Compass Points and Chowder II have received tremendous feedback from the publication this week of Vision 2035. The three articles introducing Vision 2035 were published in the National Interest December 12, 13, 14, 2022.
Feedback has come online, in emails, texts, and phone calls. Many Marines and friends of the Corps have stepped forward to say, “I want to help. What can I do?” Marines are special people. Those who have been Marines, as well as those who are friends of the Corps are passionate about the Marine Corps. They always want to make sure their Marine Corps is moving in the right direction.
How can we make sure the Marine Corps is always moving in the right direction? Informed, robust, professional discussion and debate. Stand up, reach out, and speak up. Together we can make sure the Marine Corps remains strong today and stronger tomorrow.
Among the comments received during this whole discussion of force design is one that discussed a recent Gazette article, “What’s in a Name?”
Marine Corps Gazette February 2020 and December 2022
What's In a Name?
https://mca-marines.org/wp-content/uploads/MCG-February-2020-sm.pdf
A Reply to the Gazette article, “What’s In a Name?”
In the Gazette article “What’s in a Name?’ first published in the Feb 2020 and republished Dec 2022, the author provided a primer on the terminology and concepts of the Commandant’s Planning Guidance (CPG). The purpose of the article to ensure Marines understand the CPG’s underlying ideas and concepts. The focus of the article was threefold: (1) The Operational Concept - Expeditionary Advanced Based Operations; (2) Stand-in Engagement Capabilities – forces and capabilities that facilitate the operational concept; and (3) Fleet Marine Forces – the organizations to implement the operational concept. The author is well qualified to write this article as he was one of the driving forces behind Force Design 2030, published in March of 2020. Whether you agree with Force Design 2030 or not, the author should be applauded for his over 47 years of service to the Marine Corps and federal service. In the end, we are all Marines or civilian Marines that want what is best for our Nation and our Corps.
But we have a different view of Force Design 2030. Our answer to the question, “What’s in a Name” can be summed up in two words: Global Irrelevance. Irrelevant because of how Force Design 2030 has been executed. Instead of maintaining an effective and robust global response capability while experimenting, testing, and validating the new operating concept, the Marine Corps unwisely and hurriedly implemented Force Design 2030. The rush to reconfigure and restructure the Marine Corps against a known enemy in a specific location has significantly impaired the capability of the Corps to operate as a combined-arms, air-ground logistics team. Force Design 2030 has reduced the Corps ability to respond to global crises and contingencies. The Nation no longer has three forward deployed crisis response MAGTFs; nor, does the Marine Corps have sufficient amphibious shipping, infantry, armor, cannon artillery, aviation, bridging, logistics, and sustainment (maritime prepositioning) to respond quickly and effectively as the Nation’s 9-1-1 force. These and other needed capabilities were foolishly divested to self-fund Force Design 2030. Did the Corps’ leadership entertain the idea of requesting additional funding for the new capabilities envisioned in Force Design 2030 as addressed by a noted author in his article “Here’s how the Marine Corps should have approached stand-in forces”. NO!
The myopic focus on an unproven naval operational concept has severely degraded the Marine Corps’ capability to respond globally across the spectrum of conflict. The degradation of our combined arms capabilities has Marines at risk in the single battle, especially in the close and rear battles where Marine infantry is required to close with and destroy the enemy.
As another author stated in his article Marines Flummoxed on Their Birthday:
“The statue of six Marine grunts raising the flag on Iwo Jima in 1945 is emblematic of American grit. Marines are seen as being ready to fight anywhere at any time, bringing to bear its aircraft, artillery, and tanks to support the riflemen who close with and destroy the enemy. The grunt is the organizational heart and the guiding soul of the Marine Corps. Until now. On this birthday, for the first time in its history, the grunt is not the Marine centerpiece.”
The USS Force Design 2030 and its sister ship USS Global Irrelevance have set sail and with them the future of the Marine Corps. The question for the Nation: Can we turn the ship around?
Proudly wrote to my two US Senators and US Representative, supporting congressional review of FD 2030, its impact on USMC mission and national security, as well as exploring the merits of Vision 2035.
I have written my US Senators and US Representatives supporting a review of FD 2030. I fear the battle we face will be harder than any enemy we have battled. Our Country is experiencing something never experienced before, and that is, Only 7 % of the population has ever served or is serving in the Military. Therefore, Congress reflects this and is displaying negative attitude to what is Militarily important to protecting our Nation.