Leroy N. Soetoro
2023-07-13 21:58:15 UTC
https://news.yahoo.com/marine-commandant-berger-became-poster-
185839042.html
WASHINGTON In the small town of Newport, Rhode Island, a U.S. force
lacking in capabilities was about to face off against well-armed and
advanced Chinese troops.
It was 2018, and then-Lt. Gen. David Berger was putting four years of
simmering thoughts to the test in a wargame at the Naval War College, in
hopes of figuring out a better way to employ forces in the Pacific.
His last two assignments had put him at the forefront of the Marine Corps
shift away from ground wars and back to sea. And he now had a chance to
see how all these ideas would play out in a fight against an advanced
competitor.
In the wargame, the adversarial force was based on Chinas current
capabilities plus expected growth in the next couple years. The friendly
force was played by the U.S. joint force strictly as it was no future
capabilities, no aspirational readiness levels and not even the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter, as it wasnt fielded in great numbers at the time.
Though the wargames details and results are classified, Berger had clear
takeaways for the Marine Corps: Anything heavy was a liability; mobility
would be a huge challenge, as would sustaining a force operating so near
to Chinas shores; and Marines, with the right command-and-control
structure, could be a game-changing tool for sea-control and sea-denial
missions.
However, Berger told Defense News in a June 8 interview that his primary
takeaway from that wargame was the importance of already having forces in
the theater before a conflict starts.
If we didnt have something forward, then I think [then-Commandant Gen.
Robert] Neller is exactly right. He said we should expect to fight to get
to the fight but this fight to get to the fight was getting to be a
slaughter [in previous wargames]. So more and more it was clear to not
just me, [but to] a bunch of people, the imperative of being forward all
the time, persistently, Berger said.
In the wargame, that pre-positioned force included special operations
units and submarines. But Berger wanted Marines already in theater, too,
as something of a stand-in force.
And if theyre going to be in there, then you have to answer the question
of: How are they going to survive? How are you going to resupply them? So
these became real thinking efforts for a lot of us, he explained.
Fast forward a few years, and the takeaways from the 2018 wargame directly
led to Bergers Commandants Planning Guidance, released the day after he
became the Corps top officer in July 2019; the Force Design 2030
modernization program, first released in March 2020 and updated annually;
the Stand-In Forces concept, released in December 2021 and brought to life
by the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment that was activated in March 2022; and
a contested logistics concept released earlier this year, among them.
These changes were met with resistance. In fact, Berger faced vocal
opposition from the retiree community, unusual for the small service that
was always taught that we did our laundry in private, said former Navy
Secretary and Marine pilot Richard V. Spencer.
Spencer called Berger the poster child for change, urgency and
deliberation, and said the general fully embodied the phrase talk softly
and carry a big stick.
His demeanor is so calm and so collected because its based in thought
and data, he told Defense News in a June 21 interview.
A flurry of opinion pieces some signed, some nameless began
circulating in March 2022, accusing Berger of creating a one-trick pony of
sorts, a force optimized for a fight against China but no longer capable
of conducting other types of missions around the globe.
Im saddened beyond belief knowing that our Marine Corps soon will no
longer be the ready combined-arms force that our nation has long depended
upon when its interests were threatened, former Marine Corps combat
development head Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper wrote in Marine Corps Times. It
will be a force shorn of all its tanks and 76% of its cannon artillery,
and with 41% fewer Marines in its infantry battalions.
Despite additional pushback from the likes of former Commandant Gen. James
Amos and former Navy Secretary James Webb, Berger has continued undeterred
to overhaul his Corps.
Retired Adm. Scott Swift, who commanded U.S. Pacific Fleet when Berger led
U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific, had observed how the ideas behind Force
Design 2030 were validated in the 2018 wargame.
Berger understood the challenges he was taking on and how he would be
criticized, but he had done enough study this wasnt just, he showed up
as commandant and decided to do this; this came out of his experiences,
Swift said in a June 23 interview.
He was there when they were using armor and long-range artillery in the
Middle East; he saw what the value of it was, but thats a different
warfight than what the joint force was to prepare for in the Pacific, the
admiral said, adding that Berger combined his experiences and a campaign
of wargaming to reform the Marine Corps in a much more consequential way
than I think other leaders really had the courage to do.
Berger took command of the Marine Corps on July 11, 2019. He relinquishes
command on July 10, after four years of reforms that will shape the Corps
for years to come.
Becoming commandant
The 38th commandant of the Marine Corps almost became a Navy officer.
