Marine: A Guided Tour of a Marine Expeditionary Unit

[LHD-1] ships provide us with great capability. In particular, the possibility of upgrading the command and control technology on those vessels so we can effectively interface with virtually any other command and control system makes them into an extremely capable system. You can run exactly the kinds of operations that I described previously with a split-ship ARG, disaster or humanitarian relief, or use it as the headquarters of a Joint Task Force [JTF]. We really need that seventh one [LHD-7]; and there may very well be a press to build an eighth ship as we approach the 21st century and have to counter the kinds of instability that I see happening. The desire to maintain stability will be so great you may actually see a slow growth of forces from their current levels.

The USS Whidbey Island/ Harpers Ferry-class [LSD-41/49] Dock Landing Ships are also doing their jobs well. Like the LHDs, you may also see additional units being built in the early 21 st century, if near-term worldwide instabilities continue to grow. In addition, there are LPD-17-class assault ships. This is the near-term 'big ticket' item for us. Just last year it was only a large paper ship. Today it is well on its way to becoming a reality. They are planning to build a total of twelve within the first decade of the 21 st century. The first one is due in 2001. We need to just build that first one, get it out to sea, and then determine what the follow-on units will look like. I don't want production of that first ship to be slowed and priced out of being built by adding more and more systems. I can almost guarantee that the follow-on units will be different from the first one, but we need to get that first one off the line. Also, I want shipyards to be building them at a rapid pace — the quicker we get them the better. But I want that first ship! On Landing Craft. The Landing Craft, Air Cushioned [LCAC] gives us tremendous capability, though I would like to see a smaller version built. We could outfit these with fire-and-forget support weapons that could go in with the AAAVs and be relatively immune to the inshore mine threat. The older conventional landing craft are eventually going to go away. For now, though, we need them for delivery of follow-on equipment to the beach.

Tom Clancy: What is the status of the Maritime Prepositioning Program?

General Krulak: The MPSRONs have been winners, and the program is healthy today. Just as with everything else, though, we must look at what we will need from MPSRON in the 21st century. That is one of the tasks in my planning guidance: to see if the current MPSRON is really the way to go in the future.

I have a feeling that things may be a bit different. Once upon a time, we (the U.S. and Great Britain) managed instability in the world through a system of coaling stations that were used to refuel the warships of the day. Perhaps we need to look at Admiral Bill Owens's [the recently retired Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] mobile-base concept. This is a modular self-propelled floating air/logistics base, which can be moved to a crisis area and would provide the ability to anchor a large support and logistics base right off the coast of a combat zone. We need, however, to look at the trade-off of such a concept with the current MPSRON scheme, which is mainly to haul equipment and supplies, not serve as a core base for their operations.

One of the other significant challenges faced by General Krulak is the matter of the extremely high operational tempos (Optempos) that have faced the U.S. military in general, and the U.S. Marine Corps in particular. With future Optempos projected to increase in the years ahead, his thoughts are insightful.

Tom Clancy: Let's talk a bit about the Optempos that the U.S. military in general, and the Marine Corps in particular, has been sustaining over the last few years, particularly in light of the recent cutbacks. Could you talk a little about this and its effects on the Corps?

General Krulak: Marines operate. Marines deploy. It's what we do. It's what the nation needs for us, with our Navy shipmates, to do. Optempo is going to have long term impacts on personnel and is hastening the modernization problem that is rapidly coming upon us. In regard to the latter, we are using our equipment up — going beyond the fatigue and service lives of equipment — earlier than planned. In addition, we are beginning to see maintenance problems as a result of delayed or deferred maintenance. Funding is a problem too. We are going to see lost opportunities to stretch out the life of our equipment without the proper moneys at the right time. This level of Optempos costs us training time and limits our options on how and when we repair things, which in turn gets us out of sync with the planned funding for that repair.

