These
articles and commentaries are provided courtesy
of DefenseWatch, the official magazine
for Soldiers For The Truth (SFTT), a grass-roots
educational organization started by a small
group of concerned veterans and citizens to
inform the public, the Congress, and the media
on the decline in readiness of our armed forces.
Inspired by the outspoken idealism of retired
Colonel
David Hackworth, SFTT aims to give our
service people, veterans, and retirees a clear
voice with the media, Congress, the public
and their services.
In the eleven weeks since it was published, I've received a lot of
heartfelt responses from my article about the new Marine
Corps policy establishing two-year unaccompanied tours to Okinawa
("Study
Long-Term Impact of New USMC Policies," DefenseWatch, Dec. 1,
2003).
Like the feedback I received in response to a later article on the
II MEF traffic violations plan ("Marines
Divided over Traffic Violation Policy," DefenseWatch, Jan. 27,
2004), the new Okinawa policy has touched a nerve in many Marines.
Unlike the traffic violations policy, an overwhelming majority of
Marines are opposed to the Okinawa policy.
Let me share with you some selected excerpts from those e-mails and my analysis of what those e-mails told me.
I noticed that practically all the thoughts and opinions I received were in response to the selected official Headquarters Marine Corps "sound-bites" that I referenced in my article. Therefore, I will organize the excerpts according to those "sound-bite" categories.
SOUND-BITE: "[This policy change] reflects a steady improvement
in the living conditions and entertainment options for leathernecks
assigned to the Pacific outposts …. The overall quality of life is
now relatively comparable to stateside assignments."
Analysis: An unfriendly local population plus an over-reliance
on organized intramurals does not equal a high quality of life. One
Marine asks:
"Having spent two tours and a total of three years
in Oki, I think I have a little bit to say about the policy... On
many levels, Okinawa is far different than other overseas military
bases around the world... Okinawa, while a well-populated island,
is not wrought with recreational opportunities. Much of the population
is not overly friendly with the U.S. forces, and other than the
marine park or scuba diving, not much else is of particular interest
to the average Marine. Costs for doing simple things such as eating
at a restaurant are so high as to essentially eliminate this as
a viable option for the junior enlisted Marine... Organized intramurals
or picnics can only go so far in keeping morale up and having excess
youthful energy expended."
Analysis: How can families have a good quality of life when separated for
two years, a second Marine wants to know:
"Even 1 year away from your family brings a lot of
hardships and I am just glad that I will not have to do a 2-year
tour while I am married. I believe that extending the tours from
1 to 2 years would cause problems for Marines that were married.
I do not think that single Marines will be affected as much as married
ones are... I believe that the two-year tours to Oki will be destructive
to families if Marines opt to leave their families in the States
and go accompanied for two years. We already have enough marital
problems."
Analysis: A third Marine wonders, if Okinawa was as good as
stateside assignments, why does the Corps reward Marines for extending
on Okinawa and not reward Marines for extending in stateside assignments?
"My only question is if at the 12-month mark, will
Marines be offered the same incentives (plane ticket to home of
record, or extra leave, or $2,000) currently on the table for those
considering extending for another year?"
SOUND-BITE: "Okinawa is just another Marine base. It just happens to be
over in Japan."
Analysis: So, all Marine bases are equal, but some are more
equal than others, as this Marine notes:
"Been years since this old Marine has been on the
Rock. What's changed to make it such a gala place? Can we find liberty
runs to Hong Kong, PI, or other places for just plain liberty, like
we used to do for RVN R&R? Two years there would be enough to scare
me. When we owned the Island and dictated what we were going to
do, we could have made it a better place."
Analysis: Have Marine Corps officials been listening to too many songs
by the Eagles? The policy is reminiscent of the lyric, "Welcome to
the Hotel Okinawa ... You can check out any time you like, but you
can never leave." This Marine observes:
"Single Marines living in Oki are essentially in a
situation of enforced celibacy, and while this is bad enough for
one year, most 19-year-old Marines would find a 2-year stint of
not dating to be unbearable. And for every Marine who gets a chance
to go to Korea, Thailand, or the Philippines on an operation, three
Marines will be stuck on the island for the entire 2 years."
Analysis: Yeah, but think of all the money you will save on frivolous train
expenses, as this Marine points out:
"Army troops in Europe can easily hop a train and
go to Paris, Rome, Amsterdam, etc on a three-day weekend. Marines
on Oki do not have that type of opportunity. They are on Oki, and
they will stay on Oki."
SOUND-BITE: "The intent is to increase unit effectiveness by keeping Marines
there longer .… The reduced turnover will enhance our operational
readiness and … war-fighting capability."
Analysis: At least one reader agreed with the sound-bite:
"From mid-1997 through about mid-1999, unaccompanied
"fresh-out-of-school" 2nd lt's in the Air-Ground [military occupational
specialties] MOS's who were sent to 1st [Marine Air Wing] were given
24-month unaccompanied orders. This was an arrangement made by the
monitors and the senior officers of those MOS's already 'on-island'.
This was done in order to curtail the high turnover... Shiny, new
2nd lt's would spend a year there, rotate and take with them a year's
worth of experience, only to be replaced by another 2nd lt who would
repeat the process. His peers [stateside] would spend the requisite
36 months there, go to [career level school], then a [supporting
establishment] billet, then back to the [operating forces] leaving
the Okinawa units with mid-level captains and new 2nd lt's, except
for the occasional lt who would extend for another year ... I was
one of those 2nd lt's given 24-month orders, and can attest to the
benefits of 2-year tours for all Marines in Okinawa. The cohesion,
camaraderie, and 'operational readiness' that we had cannot be developed
as well over the course of just one year."
Analysis: Many others disagreed with the sound-bite, such as this Marine's
response:
"As far as military training, Okinawa is basically
garrison duty. Other than small-unit tactics, training opportunities
are quite sub-par. The longer Marines are kept on Oki, the more
their skills atrophy when compared to Marines stationed elsewhere...
Now the Japanese call the shots and it's hard to even train like
we're going to war. Maybe we should consider moving our forward
presence to a more accommodating place?"
Analysis: And one Marine could not understand how readiness and Okinawa
fit together in that sound-bite:
"I have been stationed on Okinawa a total of 4 different
times from 1988 to my most recent 2003 Unit Deployment. I think
you're missing the point. There is no need to have anybody forward
deployed to Okinawa or a 3rd Marine Division [Mar Div] for that
matter. After the end of the Cold War the 3rd Mar Div became the
public relations division of the far east. They do not partake in
any relevant real-world missions nor is any of the training preparing
you for it. While [Camp Pendleton, CA-based] I [Marine Expeditionary
Force] MEF and part of [Camp LeJeune, NC-based] II MEF fight the
fight, active-duty Marines in the 3rd Mar Div go crazy as every
National Guard and reserve unit goes off to defend the country.
It sucks being a prize fighter and never getting a shot at the Title."
SOUND-BITE: "If [Marines are] there for two years they start to be good
neighbors … and they'll be able to understand the culture better and
hopefully that will make us be better guests of the island."
Analysis: This sounds like the "Dances With Wolves" approach
to improving cross-cultural relations, as one Marine indicates:
"Three year accompanied tours are fine. But I firmly
believe that two-year unaccompanied tours will decrease retention
and cause more problems vis-a-vis interaction with the local population.
I believe we will see more incidents which will cause strife between
the Marines and the Okinawans... As for the Marine Corps saying
that this would make the Marines that get stationed there act more
like it was their home and want to learn more about the culture
in Japan, I doubt it will do that."