Ahead of his 1977 graduation from high school in rural Maryland, Berger
applied for ROTC scholarships at the advice of his father, who Berger
called the smartest person that I know. His father had gone to Duke
University on an Air Force ROTC scholarship, and Berger ultimately chose
to attend Tulane University on a Navy ROTC scholarship due to his interest
in the schools engineering program.
That fall, Berger began school as a naval cadet, but quickly noticed the
Marines.
If youre a college freshman and dont know anything about the military,
they [Marines] were just a poster. And they not just looked the part
they were clearly different from the Navy instructors, the way they
handled themselves, the way they taught their classes, and it was clear
that the [cadets in the Marine Corps program] were different, too. So I
was drawn to that, Berger told Defense News in the interview, and he
switched to the Marine Corps program as soon as he was assured his
scholarship would allow it.
Berger graduated and was commissioned a Marine Corps officer in 1981. He
spent his first two tours on the West Coast, with deployments to the
Pacific on amphibious ships.
Though separated by geography, he said two formative events happened in
October 1983, just two years into his career: Operation Urgent Fury in
Grenada, where Marine and joint forces stormed the Caribbean island
following a coup, losing 19 American service members but quickly occupying
the island; and the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon,
that killed 241 American service members, including 220 Marines.
Lieutenants who were in my [The Basic School] class were killed. And I
was on the West Coast, and the unit was from the East Coast, but it
shocked the whole Marine Corps. And you could understand why, when you
lose 240 like that. Its just not something anyone was expecting. So that
definitely shaped things, he said, looking back at foundational moments
in his career.
Berger described the operation in Grenada as a high point for inspiring
young Marines, but said the loss in Beirut made everything real.
The start of the Gulf War in 1990 and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were
other real moments for him reminders of the seriousness of his
business.
But Berger said the experiences that shaped him as a leader were the
losses of Marines directly under his command.
Asked by Defense News what stands out as defining moments in building who
he is today, he said, almost all of them were not necessarily moments,
but when you lost Marines, because your immediate thought, most Marine
leaders immediate thought is, you missed something. You overlooked
something. You skipped a step. You immediately take responsibility
yourself and go, theres something we didnt see. There are a lot of them,
a lot of them.
Berger recounted losing 10 Marines to one improvised explosive device
attack in Iraq, and losing a Marine to an accidental grenade explosion
inside their own camp in Kuwait. Each time, he said, he scoured Marine
Corps procedures for missed or forgotten steps that could have saved
lives.
Those stay with you forever, Berger said.
A changing Pacific
Berger showed up at Marine Corps Forces Pacific headquarters in Hawaii in
2016, having read about Chinas rise and the changing landscape in the
region, but with questions about the pace of that change.
Swift and then-U.S. Pacific Command chief Adm. Harry Harris assured him
the change was happening faster than most understood, Berger recalled.
Though much of Chinas rising military power and its aggressive behavior
toward its neighbors was out of his control as the top Marine in the
Pacific, Berger could take steps to strengthen relationships with local
partners and allies another theme he brought to Force Design 2030.
Our relationship at the Marine Corps level with Japan, with Korea, with
the Philippines, with Australia, was still strong and growing and in
some cases, growing much faster than I was aware of, he said.
The ability to entrust allies and partners to share targeting data,
protect and resupply small formations of Marines, and otherwise operate
intertwined with the Corps and the U.S. joint force is key to Force Design
2030. Berger said hes seen allies in the Pacific repeatedly prove their
trustworthiness throughout his career, and particularly while commanding
Marine Corps Forces Pacific.
In 2012, while commanding 1st Marine Division (Forward) in Afghanistan,
Berger said one of his reconnaissance teams in northern Helmand province
got stuck in their position one night, with bad weather and no American
forces nearby to extract them.
An Australian special operations force liaison officer overheard Berger
talking to Maj. Gen. Charles Gurganus, the I Marine Expeditionary Force
(Forward) commander in Afghanistan.
The Australian Army major chimed in: We can do that. And, I mean,
couldnt have been 30, 45 minutes later, they take off in MV-22s, Berger
recalled. Im sure they had just returned from some other mission and
all, but it didnt matter. He knew the U.S. unit was in a pickle, in a
tough spot: We got this. Weve got aircraft, were going. No rehearsals,
no six hours of prep just get on the aircraft and go.
Berger said the power of the mateship between the U.S. and Australia was
even more evident while he commanded Marine Forces Pacific.