There is also the human cost of high Optempos. You already have problems with the families, wear and tear on the people. What is amazing, though, is that the individual Marines are loving the work, because that's what they came in to the Corps to do in the first place. The wives and families struggle, but the Marines love to work hard! It's a strange dichotomy for us to balance in the future.

The crown jewels of the Marine Corps today are its force of seven MEU (SOC)s. These compact, highly mobile forces are the key to maintaining the United States' capability to 'kick in the door' to a hostile coastline, should it be required. General Krulak's thoughts on the future of these forces are important, because they represent the last remaining vestige of our once-robust amphibious capabilities.

Tom Clancy: The MEU (SOC)s. You have seven now, but will that be enough in the future?

General Krulak: I think seven are enough to do the job today, though beyond 2005 to 2010 it will not be. What we will need to do is optimize the number of MEU (SOC)s on the various amphibious platforms that we do have. For example, if you have a V-22 that can carry twenty to twenty-five combat-loaded Marines, compared to the eight to twelve carried by the current CH-46 Sea Knight, you increase your capability to deal with the threat. In addition, you may be able to off-load some of the V-22s onto the LPD-17s, and build the mini-MEU (SOC)s that we talked about earlier.

We have to get 'outside of the box' in our thinking. We need to package the the MEU (SOC) with the capability to do the mission we are tasked to do, but do so in the minimum possible space aboard the ships. I mentioned earlier the 'digitized Marine' squad leader who can call down accurate killing fire on anybody in a matter of seconds. We have to consider what kind of capability that kind of Marine brings to our warfighting ability. I don't know what the implications are today, but I do know that I had better find the answer if the Marine Corps is going to remain relevant in the 21st century. In my planning guidance I directed the establishment of the Warfighting Lab at Quantico to look at these types of issues. As we develop various concepts of how we should fight or train or equip Marines, they will be tested under a concept called Sea Dragon. Because of new technologies that will be available to the Marines and sailors of the 21st century, in ten years you will see a MAGTF that has much greater capability and can cover more ground than the current MEU (SOC). The size of these units may be dictated more by technology and the capabilities of the individual ships than anything else. The question is just what systems do we really need on the modern battlefield for an expeditionary MAGTF. Do we need an M1 tank or perhaps a more mobile vehicle armed with fire-and-forget anti-armor missiles? Do we need a light tracked vehicle or a derivative of the current wheeled Light Armored Vehicle [LAV]? These are the questions the Warfighting Lab and Sea Dragon will address. We are looking forward into the 2010 time frame and checking into a number of other things — equipment, combat support, all kinds of things. Do you think that the United States Marine Corps will look the same in ten years as it does today? I don't think so!

As we closed out our chat with the 31st Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Krulak shared some of his visions of the future, both on the roles and missions of the service as well as the ethos of the Corps in general.

Tom Clancy: Could you talk about the Marine Corps in ten to twenty years in terms of its mission?

General Krulak: I see us as the premier crisis-response force in the world. And I define crisis response as everything from major regional contingencies to disaster relief. Some military forces are so specialized they are like a window washer who only washes square or round windows. I'm telling you that we do windows! You tell me what you want done, I will configure a force for your needs. We are the most flexible military force in the world today. When you tie us to the capabilities of our sister service, the U.S. Navy, we offer a completely unique set of capabilities.

Tom Ctancy: Do you feel good about what you see in the Marine Corps today and in the future?

General Krulak: Absolutely. The capabilities resident in the Marine Corps have been found to be of use and value to the nation. It's interesting that we are not doing things much different today from what we did during the Cold War and before Desert Storm. We are doing it a little more frequently, but we have not changed our philosophy much; and in the future we are going to become even more valuable. The Marine Corps that I inherited has always done just two things for this country. First, we make Marines; and they are a different type of person in their souls and their minds. Secondly, we win battles. We don't necessarily win major wars by ourselves; that is the job of the U.S. Army. We have, however, been the ones winning the early battles. If we ever stop doing either one of those things, we are finished. Therefore, all of my focus is on making Marines and winning battles. The