This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
By the Honorable Ben Blaz
Proceedings
The Corps in 1988
For the Marine Corps, the preeminent event of 1988 was the ending of the Reagan era. In 1980, our defense posture was really as bad as Ronald Reagan said it was. He told us he was going to rebuild America’s defenses, and he did. The Marine Corps was a major beneficiary of this revival. The Corps was modernized. War reserves were replenished; new weapon systems were delivered; facilities were renovated; pay and allowances were made more equitable; and end strengths were increased. Mr. Reagan supported a naval strategy that underscored the importance of amphibious forces and a light, mobile Marine Corps. His global strategy moved us away from our fixation on Europe, and permitted us to shift appropriate concern to the Pacific, which is—in the words of former Secretary of State George Shultz—“our nation’s future.” President George Bush has committed to continue on this course, but the hard facts of the budget deficit and compelling domestic issues mandate a new austerity.
The continuing development of the MV-22 Osprey during 1988 was significant, in my view. This tilt-rotor aircraft, replacement for the medium helicopter, is the newest example of the Marine Corps’s ability to innovate and to pioneer revolutionary concepts. The Osprey’s speed, range, and lift translates into unprecedented battlefield and strategic mobility, survivability and tactical flexibility.
The survival of the AV-8B Harrier V/STOL program was the result of a hard-fought battle by the Marines here on the Hill. The Harrier is another example of the forward thinking of Marines, and that aircraft’s potential finally seems to be getting well-deserved recognition from the other services.
The tragic death of Lance Corporal Jason J. Rother in the Mojave Desert served to remind us of the need for constant reinforcement of our professional precepts at every rank and every level of command. And the loss of one of our own, Lieutenant Colonel Rich Higgins, as a captive to Middle Eastern terrorists was another sobering event. Further, the events of 1988 confirmed that we have yet to define adequately the role of women in the armed services.
Overall, I like what I see in the Corps under Commandant A1 Gray. It seems to us on the Hill that he has focused on the right priorities. His renewal of warrior training and warfighting skills for an elite corps of Marines is
168 what the American public expects and deserves. In addition, General Gray’s willingness to solicit the advice and counsel of retired Marines is widely praised and very welcomed.
Undoubtedly, there will be lean years ahead for the Department of Defense. The warfighting center at Quan- tico has been activated at a propitious time, for there is a need today for an aggressive intellectual center with a mandate to solve the problems of maintaining high readiness with dwindling resources. The Marine Corps Coniba1 Development Command promises to do just that.
On balance, 1988 was a good year for the Marines. The Corps should be able to look through 1989 and beyond with confidence and optimism.
Representative Blaz (R-GU), a retired Marine Corps general, is a mcniN^ of the House Armed Services Committee.
Forging Ahead . . .
By the Honorable John W. Warner
While reviewing the impact of events in 1988 on the U. S. Marine Corps, I first thought—as one who once wore the green—that regardless of the tide of national and international events the Marine Corps will remain one of the President's most versatile instruments of U. S. power and diplomacy. With that in mind, this is my look "over the trench,” from which the Marine Corps has always had to fight for survival.
First, 1988 brought the end of the Reagan buildup, which was significant because it marked the first time since Dwight Eisenhower’s presidency that we enjoyed eight consecutive years under a single commander-inchief. In my opinion, Ronald Reagan’s successor, George Bush, is equally strong in his leadership and his commitment to a national defense apparatus that is fully capable of protecting our vital national interests and meeting all of our international commitments.
Second, our new commander-in-chief and the Marine Corps are confronted with new fiscal reality, which leaves uncertain the level at which modernization can continue and the level of force structure that can be maintained. It is possible to sink to a level of defense spending that would compel a slowdown in modernization efforts, if we strive to maintain the high states ol readiness to meet our worldwide commitments that we have attained during the 1980s. The problem of decrea^' ing defense dollars is compounded by the fact that the
Naval Review'