FD 2030 - Transforming to Irrelevance
Will ultimately result in an increasingly irrelevant Marine Corps
Colonel Marletto’s article is a stunning rebuttal of the article in Defense One recently written by Mr. Dakota Wood. In his article, Mr. Wood states the Marine Corps has a choice: transform or die. He argues Force Design 2030 is transforming the Marine Corps in the right direction, restoring those capabilities that differentiated it from the Army and Special Operations community.
Colonel Marletto’s article argues the opposite. He makes clear that divestitures of needed force structure and equipment — those already made, and others planned -- have significantly weakened Marine Corps combined arms capabilities. These weakened capabilities limit effective response to global crises and contingencies, and threaten the dissolution of the Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
Colonel Marletto goes on to say the proponents of FD 2030 are reluctant to engage in an open debate. Why are official proponents of FD 2030 so reluctant to openly discuss and debate their own concept? See the link below.
Topic: Force Design 2030 Region: Americas Tags: Force Design 2030U.S. Marine Corps China Great Power Competition Indo-Pacific Military
National Interest (nationalinterest.org) November 6, 2022
Force Design 2030: Transforming to Irrelevance
By Michael P. Marletto
What advocates of FD 2030 propose will ultimately result in an increasingly irrelevant Marine Corps, not its transformation into a force that is adequately prepared to act and serve in the twenty-first century.
. . . Critics refuse to accept the conclusions drawn by FD 2030 advocates. We agree that the Marine Corps must maintain a current relevant role in the defense establishment, but we see FD 2030 as significantly limiting Marine Corps’ capabilities to respond to global crises and contingencies, and undermining a path to future success. Unlike the advocates, we make no pretense that we can clearly see the future and maintain that a flexible and scalable combined arms force is the best contribution the Marine Corps can make to national defense and global security and reduce risk in an unknown future . . . .
Michael P. Marletto is a retired Marine Corps Colonel with over thirty years of service in a wide variety of command and operational assignments. He is a graduate of the National War College and the U.S. Army School of Advanced Military Studies.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/force-design-2030-transforming-irrelevance-205734
One note that is consistently on my mind is how we may be right in questioning the implementation of FD 2030, but we are losing the branding battle. I would prefer to say I am above such things, but reality is that branding matters (ask MCRC), and to date, the FD 2030 advocacy (and the CMC, who, it has to reinforced, is the decision maker) are winning the branding battle. Col. Marletto's article makes excellent points, but he, I , and us are all painted in the camp of the old guard; fumbling with our blackberries, paper maps, 1911's, Garands, 75mm pack howitzers, Shermans, and those giant walkie talkie things. FD 2030 advocacy is the Spartan force of 2035 - iPhone 80s with neural link, regenerative logistics, precision systems, integrated networks, autonomous systems, next gen cyber capabilities, and a superior instagram (insta wuht?). We are having a gentlemanly discussion of rational ideas; they aren't. They soft ridicule the 'resistors', us, as befuddled old Marines who just don't get it, while they talk about riding Polaris RZRs with a few Javelins as the new system of shock effect and firepower (yes, I actually heard this on an interview with a very senior Active Duty Marine Officer - this is not self serving hyperbole). The battle over FD 2030 is over; it has been implemented and is moving forward. Active duty Marines are eating this course of consequences. We are engaged in the battle for the next Vision & Strategy / Force Design / Revolution in Military Affairs of 20xx. We are engaged in preserving the USMC long enough to take advantage of the opportunities presented by the reality of the implementation of FD 2030, although we did not want this process to be forced on us. There are opportunities in this debacle, if we can capture them. If we fail to get this right, then we are just ghost dancing to return to / bring forward the better reality we are dreaming of. I would advocate that we are in the battle to plan for the resurrection of the MAGTF as the primary seed for single service full spectrum tip of the spear Joint Force equivalent capability, and dynamic entry seed Joint Force for follow on forces / larger scale operations in line with multiple recent NDS's). Maybe something else...whatever it is, let's gain consensus for our side, brand it Phoenix 2031 (or whatever) and 'Keep Moving'.