Exclusive Interview: Out Call With the Commandant

As the 34th Commandant, General James T. Conway, a wartime Com­mandant, prepared to yield the reins this fall, and spend more time hunting and fishing, he sat down with Leatherneck magazine to talk about the state of the Corps.

Leatherneck: What kind of a Marine Corps are you leaving?
Gen Conway: In terms of our Marines, the equipment they receive, the training we provide and the condition of our families, our Corps is in pretty good shape. After almost nine years in this counterinsurgency [COIN] environment, we’ve become highly effective.

Leatherneck: How do today’s Marines stack up compared to when you were a young lieutenant?
Gen Conway: I’ll put it in perspective. When I joined my first unit in August 1971, the battalion returned from Vietnam. Most of our Marines had no career interest and just wanted to go home. I was surprised how little training resources we had. As a young lieutenant, I was asking people who were locked and loaded six months before in Vietnam, to charge hills at Camp Pendleton, yelling “bang-bang.” Those were tough leadership days and challenging for many reasons.
Today, that is just not true. My biggest problem as Commandant is finding ways to get 150,000 Marines to Afghanistan who want to go. In the next few days, 600 Ma­rines will re-enlist over there. So that’s the motivation today.

Leatherneck: How is Marine recruiting and retention faring?
Gen Conway: It’s off the page. We grew 27,000 additional Marines early in my ten­ure. We kept the standards high, although some thought we should lower them. To­day, if you joined the Marines in June after graduating from high school, you must wait nine to 10 months before going to boot camp because our pools are full. Last year, retention for both the first term and the career force finished up half­way through the fiscal year. This year, it was about seven and nine months respectively.

Leatherneck: What’s the present “dwell” time, or time between deployments?
Gen Conway: It’s getting better. For a while, it was “one to one” [seven months deployed and seven months home] across the Corps in almost all MOSs [military occupational specialties]. Today, it’s getting close to “one to two” [seven months deployed and 14 months home]. We’re not there yet. Some combat support and combat service support units can’t stay 14 months at home. We’re working on it. “One to two” is the objective. We’re close. I’ve told both the Secretary of Defense and the President that if we get to that standard, our endurance is pretty good and we can do this for a long time.

Leatherneck: Would you say family programs have changed since you were a young officer?
Gen Conway: In 1971, about 15 percent of my company was married. Today, across the board, 45 percent of Marines are married and have families. We believe that you recruit a Marine, but retain a family. We knew this fight would be a long haul and that we needed to get the families on a “wartime footing.” We were asking a lot of them, and they deserved the best possible quality of life and support. So, we tried to be smart about it. We asked the families what they needed and put more money into it. Those things have come together very nicely. Our families are tired, but proud, and I think they appreciate that we’re trying.

Leatherneck: What concerns you about the Marine Corps?
Gen Conway: Right now, the Defense Department sees us engaged in a COIN kind of fight in the future. I think we also need to enhance our skills for a larger fight. The Marine Corps is a two-fisted fighter equally as capable in a major contingency as we are in a COIN. The results we achieved in Iraq and our performance in Afghanistan proves our merit in the latter. But, we need to regain some of our combined arms skills. We need to exercise that Marine air-ground task force [MAGTF] for that bigger fight. As opposed to being a second land army, we should return to our amphibious roots.

Leatherneck: How many Marines are still in Iraq right now?
Gen Conway: It’s fair to say that the Marine Corps is out of Iraq. We have 138 there now, and we’re drawing down the last of our training teams this summer. We’ll leave about 20 to 30 Marines to train the fledging Iraqi Marine Corps, and we still have some officers on staff in Baghdad.

Leatherneck: How will military historians look upon what the Marine Corps accomplished in Iraq?
Gen Conway: I hope that proper credit is given. Those great young Americans left Iraq under a victory pennant. They enabled the Iraqis to take control of their own destiny. The “Awakening” happened in Al Anbar as you know. Our people can take a great deal of pride for driving that wedge between the insurgents and the good people of Iraq. A number of great Army units worked for us in the theater as well.

Leatherneck: How often do you go to Afghanistan?
Gen Conway: I go over there about once every four months. Honestly, when I was commanding in Iraq, we had too many visitors. I saw it from the other side. The frequency got burdensome. I found about three to four times a year is right to see every unit. I feel comfortable that I’m very well read in what we’re doing, how we’re doing and what our needs are.

Leatherneck: Where are Marines operating in Afghanistan?
Gen Conway: Marines are in Helmand province almost exclusively now. If you drew a border around the province, you’d capture probably 98 percent of Marines. We do have some special operations units working elsewhere in the region. At one point, some Marine advisors were in the eastern and northern parts of the country, but they moved south.

