Inside the Headquarters

It has been two decades since the Marine Corps crowned the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle as the replacement for the ‘70s era Amphibious Assault Vehicle. It has been a long, expensive and apparently fruitless road. Defense Secretary (and Occasional Superhero) Robert M. Gates who has stood by the vehicle may be wavering. The Corps has cut its “requirement” from more than 1,000 to 573, and discussions on the merits of the EFV are on the rise.

Do the Marines need the EFV, and what is the future of amphibious global stomp-and-romps?
The nature of warfare has changed somewhat (a recycled statement) as has the nature of amphibious warfare. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Jim “Not in My Corps” Conway agrees: beach landings a la World War II are doubtful, though the tactic will remain in the Corps’ bag o’ tricks. (During World War II, at least one famous Marine leader, whose name eludes me, was critical of the Corps’ deadly up-the-middle approach to amphibious warfare.)

Despite being America’s second land Army, a title the Marines deplore, the Corps is sticking to its “soldiers of the sea” mantra. Documents like the “Marine Corps Operating Concepts” and the “Vision and Strategy 2025” underscore the importance of the Corps’ amphibious mission. My guess is the Boys’ Gun Club actually believes its own rhetoric. They also may see their future tied to the Navy’s fan tail cruising the world’s waterways looking for the next hot spot. Regardless, given a decade of mostly ground warfare, it is natural to question why the U.S continues to fund a Marine Corps, let alone the EFV.

The Marines have a good response but have done a horrible job explaining to Americans the importance of maneuver from the sea. A bunch of Marines and a few ships can operate in disaster areas as well as hostile regions where traditional forces can’t. Today’s Navy will operate over-the-horizon and the Marines must make their way to their objective be it by air as with the V-22 Osprey or by sea in a waterborne MRAP like the EFV. (Whale boats would make a great visual as the Marines row ashore.)

Warfare will continue to change and the Corps deserves to reclaim its amphibious crown, but the behind-schedule and over-budget EFV may not be the way to go.

With Conway’s looming retirement so goes the EFV.

Not a lot of information has been coming out of Pakistan with what is said to be the nation’s worst disaster ever. The extensive flooding has left millions homeless. During a Bloggers’ Roundtable with Army Brig. Gen. Michael Nagata, deputy commander, Office of the Defense Representative, Pakistan, who is overseeing the U.S. portion of the international relief effort, emerging media moderator Navy Lt. Jennifer Cragg went around the virtual roundtable.

Not just for bloggers, broadcast and print outlets like CNN and Stars and Stripes called in to the gathering. The group spanned time zones, but everyone was equal at this OSD-sponsored interview.

Nagata did not tell us much that was new, though four to five Marine helicopters (photos show CH-46s, releases say CH-53Es) from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit floating off the coast were replacing the Army helos currently working the disaster. Despite reports that Pakistan wants more assistance, none of the MEU’s ground units will be involved in the relief we were told. When pressed, Nagata further shared the Pakistani government had not requested the Marines.

Nagata went on to explain the U.S. is concentrating on Swat (no surprise since it is Taliban territory), though he implied U.S. assets had been active in other areas. In the five flyable days they’ve had, Nagata said the U.S. has delivered hundreds of thousands of pounds in relief supplies and rescued thousands of people.

Nagata’s PAO, Air Force Lt Col Patrick Ryder, was able to clarify what seemed to be fat stats for such a small force. The U.S. had airlifted 436,944 meals into Pakistan at the beginning of the effort, which may be the source of Nagata’s reference. As of August 12, 73,473 pounds of supplies had been delivered and 1,019 people rescued. Though Nagata seemed a bit scripted he appeared eager, honest and gracious. (What are a few hundred thousand pounds among friends?)

When I asked about interaction with the Taliban in Swat, the general was adamant there had been none and engagement was not the U.S. mission. (Whoa. It was just a question.) He could not heap enough praise on the Pakistani army and its work keeping U.S. personnel safe. Again, the U.S. has only a small role there and a couple of hundred people on the ground. (Got it.)

This was a good encounter, even if no new information was revealed. One did gain a feel for the U.S. role in the Pakistan relief effort. What was not said was, “This is Taliban World Headquarters, damn it! There are lots of hearts and minds to be won.”

Read the transcript and listen to the interview.

International Security Assistance Force HQ Public Affairs brief video interview with Army Brig. Gen. Michael Nagata, deputy commander, Office of the Defense Representative, Pakistan overseeing U.S. relief efforts in the aftermath of what is reported to be the worst disaster in Pakistan’s history. 