In August 2017, a Marine Corps MV-22 was flying back to the amphibious
transport dock Green Bay, which was operating off the coast of Queensland,
Australia. As it approached the ship to land, the aircraft suddenly
dropped, slammed into the side of the vessel and quickly sank, injuring 23
and killing three.
I called a couple people in Australia directly, immediately, Berger
said, as the U.S. did not have the right divers on hand to recover the
wreckage and the bodies of the missing Marines.
His Australian contacts made a few calls, and then called back Berger to
promise a ship with deep-sea divers within 12 hours.
No paperwork, no messages, no money, no anything on a phone call,
Berger said.
Though the three Marines who went down with the aircraft could not be
rescued, Berger said the Australian divers spent at least three days in
the water, exceeding the time limits for how long they should be
underwater at those depths, all to assure they recovered the fallen
Marines bodies.
Berger and his team flew to Australia in January 2018 to award the divers
and other supporting units with a Meritorious Unit Commendation.
Berger has experienced opposition to the reliance on allies and partners
in the Force Design 2030 and Stand-In Forces strategies. The two main
criticisms are that partner forces arent skilled enough, and that the
U.S. couldnt rely on them to show up in the event of a conflict.
Theyre just excuses, he said, referring to the criticism and noting
that he absolutely believes allies will be there for the Marine Corps
and the rest of the U.S. military if called upon for a fight.
Swift said people often talk about a Chinese invasion of Taiwan by 2027 as
a fait accompli, a given.
That doesnt have to be the case if they do more thoughtful things like
Gen. Bergers doing the biggest thing that hes doing is deterrence,
Swift said, highlighting Bergers work to deepen Marines ties to allies
and partners in the Pacific.
Creating a lasting change
In 2018, Neller the commandant at the time tapped Berger to come to
Washington to serve as the deputy commandant for combat development and
integration. In this position, Berger would take his knowledge of the
Pacific and his four years of reforming regional Marine forces, and apply
it to the entire Corps.
It was very clear to everyone the rising prominence of China in terms of
the National Defense Strategy, so I think he brought me to CD&I because
thats where combat development happens. And if China is central to our
security, then you need to understand the Pacific, Berger said.
Berger said he didnt have a force-wide reform plan going into the job,
but it gave me time to observe, to think of, if we needed to accelerate
[the reforms Neller was starting], what would that take? What kind of hard
decisions would we have to make?
That forethought caught the eye of Spencer, who served as secretary of the
Navy from August 2017 to November 2019. Spencer interviewed several
candidates during the search for the 38th commandant, and he said his
initial conversation with Berger started slowly.
It just progressed so comfortably and so logically, and so data-informed.
I remember the data-informed nature, he said, noting that Berger didnt
just answer Spencers questions but rather explained how analysis informed
an answer.
Spencer said he went into the interview process without a front-runner in
mind but was drawn to Berger, knowing that the Marine Corps would need a
major overhaul in the coming years.
You can get change agents and some are very successful that just come
in and put a 12-volt battery, boom, charge right to the heart, and go
Were changing. Those of you who cant take it, you can take a left;
were all going right, Spencer said.
Berger, on the other hand, wanted everyone to come along with his reforms
and get as much change implemented as possible.
You could see it in his demeaner and the way he led, that a steady hand
at the tiller doing something this dramatic was exactly what we needed,
Spencer said.
Those dramatic changes were revealed July 12, 2019 one day after Berger
was sworn in as commandant. He released a Commandants Planning Guidance
that portended a fundamental overhaul.
Visions of a massed naval armada nine nautical miles off-shore in the
South China Sea preparing to launch the landing force in swarms of
[surface connectors] are impractical and unreasonable, he wrote. Instead,
Marines would rethink their strategy in light of growing anti-access/area-
denial threats, and would collaborate with the Navy to become a sea-
control and sea-denial fleet.
Within 24 hours he released his first thoughts, and within eight months
Force Design 2030 was released, kicking off a generational change for the
Corps.
Berger said he didnt mind the wave of criticism from retired Marine Corps
leaders, as debate can be healthy.
But he said red lines have been crossed since last year.
A Wall Street Journal op-ed, written by former Navy Secretary Webb,
alleged that 22 retired four-star generals signed a private letter to
Berger, and that above 90 percent of retired general officers were
concerned about Force Design 2030.
Everybody speaks for themselves; you dont speak for others, Berger
said. So when you say all or most or three dozen, or whatever, you better
have their concurrence.
