Like their bulldog mascot, Marines latch onto an enemy and don’t let go. They stand ready to fight in any clime or place — until recently.
The public esteems the Marines for their discipline and toughness. Like their bulldog mascot, Marines latch onto an enemy and don’t let go. They stand ready to fight in any clime or place — until recently.
A few years ago, policy-makers advocated a “pivot” to the Pacific, concerned that China was building forts on atolls in the South China Sea. The commandant of the Marine Corps immediately proclaimed a counter. Small groups of Marines would move into unoccupied islands in the South China Sea, after receiving permission from the host nations. From those islands, they could then fire missiles to sink Chinese warships. Congress joined the press and policy-makers in praising this dramatic initiative, launched in haste and with scant consultation.
Three mortal flaws in this anti-ship strategy have since emerged. First, the Chinese forts are now yesterday’s newspaper. China has “pivoted” toward Taiwan, far out of range of Marine missiles in the South China Sea. The Marines are out of position.
Second, the invasion of Ukraine has again demonstrated that aggressors strike when and where they choose. Because our nation does not pick the time and place, our forces must be prepared to fight anywhere. However, Marines today are much less capable as our global “force in readiness,” because the resources devoted to the South China Sea scenario are not transferable elsewhere. There are few battlefields where anti-ship missiles, unlike Javelins, will be used.
Third, to pay for those missiles, the Marine Corps gave up its tanks and much of its artillery and air, with more reductions planned. With fewer combined arms, the Corps is less capable of fighting in urban spaces like Ukraine. Marines with combined arms fought the largest urban battles in Vietnam (Hue City) and Iraq (Fallujah) 20 years ago. Marines today are less capable than two decades ago. With urban growth soaring worldwide, the Marines, focused on isolated atolls, have diminished their capabilities to fight on the likely battlefields.
Congressional legislation directs the Marines to be a combined-arms corps. That capability is being eviscerated. Therefore Congressional language directing a pause in the anti-ship strategy for an objective study is fitting and would benefit our national security. Forsaking proper consultation and ignoring history, the commandant of the Marine Corps is giving up too much to gain too little.