Story to follow tomorrow.

A jewel in the crown of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs may be its Emerging Media Directorate. Put aside your images of Facebook and Twitter, though this office handles them and other social media for DoD. These guys may be one of the best sources of information in the Pentagon. Sure programs like the Bloggers’ Roundtable may be planned and the guests may not be of the multi-star ilk, but it showcases experts who can be difficult to access. (The Bloggers’ Roundtable is brilliant.)

DoD’s Emerging Media seems to be a genuine effort to fill communication gaps and reach out to the little guy (as well as the CNNs of the world). The staff seems to understand we will write and comment on our varied encounters and reach an audience that may be otherwise tough to crack.

After months of watching from afar, I finally participated in my first roundtable. A number of news outlets (not all blogs) including CNN and Stars and Stripes called in to talk to Army Brig. Gen. Michael Nagata, deputy commander, Office of the Defense Representative, Pakistan who is overseeing U.S. relief efforts in Pakistan.

Pakistan is a hot topic and the widespread flooding makes it even more interesting. When the topic of piracy was heating up, the Navy’s commander of the combined Joint Task Force in the Gulf of Aden was a guest on the Bloggers’ Roundtable and shared information so detailed I was able to confirm it and use it in an article. Unfortunately I missed the recent roundtable featuring Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. James R. Cartwright on reforming the way the Pentagon does business. You can go to the Web site to listen to the interviews live and read the transcript.

The Nagata interview will appear later this week.

Concurrent Receipt is one of those mysteries that cannot be explained by the Defense Department, Veterans Affairs or the Catholic Church. But this is a priority of the Military Officers’ Association of America (yes, the same people who kindly sponsor my blog) and it seems progress has been made.

Concurrent receipt, which dates to an obscure law from the 1890s according to MOAA, refers to the receipt of retirement and disability compensation. Until recently veterans were “taxed,” as MOAA puts it in its informative e-book “Undue Sacrifice.” (Look past the melodramatic title.)

For each dollar of medical compensation, that much has been deducted from the retiree’s pay. So, a retiree with $2,000 in retirement and $1,000 in disability compensation would receive $2,000 not $3,000.

A few years ago, the law changed, phasing in concurrent receipt for those with 20 years or more of service and a disability rating of 50 percent or greater. Most in group receives both retirement and disability payments with no offset, but according to MOAA a percentage is still hit with the “tax.” Work has been done on behalf of veterans whose disabilities are deemed combat-related. The goal is all in this category will be exempt from the offset.

But 20-year retirees with a rating of 40 percent or less and those with a retirement of less than 20 years (even with as many as 19 years) are still subject to the offset. MOAA and others are fighting this battle, and it seems with some success.

Changes in concurrent receipt are sitting in some version of this year’s Defense Authorization Bill. The new guidelines take a phased approach. During the first year, those with disabilities rated at 90 and 100 percent (and fewer than 20 years of service) would be allowed in the concurrent receipt club. Year Two would extend the “benefit” to those rated at 70 and 80 percent. Currently, there are no plans to include the 60 percent and under crowd, but it could come once the way is paved with the higher ratings.

Though there are costs with the proposal, they should be offset by other spending cuts, says MOAA. A zero net cost or something close should appeal to lawmakers.

Whether or not payments will be retroactive is still unknown, though MOAA says it’s doubtful. Our guess is that was taken off the table to try and get the rest of this plan through, though the “plan” ignores most under 70 percent.

MOAA’s says its position is to compensate for career and disability. Twenty years? Fewer? There is no difference in service, the organization says. That the 60 percent crowd and below are left out makes one wonder.

What do you think about a veteran’s retirement being offset by his or her disability compensation?

With the Potomac in the background I saw this sign billowing at the “Free Bradley Manning” protest in Quantico Town, just outside the confines of the “Crossroads of the Marine Corps.” This image is not something one sees around Quantico very often. I found it striking in its silence and beauty away from the Manning mess.

Is this accurate or just more rhetoric?

From MCBQMNS@comcast.net Aug, 6, 2010:

On Sunday 8 August 2010 we are expecting members of CODEPINK and possibly other organizations to gather at the waterfront park in Quantico Town in order to protest PFC Bradley Manning’s arrest and confinement at Marine Corps Base, Quantico. Base officials, Prince William County Police, and the Quantico Town Police are working together to ensure this event occurs without incident.

Personnel assigned to MCBQ should avoid the area from 1000-1700 on Sunday, 8 August 2010.

Is Quantico encouraging people to stay away from a public off-base event? Does this cross a line?