Berger said another line was crossed when an opposition group hired
lobbyists to make their case on Capitol Hill.
Congress is the operating area for the sitting commandant, and you dont
wade into there, you dont try to resist or fight there, you dont have an
active insurgency there. Thats where the commandant operates on behalf of
the Marine Corps, Berger said.
The debate is healthy, but once youve had the debate and its very clear
that the organization is headed in a certain direction and is supported by
the civilian leadership and is supported by Congress, OK, then youre
done. Then just being loud over and over and over again unless theres
some new information, Berger added. Im not sure what is the benefit of
that.
Former combat development head Van Riper, who has led opposition, told
Defense News the strong pushback from the retired community had nothing to
do with Berger as a person but was the result of the drastic changes and
the nontraditional way in which those changes were handled and executed.
Our Corps made its reputation because of its willingness to close with
and destroy the nations enemies, and it did this with an infantry-heavy
force supported by tanks, cannon artillery, engineers, close air support
and dedicated logistics efforts, he said.
Changes over time, he added, were the product of a highly regarded combat
development process, which thoroughly vetted new operational methods
before implementation.
Force Design 2030 has severely crippled Marine Corps capabilities to
respond quickly and effectively to global crises and contingencies across
the spectrum of conflict, he said, noting that Berger may not want the
Corps to be a second ground force but that sometimes thats what the
nation demands.
Dakota Wood, a senior research fellow for defense programs at the Heritage
Foundation think tank, said that while Force Design 2030 is sound, the
sales pitch could have gone better.
Wood noted the Marine Corps began to worry in the 1990s about long-range
anti-ship cruise missiles and how they would affect amphibious operations,
leading to early acquisition wins like the MV-22 Osprey program and
failures like the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, both of which were meant
to help Marines get from the ship to shore across greater distances and at
higher speeds.
Whats interesting about Gen. Bergers commandancy is he grew up in that
whole debate that took place in the pages of the Marine Corps Gazette and
in intellectual forums regarding growing threats to amphibious
operations, Wood said. But after 9/11, the Marine Corps was committed to
land wars and lost touch with the sea in many ways.
What Gen. Berger really brought with him into the commandancy is saying:
The world has not gotten easier; its gotten harder. We are a naval power
projection force, not a second army, Wood added. I find it stunning
that this guy comes into the office and he implements things that the
Marine Corps has talked about for 30 years. But change is scary, and it
was in the implementation that generated all this criticism.
Wood said Berger talked a lot in 2020 about what would change, what the
Corps would divest to free up funds for new investments, and what new gear
and concepts the service would come to rely on.
For his part, Berger has acknowledged he should have spent more time
talking about the fundamentals of the Marine Corps that would not change.
However, Wood noted that the divest-to-invest approach, while unpopular,
was necessary to make significant change during tight fiscal times.
You can either stay with the old Marine Corps and proven, known sorts of
things, and actually be irrelevant in your primary mission area, which is
naval power projection; or you can adopt these new things, which are
really, really good and have been [proved] in the various testing and
training and force-on-force exercises, but that means youre going to have
to leave something behind, Wood said.
Despite the initial messaging, the analyst said he believes Force Design
2030 was the right change, and Berger was the right man to lead it.
His legacy its so premature to be talking about that [is] that he
will be seen as one of these pivotal commandants, just like when we
shifted from small wars to large-scale amphibious operations going into
World War II, and then innovation in the use of helicopters and all the
other things deployed MEUs that were all over the world doing crisis
response and all that. So this is a big change for the Corps that enables
it to keep pace with changing times.
Comments:
Frank
1 day ago
If I have $5, and then I throw away $2, that is change. I would argue
that that is not a good change for me. So to say that Berger is a poster
child for change is supposed to be a compliment, but it is not necessarily
a good change. Many agree with that position. Berger's main claim to
fame, in terms of change, is that he is rapidly moving the Corps towards
irrelevancy.
-Retired colonel of Marines.
John n
1 day ago
Not everyone agrees with this guy and what he has "changed". Getting rid
of armor like tanks was not a good idea. Now they will have to rely on a
sister service for this. How well do you really think that will work out
well. And disbanding some arty, fixed and rotary wing units won't help
either. That's my opinion of course. I did my 20 and won't have to deal
with it. They did save our rear ends on NUMEROUS occasions in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
--
We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that
stupid people won't be offended.
Durham Report: The FBI has an integrity problem. It has none.
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.
Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden
fiasco, President Trump.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp. Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood
queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed
dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.
185839042.html
WASHINGTON In the small town of Newport, Rhode Island, a U.S. force
lacking in capabilities was about to face off against well-armed and
advanced Chinese troops.
It was 2018, and then-Lt. Gen. David Berger was putting four years of
simmering thoughts to the test in a wargame at the Naval War College, in
hopes of figuring out a better way to employ forces in the Pacific.
His last two assignments had put him at the forefront of the Marine Corps
shift away from ground wars and back to sea. And he now had a chance to
see how all these ideas would play out in a fight against an advanced
competitor.
In the wargame, the adversarial force was based on Chinas current
capabilities plus expected growth in the next couple years. The friendly
force was played by the U.S. joint force strictly as it was no future
capabilities, no aspirational readiness levels and not even the F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter, as it wasnt fielded in great numbers at the time.
Though the wargames details and results are classified, Berger had clear
takeaways for the Marine Corps: Anything heavy was a liability; mobility
would be a huge challenge, as would sustaining a force operating so near
to Chinas shores; and Marines, with the right command-and-control
structure, could be a game-changing tool for sea-control and sea-denial
missions.
However, Berger told Defense News in a June 8 interview that his primary
takeaway from that wargame was the importance of already having forces in
the theater before a conflict starts.
If we didnt have something forward, then I think [then-Commandant Gen.
Robert] Neller is exactly right. He said we should expect to fight to get
to the fight but this fight to get to the fight was getting to be a
slaughter [in previous wargames]. So more and more it was clear to not
just me, [but to] a bunch of people, the imperative of being forward all
the time, persistently, Berger said.
In the wargame, that pre-positioned force included special operations
units and submarines. But Berger wanted Marines already in theater, too,
as something of a stand-in force.
And if theyre going to be in there, then you have to answer the question
of: How are they going to survive? How are you going to resupply them? So
these became real thinking efforts for a lot of us, he explained.
Fast forward a few years, and the takeaways from the 2018 wargame directly
led to Bergers Commandants Planning Guidance, released the day after he
became the Corps top officer in July 2019; the Force Design 2030
modernization program, first released in March 2020 and updated annually;
the Stand-In Forces concept, released in December 2021 and brought to life
by the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment that was activated in March 2022; and
a contested logistics concept released earlier this year, among them.
These changes were met with resistance. In fact, Berger faced vocal
opposition from the retiree community, unusual for the small service that
was always taught that we did our laundry in private, said former Navy
Secretary and Marine pilot Richard V. Spencer.
Spencer called Berger the poster child for change, urgency and
deliberation, and said the general fully embodied the phrase talk softly
and carry a big stick.
His demeanor is so calm and so collected because its based in thought
and data, he told Defense News in a June 21 interview.
A flurry of opinion pieces some signed, some nameless began
circulating in March 2022, accusing Berger of creating a one-trick pony of
sorts, a force optimized for a fight against China but no longer capable
of conducting other types of missions around the globe.
Im saddened beyond belief knowing that our Marine Corps soon will no
longer be the ready combined-arms force that our nation has long depended
upon when its interests were threatened, former Marine Corps combat
development head Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper wrote in Marine Corps Times. It
will be a force shorn of all its tanks and 76% of its cannon artillery,
and with 41% fewer Marines in its infantry battalions.
Despite additional pushback from the likes of former Commandant Gen. James
Amos and former Navy Secretary James Webb, Berger has continued undeterred
to overhaul his Corps.
Retired Adm. Scott Swift, who commanded U.S. Pacific Fleet when Berger led
U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific, had observed how the ideas behind Force
Design 2030 were validated in the 2018 wargame.
Berger understood the challenges he was taking on and how he would be
criticized, but he had done enough study this wasnt just, he showed up
as commandant and decided to do this; this came out of his experiences,
Swift said in a June 23 interview.
He was there when they were using armor and long-range artillery in the
Middle East; he saw what the value of it was, but thats a different
warfight than what the joint force was to prepare for in the Pacific, the
admiral said, adding that Berger combined his experiences and a campaign
of wargaming to reform the Marine Corps in a much more consequential way
than I think other leaders really had the courage to do.
Berger took command of the Marine Corps on July 11, 2019. He relinquishes
command on July 10, after four years of reforms that will shape the Corps
for years to come.
Becoming commandant
The 38th commandant of the Marine Corps almost became a Navy officer.