Leatherneck: How are the Marines doing over there?
Gen Conway: They are doing well. It’s a tough fight, a close fight. Afghanistan today is where we were in Iraq in 2005. The enemy is capable and adaptive. He does not take us on one on one. Yet, he finds ways to sap our energy, discourage our national support and draw this thing out. “If he’s losing, he’s winning”—that’s the enemy philosophy. Realizing they can’t take on main force units, they rely on improvised explosive devices [IEDs] and keep large explosions in the eye of the international audience. This makes their strength appear greater than it is.
But our Marines feel good about what they’re doing. It’s a small-unit fight, and we have the best small-unit leadership at the NCO [noncommissioned], staff NCO and company-grade officer level anywhere in the world.
People ask us constantly, “How the hell do you guys do that?” While the enemy is adaptable, our guys are even more so. If the enemy changes tactics, we’re all over it. We adjust things, and Marines are anxious to take it back to them. I read about our losses. It’s unfortunate, but I also realize that we have great young Americans who are willing to sacrifice to get the job done sooner than later.

Leatherneck: We’re hearing complaints that U.S. ground forces are sometimes not getting the fire support they need in Af­ghanistan because of the rules of engagement. Is this a problem?
Gen Conway: I ask that question every time I go over there. It doesn’t bother them much because they are very good at it. Marines are adjusting, observing patterns of life and asking “what if” before they drop a bomb. General officers to sergeant patrol leaders tell me, “Sir, we can do this. We get the job done, and we don’t feel like we’re putting any of our Marines or sailors at risk with the rules such as they are.”

Leatherneck: Did you have the same fire support concerns in Iraq?
Gen Conway: While similar in many ways, it’s not the same. In Iraq, if you were willing to admit your mistake, make proper apologies to the family and compensate them in some way, the Iraqi people had a perspective that it was somehow God’s will. In the Afghan culture, if you kill an Afghan, you have potentially created an enemy for life. Marines understand that they must be careful. They are COIN trained, and this awareness is their formula for success.

Leatherneck: How do you compare the current Afghanistan army with the Iraqi army that you saw in its early rebuild stages?
Gen Conway: The young Afghan has more of a warrior spirit, partly because they have been at war for a long time. It’s in their culture, along with the fierceness of the tribes that live in the mountains. The Afghanistan literacy rate isn’t nearly what it was in Iraq. Nor was the Afghani­stan army ever as accomplished. It takes many ingredients to build a fighting force.
The Iraqis already had it at some point, and we were trying to bring it back. Unlike Afghanistan, they had a structure, which included experienced senior- and company-level officers. In many areas, we’re trying to build something from a blank board in Afghanistan. Yet, we must create success there so that we can leave the country.

Leatherneck: Are we going to be successful there eventually?
Gen Conway: I think so. The enemy is getting tired. There is low-level reconciliation. The Taliban’s corporals and lieutenants are saying, “Jeez, you guys are just wearing us down. There’s no place we can go where we don’t feel that you aren’t chasing us.”
The enemy is getting frustrated and its leadership is not cohesive. Success is not going to happen today or tomorrow. It won’t happen as it did in Iraq because Afghanistan doesn’t have the same central tribal structure. By retaining the initiative, once we convince the fighters and their leadership that they won’t win, they will start coming over. I think they could come over in large numbers.

Leatherneck: What do you say to the critics who say that the Marine Corps is too independent and operating as the 42nd country over there?
Gen Conway: I read that and I think that it’s patently unfair. Our people are taught and encouraged to exercise good playground skills when operating with the other services and other countries. I have every confidence they are doing that. I only know of one critic who has said that. When I visit Afghanistan, I look at those people eyeball to eyeball and they don’t say those things to me. I consider it unfair and maybe even disingenuous.

Leatherneck: Does the Corps still have many supporters over there?
Gen Conway: Yes. Every commander who has Marines working for him is incredibly appreciative of the job they are doing and would like to have more Marines.

Leatherneck: How are the U.S. and the Free World doing in the war against terror?
Gen Conway: Art, I’m worried. The enemy has broadcast his strategic aims. He wants to exorcise Western influence out of the Gulf, control the oil supply coming from that region, destroy Israel and keep pressure on us through global terrorist attacks and by disrupting our economy.

He can’t defeat us in the field, but thinks he can bankrupt us or deter our international objectives to go places to protect our vital interests. Our national fiscal picture and our dedication to the fight give me concern that he is close to being on plan.

The enemy has the long view. If it takes 100 years to wear down our desire to confront them, so be it. He’s succeeding in some areas, not only in this country, but globally.

