Vision 2035 - Restoring Maneuver for a Stronger Marine Corps
Global Response in the Age of Precision Munitions
For the past several weeks Compass Points has presented information on a series of forthcoming Marine Corps Gazette online articles introducing Chowder II’s Vision 2035. Yesterday, Tuesday, 29 November the Gazette published the first article, “The Preface - Who is Chowder II?” The Gazette planned to place the second article online today, the third on Thursday, and the fourth on Friday, however, an editing issue has disrupted that schedule. The upcoming articles are:
The Concerns - Fatal Flaws in FD 2030
The Choice - Retreat to defense or retake the offense?
The Vision - Global response, today and tomorrow.
Compass Points will introduce these articles and provide links to them the same day the Gazette places them online.
The Preface elicited numerous comments. Among the most prevalent were questions about Chowder II—who makes up the group, how are they organized, where did the name come from, and so forth. We answer those questions in the following paragraphs.
Original Chowder Society
Seventy-five years ago, the Marine Corps was fighting for its institutional survival. The President of the United States, the War Department, and the United States Army wanted to abolish the Marine Corps as a viable combat military organization. The Navy, itself under programmatic attack, was content to watch from the sidelines.
Facing an almost impossible task, a group of fourteen active duty Marine officers and four reserve officers worked tirelessly to save the Marine Corps as a separate Service. The result of their effort was the National Security Act of 1947, which codified Marine Corps roles and mission, stating in part:
The United States Marine Corps, within the Department of the Navy, shall include land combat and service forces and such aviation as may be organic therein. The Marine Corps shall be organized, trained, and equipped to provide fleet marine forces of combined arms, together with supporting air components, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases and for the conduct of such land operations as may be essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign.
These eighteen officers were collectively known as the Chowder Society.
Prior to the passage of the National Security Act, the Marine Corps was facing an existential threat. The Army saw the Marines as a second land army and unnecessary. President Truman was no friend of the Marine Corps, once writing before becoming President: “… the Navy has its own ‘little army’ that talks Navy and is known as the Marine Corps.” After becoming President, he remarked: “The Marine Corps is the Navy’s police force and as long as I am President that is what it will remain. They have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin’s.”
The sentiment inside the Department of War was even stronger. The Secretary of War and most of the other officials wanted the Marine Corps reduced to organizations not larger than a regiment, basically relegating the Marines to the status of Navy police units. Without assistance from the Navy, the Marines knew they had to turn to Congress for statutory legislation to protect Marine Corps roles, mission, and aviation.
In 1946, the Senate proposed a service unification bill that would essentially drive a stake through the institutional heart of the Marine Corps. The Marines knew they must have the support of the House of Representatives, or the Marine Corps would be killed. Speaking before the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs on May 6, 1946, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Alexander Vandegrift, delivered his famous “bended knee “speech, which said in part:
… The Marine Corps, then, believes that it has earned this right—to have its future decided by the legislative body which created it—nothing more. Sentiment is not a valid consideration in determining questions of national security. We have pride in ourselves and in our past but we do not rest our case on any presumed ground of gratitude owing us from the Nation. The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps. If the Marine as a fighting man has not made a case for himself after 170 years of service, he must go. But I think you will agree with me that he has earned the right to depart with dignity and honor, not by subjugation to the status of uselessness and servility planned for him by the War Department.
General Vandegrift’s speech galvanized the American public and the Senate Bill was tabled and eventually died. The Chowder Society continued to work with selected Members in the House of Representatives, who eventually hammered out a bill giving the Marines everything they wanted. On 26 July 1947 the National Security Act was signed into law by President Truman. A few good men, the Chowder Society, had saved the Marine Corps from destruction.
Why a Chowder II Society
After three years of failing to persuade the Marine Corps senior leadership that Force Design 2030 was a flawed operating concept, members of Chowder II took the unprecedented step of speaking out publicly. It was a step taken with great reluctance and after much discussion. Members concluded there were two options available, say nothing or watch the Corps self-destruct. They were then and remain convinced today that Force Design 2030 and Talent Management 2030 pose an existential threat to the Corps.
Who is Chowder II
Chowder II is a diverse group, whose ranks include former Commandants of the Marine Corps; combatant commanders; MEF, MEB, and MEU commanders; Marine Corps Combat Development Command commanders; Joint Force commanders; division, aircraft wing, regimental, aircraft group, battalion and squadron commanders; a number of logisticians, and staff officers who held demanding assignments at the combatant commands, Joint Staff, HQMC, and the supporting establishment. Also among our group are defense analysts and authors of joint and other Service operating concepts.
Chowder II members have retired from the Marine Corps as recently as this month and as long as 25 years ago.
Chowder II is an informal organization made up entirely of volunteers. Our structure is also informal but similar to any military staff. There are 15 members who are “on duty” every day. There are another 20 members who spend several days each month assisting. There are several hundred supporters who correspond with us regularly.
Our online presence, Compass Points, has over 1,000 subscribers and receives around 4,000 visits each day. Most posts have had at least 1,200 views. We welcome the submission of posts and articles.
Many Chowder II members are authors of the articles posted on Compass Points, so their names are public. Others have spoken in open forums and on blog sites, so again, many of their names are public. For various reasons a few are precluded from making public statements. All have served in our Corps. None are on active-duty.
Our members have not initiated contact with active-duty Marines seeking information or any kind of access. This would be entirely inappropriate. However, active-duty Marines have frequently reached out to us expressing their concerns about what they observe happening to our Corps
The only correspondence we have had with those inside the Marine Corps, other than emails and phone calls between our most senior retired generals and current Marine Corps leaders, was an email to Marine Corps University faculty informing them of Compass Points and our desire for discourse and debate. We felt this necessary when we had solid evidence that our members were in effect barred from speaking or attending seminars at MCU, a clear contradiction of its professed academic freedom.
If you would like to contact one of our members personally, we will endeavor to make the connection.
We welcome new readers and contributors who desire to support our ongoing efforts to make the Marine Corps strong today and stronger tomorrow.
It is more than a bit presumptious to take on the mantle of the Chowder Society. The original society was working in support of the Commandant. It also represented the vast majority of Marines. They were directly challenging an attempt to do away with the Corps.
Today's discussion is how the Corps can best support the nation -- a very different discussion. Ands one not necessarily widely supported. The self named Chowder II Society points to the 4000 members of this blog as evidence of support.
I am one of teh 4000 but do NOT support their positions. In fact, I think their approach will make the Corps essentially irrelevant in most future conflicts.
I read the posts because it is an essential part of being open to ideas in order to either validate or invalidate your own.
It would also be useful if the opponents of FD2030 would provide hot links that support their arguments where statements of facts are involved. This is basic to any intellectual argument.
T. X. Hammes
As I review this thread I cannot help but notice that those critical of FD-2030 are portrayed as unidentified conspirators who have the unmitigated gall to question those currently on active duty who designed this in the dark, behind closed doors and tied to threats and insults. Over my career I cannot remember any changes that were not debated, evaluated, reviewed and expected to stand on their merits. The leader who rapidly issues orders to prevent discussion is well known to all of us over our decades of service. Most of us were trained to debate until the moment of decision after which the order is issued and you do your level best to execute. This is the exact opposite of what unfolded from day one. Reasonable and rational questions were rejected with an eye roll and the dismissive wrist flip. To insure there would be no retreat the bridges were burned. The small, elite cadré designing FD-2030 should have welcomed the input and questions to refine their efforts. They resented it, rejected it and attack the authors vice the points.