Ahead of his 1977 graduation from high school in rural Maryland, Berger
applied for ROTC scholarships at the advice of his father, who Berger
called the smartest person that I know. His father had gone to Duke
University on an Air Force ROTC scholarship, and Berger ultimately chose
to attend Tulane University on a Navy ROTC scholarship due to his interest
in the schools engineering program.
That fall, Berger began school as a naval cadet, but quickly noticed the
Marines.
If youre a college freshman and dont know anything about the military,
they [Marines] were just a poster. And they not just looked the part
they were clearly different from the Navy instructors, the way they
handled themselves, the way they taught their classes, and it was clear
that the [cadets in the Marine Corps program] were different, too. So I
was drawn to that, Berger told Defense News in the interview, and he
switched to the Marine Corps program as soon as he was assured his
scholarship would allow it.
Berger graduated and was commissioned a Marine Corps officer in 1981. He
spent his first two tours on the West Coast, with deployments to the
Pacific on amphibious ships.
Though separated by geography, he said two formative events happened in
October 1983, just two years into his career: Operation Urgent Fury in
Grenada, where Marine and joint forces stormed the Caribbean island
following a coup, losing 19 American service members but quickly occupying
the island; and the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon,
that killed 241 American service members, including 220 Marines.
Lieutenants who were in my [The Basic School] class were killed. And I
was on the West Coast, and the unit was from the East Coast, but it
shocked the whole Marine Corps. And you could understand why, when you
lose 240 like that. Its just not something anyone was expecting. So that
definitely shaped things, he said, looking back at foundational moments
in his career.
Berger described the operation in Grenada as a high point for inspiring
young Marines, but said the loss in Beirut made everything real.
The start of the Gulf War in 1990 and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were
other real moments for him reminders of the seriousness of his
business.
But Berger said the experiences that shaped him as a leader were the
losses of Marines directly under his command.
Asked by Defense News what stands out as defining moments in building who
he is today, he said, almost all of them were not necessarily moments,
but when you lost Marines, because your immediate thought, most Marine
leaders immediate thought is, you missed something. You overlooked
something. You skipped a step. You immediately take responsibility
yourself and go, theres something we didnt see. There are a lot of them,
a lot of them.
Berger recounted losing 10 Marines to one improvised explosive device
attack in Iraq, and losing a Marine to an accidental grenade explosion
inside their own camp in Kuwait. Each time, he said, he scoured Marine
Corps procedures for missed or forgotten steps that could have saved
lives.
Those stay with you forever, Berger said.
A changing Pacific
Berger showed up at Marine Corps Forces Pacific headquarters in Hawaii in
2016, having read about Chinas rise and the changing landscape in the
region, but with questions about the pace of that change.
Swift and then-U.S. Pacific Command chief Adm. Harry Harris assured him
the change was happening faster than most understood, Berger recalled.
Though much of Chinas rising military power and its aggressive behavior
toward its neighbors was out of his control as the top Marine in the
Pacific, Berger could take steps to strengthen relationships with local
partners and allies another theme he brought to Force Design 2030.
Our relationship at the Marine Corps level with Japan, with Korea, with
the Philippines, with Australia, was still strong and growing and in
some cases, growing much faster than I was aware of, he said.
The ability to entrust allies and partners to share targeting data,
protect and resupply small formations of Marines, and otherwise operate
intertwined with the Corps and the U.S. joint force is key to Force Design
2030. Berger said hes seen allies in the Pacific repeatedly prove their
trustworthiness throughout his career, and particularly while commanding
Marine Corps Forces Pacific.
In 2012, while commanding 1st Marine Division (Forward) in Afghanistan,
Berger said one of his reconnaissance teams in northern Helmand province
got stuck in their position one night, with bad weather and no American
forces nearby to extract them.
An Australian special operations force liaison officer overheard Berger
talking to Maj. Gen. Charles Gurganus, the I Marine Expeditionary Force
(Forward) commander in Afghanistan.
The Australian Army major chimed in: We can do that. And, I mean,
couldnt have been 30, 45 minutes later, they take off in MV-22s, Berger
recalled. Im sure they had just returned from some other mission and
all, but it didnt matter. He knew the U.S. unit was in a pickle, in a
tough spot: We got this. Weve got aircraft, were going. No rehearsals,
no six hours of prep just get on the aircraft and go.
Berger said the power of the mateship between the U.S. and Australia was
even more evident while he commanded Marine Forces Pacific.