Code Pink, the famed femme fanner of fires, descended upon Quantico, Va., to protest the incarceration of alleged Wikileaks secret document machine, Army Private First Class Bradley Manning, who is confined to the Quantico brig.

Code Pink, our gurlz from the San Francisco Bay Area, can be creative. Our last story showed the group holding a kiss-in at a recruiting office parking lot in Berkeley to block access to the recruiters. Impressive.

But recruiting store fronts are on civilian property. As you probably know, one cannot protest on board a military installation, so Code Pink, Veterans for Peace and others obtained a permit to hold their event in Quantico Town. It is a civil municipality surrounded by the base on three sides and the Potomac on the fourth, but it is civilian property.

Despite Manning’s presence in the brig, it is an unlikely place for a protest. But heroes on both sides gathered. A docile Code Pink and Manning supporters numbered a couple of hundred. They had the requisite chant, “Free Bradley Manning,” signs, and speeches. One gentleman announced Manning supporters had raised $60 thousand in his defense, half their goal.

Does he have a defense? If you listen to the pink and righteous, the government wants whistleblowers, aka Manning. But one attendee told me many in the pro-Manning camp did not understand he had allegedly committed a crime with the release of classified material. Such are the doe-eyed and bleating. Manning had options.

Off to the side was a silent and equally cordial group numbering 10 or so for the other team. Their main image is shown above. Concrete Dave, a veteran, knew the protesters by name. They seem to have the Looney Tunes Ralph-and-Sam thing going.

Media was plentiful. According to Quantico public affairs, CNN (whose camera guy tried to take down a cop); DC-based Ch 4, 7, 9; a number of smaller outlets (I think I spoke to a Russian news organization); were all present. And we cannot forget our friends at al Jazeera. (Arabic T-shirts, a must.)

What are your thoughts on Wikileaks and the secret documents? PFC Manning?

Peaceful protests? And that e-mail from Quantico? Unnecessary? Over the line?

(Despite the outrageous Hawaiian attire, my escort was not DIA, as alleged.)

(click on image to enlarge)

As they wear burlap and beat themselves with reeds, the services are taking yet another look at increases in suicide in the ranks.

The Army recently published its 350-page report, “Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, Suicide Prevention.” Finding the “causes” of the increase in suicides among service members has become a bit like the search for the Holy Grail—unsatisfying and elusive. Judging from the report, the Army has collated a tremendous collection of data. It says it has zeroed in on some possible suicide indicators seen in the above illustration, but little information is new. There are pages of recommendations, yet no answers.

Service scrutiny of the suicide phenomenon may spring more from public opinion and law maker pressure than a genuine problem for the Army. Are 160 suicides in an active component of more than 500,000 soldiers a service’s problem? Whatever this situation is, the traditional problem-solution model does not fit.

Researchers found 79 percent of soldiers who committed suicide in fiscal 2009 had no deployment experience, which seems to imply factors other than combat are at play. (Another shocker.) Though the source of suicides has been known, certain media outlets have tried to pin this tail on the op tempo donkey.

It has been reported the Army suicide rate of 20 per 100,000 has surpassed the civilian rate reported by the Centers for Disease Control, 19 per 100,000. Is this difference statistically significant? (If you go to the CDC Web site, you will see most information seems to end in 2006 – a world away from the Army of 2009.)

There has been anecdotal evidence of civilian increases in the rates of suicide, and the Army has included examples in its report. For instance, the Idaho Mountain Express reported that the suicide rate had “tripled in Blaine County, Idaho, during the past six months.” In March 2010, The New York Times covered Cornell University’s “suicide cluster.” Before that, in November 2009, MSNBC reported the increase in suicide deaths in Elkhart, Indiana. But are the increases statistically significant to point to a societal shift? We don’t know.

Researchers note suicide hotline calls are up. General Lifeline calls increased from 381,316 in 2007 to 501,562 in 2009, while the Veterans Hotline increased from 20,853 to 125,625 during the same period.

So, where does the Army really fall in the suicide monologues? There seems to be an unwillingness to place some responsibility on the deceased servicemember. While suicides are complex, generally people take their own lives because they are engulfed by a hopelessness few can understand. They want the all-consuming pain to stop and have found no other way.

It is difficult to identify these people. Many of the ones who want to die don’t want to be found. Despite reports like the Army’s, few can recognize those in crisis. The services have never been good at helping even those who seek assistance. This is one of the few areas all services can realistically improve.

Regardless of reports of sleepless nights, the Army is going to lose some to suicide. It loses soldiers in combat, but their deaths can be attributed to the mission and blamed on a shadowy enemy. Aren’t all lives equal?

