, flexibility and responsiveness of well-balanced Marine crisis response forces can best contribute to the success of the Joint Force — not marooned on small islands in the Western Pacific with duplicative (or, worse, questionable) capability.
The hasty decisions made by senior Marine Corps leaders in 2019 and solidified by the current senior leadership have proven to fall well short of the promised capability and have never been shown to be supportable. Meanwhile, China’s People’s Liberation Army and other potential adversaries around the world continue to enhance and increase their warfighting capabilities.
-- Gen. Charles Krulak and Gen. Anthony Zinni, "More funding for the wrong programs won’t fix the Marine Corps" Washington Times
.
---------------------
---------------------
.
Is the Marine Corps today as strong as it needs to be, not only in the Pacific but around the globe?
Compass Points salutes Gen. Charles Krulak and Gen. Anthony Zinni, for taking time to explain in the pages of the Washington Times that "More funding for the wrong programs won’t fix the Marine Corps"
The Nation does not need and cannot afford a Marine Corps that is focused on being a regional sensing and missile node in a joint kill chain. As Generals Krulak and Zinni make clear, "Our nation requires a Marine Corps that is organized, manned, trained, equipped and consistently afloat, ready to respond to contingencies globally. In an uncertain world, the United States needs a certain force — to gain decision space for our national leaders, to reassure allies and partners with whom we will invariably fight, and to set conditions for the Joint Force to fight and win."
.
- - - - -
.
Washington Times - 07/06/2025
Marine Commandant: Corps To Focus On Advanced Weapons And Contested Logistics In Prep For War
The Marine Corps recently unveiled its budget request for fiscal 2026 that calls for spending $57.2 billion on new aircraft, drones, advanced weapons and military technology for its readiness in the Indo-Pacific.
By Bill Gertz
.
- - - - -
.
Washington Times - 07/10/2025
More funding for the wrong programs won’t fix the Marine Corps
Reverse the effects of the force's redesign
By Gen. Charles Krulak and Gen. Anthony Zinni
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/jul/10/funding-wrong-programs-wont-fix-marine-corps/
As a geologist, even in the geologic active Pacific, I find it hard to believe our commandant can have islands, with our Marines on them, move to strategic places when their initial deployment site becomes irrevocably compromised. (And islands defending exactly what?) defense in depth or in depths? Maybe I missed the total concept, but it looks like a gamma goat of an idea.
If CMC Smith wants the Marine Corps to be a rapidly responding and flexible force, he needs to return to the pre-FD Marine Corps. The Corps the Commandant leads now is a narrowly focused and ill-equipped force. It is not robust enough nor flexible enough to be a credible expeditionary force. It lacks artillery and armored support and other assets. However, with a robust force with these weapons and more, the Marine Corps can return to being such an expeditionary force. It can also be an anti-shipping force. An anti-shipping force can be formed from a traditional MEU using: a HIMARS section, an infantry platoon, and an anti-air section. Or a MEU can be formed for mechanized operations using a traditional MEU. The Marine Corps needs to return to being a Swiss Army Knife of military capabilities. The more tools in the tool box will give the Commandant more options for operations. This will be a flexible and robust Marine Corps.