In August 2017, a Marine Corps MV-22 was flying back to the amphibious
transport dock Green Bay, which was operating off the coast of Queensland,
Australia. As it approached the ship to land, the aircraft suddenly
dropped, slammed into the side of the vessel and quickly sank, injuring 23
and killing three.
I called a couple people in Australia directly, immediately, Berger
said, as the U.S. did not have the right divers on hand to recover the
wreckage and the bodies of the missing Marines.
His Australian contacts made a few calls, and then called back Berger to
promise a ship with deep-sea divers within 12 hours.
No paperwork, no messages, no money, no anything on a phone call,
Berger said.
Though the three Marines who went down with the aircraft could not be
rescued, Berger said the Australian divers spent at least three days in
the water, exceeding the time limits for how long they should be
underwater at those depths, all to assure they recovered the fallen
Marines bodies.
Berger and his team flew to Australia in January 2018 to award the divers
and other supporting units with a Meritorious Unit Commendation.
Berger has experienced opposition to the reliance on allies and partners
in the Force Design 2030 and Stand-In Forces strategies. The two main
criticisms are that partner forces arent skilled enough, and that the
U.S. couldnt rely on them to show up in the event of a conflict.
Theyre just excuses, he said, referring to the criticism and noting
that he absolutely believes allies will be there for the Marine Corps
and the rest of the U.S. military if called upon for a fight.
Swift said people often talk about a Chinese invasion of Taiwan by 2027 as
a fait accompli, a given.
That doesnt have to be the case if they do more thoughtful things like
Gen. Bergers doing the biggest thing that hes doing is deterrence,
Swift said, highlighting Bergers work to deepen Marines ties to allies
and partners in the Pacific.
Creating a lasting change
In 2018, Neller the commandant at the time tapped Berger to come to
Washington to serve as the deputy commandant for combat development and
integration. In this position, Berger would take his knowledge of the
Pacific and his four years of reforming regional Marine forces, and apply
it to the entire Corps.
It was very clear to everyone the rising prominence of China in terms of
the National Defense Strategy, so I think he brought me to CD&I because
thats where combat development happens. And if China is central to our
security, then you need to understand the Pacific, Berger said.
Berger said he didnt have a force-wide reform plan going into the job,
but it gave me time to observe, to think of, if we needed to accelerate
[the reforms Neller was starting], what would that take? What kind of hard
decisions would we have to make?
That forethought caught the eye of Spencer, who served as secretary of the
Navy from August 2017 to November 2019. Spencer interviewed several
candidates during the search for the 38th commandant, and he said his
initial conversation with Berger started slowly.
It just progressed so comfortably and so logically, and so data-informed.
I remember the data-informed nature, he said, noting that Berger didnt
just answer Spencers questions but rather explained how analysis informed
an answer.
Spencer said he went into the interview process without a front-runner in
mind but was drawn to Berger, knowing that the Marine Corps would need a
major overhaul in the coming years.
You can get change agents and some are very successful that just come
in and put a 12-volt battery, boom, charge right to the heart, and go
Were changing. Those of you who cant take it, you can take a left;
were all going right, Spencer said.
Berger, on the other hand, wanted everyone to come along with his reforms
and get as much change implemented as possible.
You could see it in his demeaner and the way he led, that a steady hand
at the tiller doing something this dramatic was exactly what we needed,
Spencer said.
Those dramatic changes were revealed July 12, 2019 one day after Berger
was sworn in as commandant. He released a Commandants Planning Guidance
that portended a fundamental overhaul.
Visions of a massed naval armada nine nautical miles off-shore in the
South China Sea preparing to launch the landing force in swarms of
[surface connectors] are impractical and unreasonable, he wrote. Instead,
Marines would rethink their strategy in light of growing anti-access/area-
denial threats, and would collaborate with the Navy to become a sea-
control and sea-denial fleet.
Within 24 hours he released his first thoughts, and within eight months
Force Design 2030 was released, kicking off a generational change for the
Corps.
Berger said he didnt mind the wave of criticism from retired Marine Corps
leaders, as debate can be healthy.
But he said red lines have been crossed since last year.
A Wall Street Journal op-ed, written by former Navy Secretary Webb,
alleged that 22 retired four-star generals signed a private letter to
Berger, and that above 90 percent of retired general officers were
concerned about Force Design 2030.
Everybody speaks for themselves; you dont speak for others, Berger
said. So when you say all or most or three dozen, or whatever, you better
have their concurrence.