The Army’s report is a resource. My guess is its recommended actions will do little to decrease the number of suicides. If the suicide rate decreases the factors may remain as complex and elusive as those “explaining” the increase. (How many angels can dance on the head of the pin?)

How much attention should the services give to suicide?

US News and World Report had a piece on the ultimate political reality show: Sarah Palin and Rod Blagojevich.

It is an over-the-top “reality show” with a love story between the two thrown in. (Guess Sarah dumps husband Todd.) We find the two former governors to be more the political exceptions; two people with no interest in actually governing their states, as US News notes. But TV has hit some noteworthy lows, so it could register as entertaining for the reality series crowd. Or it could amount to a short-lived smash-and-grab. But isn’t that what it’s all about? (So how many of you out there are reality TV junkies?)

Clearly, the best reality show goin’ is in Afghanistan, and with Marine Gen. Jim “I like Brawlin’” Mattis probably soon at the U.S. Central Command helm, anything is possible. Sure documentaries have been done in theater and numerous stories for print and broadcast by “embeds” have graced TV screens, magazines and newspapers. The ultimate nod was Academy Award wonder, “The Hurt Locker.”

As tasteless as some reality bottom feeders can be, our Afghanistan reality show could be the low-brow “Big Brother” meets the tired, but reliable, “Amazing Race.”

Cameras would follow our boys and girls ‘round the clock. There is so much we don’t know. Do the doe-eyed and bleating argue? Fight each other? Read? Surf the Web? Make YouTube videos? Get sick? Laugh? Cry?

Do they talk about upcoming missions? (No WikiLeaks here.) We’d have the director work his way from the forward operating bases to force commander Army Gen. David “King David” Petraeus. He appears gracious, brilliant. But how miffed is he at his unexpected tour of duty? What does his wife think? We need the wife.

An episode or two with Afghan president Hamid Karzai could be a hoot. Who is that man’s tailor? Really. I want him or her on camera. Filming Karzai meeting with other elected officials (and his tailor) would be more reality than viewers could take.

Could we get the Taliban to appear regularly? Taliban leaders would love the exposure and it could help relations on all sides. If the show took off, the director could spend some quality time with the brawler himself, Jim Mattis. He’s a four-star and single. There must be some stories there. But is this man ready for prime time? No need for episodes at the Pentagon and White House. The uber-scripted are an uber buzz kill. Ratings would tank.

“Reality Afghanistan” could be compelling. Having worked with a couple of producers out of Los Angeles back when I was shillin’ for the Defense Department, these guys are looking for the next great thing. Could this be it or has it already been discussed – too many times?

Should we have a reality show of the Armed Forces? What is your vision for the ultimate showcase of US units in any service anywhere in the world? (Hey, our ship-bound Navy brethren could be interesting. All those people forced into close-quarters for long periods? Explosive!)

In another bid to save money and reduce a bloated Defense Department, Defense Secretary (and Occasional Superhero) Robert M. Gates has asked for a comprehensive review of defense and recommendations where he could save buck.

The early word is the Defense Business Board will pull no punches. One recommendation: Nix Joint Forces Command.

Gates is reportedly on the prowl to find $100 billion in savings over the next five years. Short of searching for change in DoD vehicles and seat cushions in Pentagon offices, he had the DBB take its best shot. The board will present its recommendations in October, but JFCOM and a few others are already known.

In the case of JFCOM, it seems the command has more contractors than military and government civilian. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it would seem DoD does not have the people to staff it. (Probably because they are all sitting in Afghanistan waiting for who knows what. But we digress.)

One of our faves working with the DBB is senior fellow and retired Marine Maj. Gen. Arnold Punaro. Arnie is fascinating and he may be connected to more people than anyone in the history of Washington. He’d be a great date or assassin. Or both.

JFCOM (formerly the U.S. Atlantic Command) has spawned its own krewe of commands. To align with JFCOM, the services had to come up with their equivalent. (I have never understood why.)

For example, Marine Forces Atlantic became Marine Forces Command, which makes little sense and seems to be a huge waste. (Cha-ching.) Ah, but waste has become DoD’s friend, which has put Gates in this unfortunate position.

The DBB is looking at other entities including (get this) the Office of the Secretary of Defense itself. OSD has grown by a reported 700 people since 2000 to a staggering 5,000. Its budget is more than $5 billion annually. Apparently there is significant overlap between OSD and the Joint Staff. Combining functions could be a start to the fiscal savings Gates longs for.

We look forward to that report.

How would you save money at DoD?