A New Kind of War: How the Marine Corps is preparing for Great Power Competition.

Last week, USMC Commandant Gen David Berger put forth an essay highlighting the reasons behind forthcoming changes to the Marine Corps that are intended to prepare it to deter and fight peer adversaries like Russia and China. With the rise of greater weaponry and strategies by adversaries that challenge US interests, Berger has warned that the Marine Corps is not prepared for a new era of conflict. The proposed changes are radical and controversial and, if fully implemented, will drastically reshape the Marine Corps.

In his essay, Berger highlights two trends that have fundamentally changed the nature of warfare. The first is the upgrade and proliferation of long-range precision missiles that can accurately strike targets with devastating effect. The other is the use of gray zone tactics by adversaries that threaten the interests of the US and its allies and partners without escalating into open conflict. Describing it as “salami slicing”, Berger states that adversaries make decisions that force the US to choose between military action with possibly devastating consequences or resign the matter as not worth the risk. He pointed to Russian military actions in Ukraine and China’s controversial territory claims in the South and East China Seas as examples. In both instances, Russia and China threatened the interests of the US and its allies and partners, but due to their military capabilities, military retaliation was deemed too risky. Berger states that the primary area where these threats play out is in the maritime domain, specifically in regards to China and Iran. He refers to Russia and North Korea as “land powers” that the Marine Corps would primarily act in a supporting role against in the event of a conflict. With Berger stating the need to refocus the Marine Corps on maritime operations, it is the threats posed by China that are driving the force’s modernization.

While retaining its ability to respond to global crises, the future force that Berger envisions is one that is smaller, lighter, and more dispersed, capable of operating under the threat of enemy precision missiles while working closely with the Navy to enable friendly forces to operate freely and effectively at sea while denying the enemy the ability to do the same. These forces would operate in smaller numbers, spread out over great distances to minimize their chances of being detected and mitigate the amount of damage the enemy could inflict. Additionally, Berger wants to invest in manned and minimally manned systems that would be able to operate within enemy missile ranges to overwhelm and reduce their capabilities. To fulfill such a mission, the Marine Corps is doing away with tanks, shrinking and reducing the number of infantry units, cutting aircraft and artillery, and investing more into unmanned systems, among other things. Moreover, Berger wants to create a force that can respond to the gray zone tactics used by adversaries, such as China’s building and militarization of islands in the South China Sea. While ultimately creating a force that can fight and defeat a country like China, the aim is to design a force that is powerful enough to deter adversaries and avoid resorting to open conflict to protect US interests. But the Marine Corps won't do it entirely alone. It would wage such a fight in direction partnership with other branches and US allies and partners.

Berger’s essay comes at a time that tensions are rising between the US and China, and more and more nations are calling for an inquiry into the coronavirus that would, in part, determine how it originated and spread. As of now, the changes called for remain in their infant stages. Throughout their implementation, they will be subjected to scrutinous testing and analysis to ensure they meet the ever evolving threats they are meant to address. Still, Berger acknowledged the difficulties of preparing for challenges that are so abstract. Quoting a British historian who spoke about the same predicament that once faced Great Britain, Berger said: “Sympathetic to the challenge of preparing forces for a test that can only truly be administered in battle, Howard went on to allow that it is not too much to hope that we will not ‘get it too badly wrong,’ and that is most certainly my intention.”