Berger said another line was crossed when an opposition group hired
lobbyists to make their case on Capitol Hill.
Congress is the operating area for the sitting commandant, and you dont
wade into there, you dont try to resist or fight there, you dont have an
active insurgency there. Thats where the commandant operates on behalf of
the Marine Corps, Berger said.
The debate is healthy, but once youve had the debate and its very clear
that the organization is headed in a certain direction and is supported by
the civilian leadership and is supported by Congress, OK, then youre
done. Then just being loud over and over and over again unless theres
some new information, Berger added. Im not sure what is the benefit of
that.
Former combat development head Van Riper, who has led opposition, told
Defense News the strong pushback from the retired community had nothing to
do with Berger as a person but was the result of the drastic changes and
the nontraditional way in which those changes were handled and executed.
Our Corps made its reputation because of its willingness to close with
and destroy the nations enemies, and it did this with an infantry-heavy
force supported by tanks, cannon artillery, engineers, close air support
and dedicated logistics efforts, he said.
Changes over time, he added, were the product of a highly regarded combat
development process, which thoroughly vetted new operational methods
before implementation.
Force Design 2030 has severely crippled Marine Corps capabilities to
respond quickly and effectively to global crises and contingencies across
the spectrum of conflict, he said, noting that Berger may not want the
Corps to be a second ground force but that sometimes thats what the
nation demands.
Dakota Wood, a senior research fellow for defense programs at the Heritage
Foundation think tank, said that while Force Design 2030 is sound, the
sales pitch could have gone better.
Wood noted the Marine Corps began to worry in the 1990s about long-range
anti-ship cruise missiles and how they would affect amphibious operations,
leading to early acquisition wins like the MV-22 Osprey program and
failures like the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, both of which were meant
to help Marines get from the ship to shore across greater distances and at
higher speeds.
Whats interesting about Gen. Bergers commandancy is he grew up in that
whole debate that took place in the pages of the Marine Corps Gazette and
in intellectual forums regarding growing threats to amphibious
operations, Wood said. But after 9/11, the Marine Corps was committed to
land wars and lost touch with the sea in many ways.
What Gen. Berger really brought with him into the commandancy is saying:
The world has not gotten easier; its gotten harder. We are a naval power
projection force, not a second army, Wood added. I find it stunning
that this guy comes into the office and he implements things that the
Marine Corps has talked about for 30 years. But change is scary, and it
was in the implementation that generated all this criticism.
Wood said Berger talked a lot in 2020 about what would change, what the
Corps would divest to free up funds for new investments, and what new gear
and concepts the service would come to rely on.
For his part, Berger has acknowledged he should have spent more time
talking about the fundamentals of the Marine Corps that would not change.
However, Wood noted that the divest-to-invest approach, while unpopular,
was necessary to make significant change during tight fiscal times.
You can either stay with the old Marine Corps and proven, known sorts of
things, and actually be irrelevant in your primary mission area, which is
naval power projection; or you can adopt these new things, which are
really, really good and have been [proved] in the various testing and
training and force-on-force exercises, but that means youre going to have
to leave something behind, Wood said.
Despite the initial messaging, the analyst said he believes Force Design
2030 was the right change, and Berger was the right man to lead it.
His legacy its so premature to be talking about that [is] that he
will be seen as one of these pivotal commandants, just like when we
shifted from small wars to large-scale amphibious operations going into
World War II, and then innovation in the use of helicopters and all the
other things deployed MEUs that were all over the world doing crisis
response and all that. So this is a big change for the Corps that enables
it to keep pace with changing times.
Comments:
Frank
1 day ago
If I have $5, and then I throw away $2, that is change. I would argue
that that is not a good change for me. So to say that Berger is a poster
child for change is supposed to be a compliment, but it is not necessarily
a good change. Many agree with that position. Berger's main claim to
fame, in terms of change, is that he is rapidly moving the Corps towards
irrelevancy.
-Retired colonel of Marines.
John n
1 day ago
Not everyone agrees with this guy and what he has "changed". Getting rid
of armor like tanks was not a good idea. Now they will have to rely on a
sister service for this. How well do you really think that will work out
well. And disbanding some arty, fixed and rotary wing units won't help
either. That's my opinion of course. I did my 20 and won't have to deal
with it. They did save our rear ends on NUMEROUS occasions in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
--
We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that
stupid people won't be offended.
Durham Report: The FBI has an integrity problem. It has none.
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.
Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden
fiasco, President Trump.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp. Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood
queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed
dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.