Leatherneck: You are scheduled to hand over the Corps’ reins just after the ninth anni­versary of 9/11. Can you elaborate more on this?
Gen Conway: I worry about our willingness to sacrifice to take these people on. I don’t want us to lose our way of life. Will future Americans be able to travel the globe to visit other cultures? Must there always be barricades to defend “fortress America” against terrorist attack? Is our belief in forward-based defense being reeled back because it’s too expensive or too hard?
That’s a different America and it concerns me. The world looks to us for leadership. If we perceive ourselves as unable, unwilling or even incapable, then I worry that we’re handing our grandchildren a very different world.

Leatherneck: What do you think about turning the Corps over to a Marine aviator?
Gen Conway: When I met first with the Secretary of the Navy and then with the Secretary of Defense to talk about my suc­cessor, I spoke with them about a num­ber of very capable Marine general officers. My final words were, “Mr. Secretary, you simply need to pick one of these. Anyone you pick will do a great job.” Every general officer of Marines understands and supports the Marine air-ground task force. They are all MAGTF [pronounced mag-taff] officers because that is how we organize, fight and succeed.

Leatherneck: What would you do differently as Commandant?
Gen Conway: Not much. I established seven priorities when I came in, and we pretty much got it right. As a wartime Commandant, our number-one effort was to win these wars and to support the Marines at the point of the spear. Washington, D.C., is my battlefield, so I fight for things that help the Corps and all the services as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Leatherneck: Study groups are saying the Army and the Marines should be reduced in size. Is that going to happen?
Gen Conway: After the “long war” is over, I think a 202,000-person Marine Corps is too large. I would have a tough time employing it effectively in peacetime. People are expensive and the national fiscal picture will play in our future. So, we have formed a “structure review group” that will provide the new Commandant this year with some forward thinking about our future size. But, the enemy gets a vote in this. I think it will be some years before we wave an Afghanistan victory pennant. Only then should we start this draw-down process.

Leatherneck: Prior to 9/11, the Marine Corps was wedded to the Navy. Are operational units aboard ships today, and what does the future look like?
Gen Conway: We’re maintaining that linkage. I think the Navy will have sufficient numbers of amphibious ships when we resume our more traditional roles. We deploy the Marine expeditionary units on a routine basis, and they’re active around the globe. You saw what the Navy-Marine team accomplished off Haiti on very short notice. Over time in Iraq and now in Afghanistan, 500 miles from salt sea air, we have become a second land army. We’re not comfortable doing that for the long term.

Leatherneck: Are there misconceptions about the Marine Corps out there?
Gen Conway: This nation needs the capacity to go to other countries and “kick the door in” if that’s in our best interest. You can talk about forward presence, but if you can’t culminate, you’re a toothless tiger.

Unfortunately, we are fighting the image of a bloody Tarawa-type landing as depicted in the recent “Pacific” TV series. We know the nation will not accept such losses today. In an anti-access environment, we will get to the shore from ships, but it won’t be a broad-based 0800 assault against a defended beach. We are smarter than that. There are ample ways to do that today. That’s probably where we’re most misunderstood.

Leatherneck: The Osprey and the expeditionary fighting vehicle (EFV) will help Marines get to shore. How are they doing?
Gen Conway: The Osprey continues to perform just as we hoped it would. It gives us tremendous flexibility from amphibious ships. The great young pilots and crew chiefs that man it up are my indicator of just how well it’s doing. They absolutely love the airplane as do the ground commanders who are employing it to great use.

The EFV is still a question. It hasn’t gone to full procurement, although seven new vehicles arrived this summer for testing. I’m convinced that we need a capability like that based on the Navy’s doctrine not to endanger $3 [billion] to $4 billion ships by going close to shore in an anti-access situation. If the ships lay off, how do we close that distance?

Leatherneck: What’s the Corps going to look like in 10 years?
Gen Conway: We probably will be smaller and still be the nation’s go-to force for rapid response.

Instead of being a second land army, we’ll be back in our traditional role with the Navy. We’ll be much lighter and continue to be expeditionary. We’ll have enhanced battlefield communication with a redundant means if a technical enemy takes down or limits those capabilities. Small units will be more mobile and have more firepower. The key to all of this will be Marines. I don’t think in 10 years that you’ll see a substantial change to the young men or women that we bring in. They will be true patriots.

Leatherneck: What are your plans for the future?
Gen Conway: It’s starting to take shape. I joke with my wife that I’m going to be a professional bass fisherman. In talking about it with my service chief peers, one of the first things to decide is, do you want to run something? I think that answer is prob­ably no. For the last four years, at least, my schedule hasn’t been my own. I enjoy out­door activities and I haven’t done much of that lately. My wife and I want to visit our grandchildren and travel overseas. If you’re a CEO running an organization, there isn’t time for those things. I want to work and do something—serving on boards, consult­ing or advising people on leadership. I think that’s what we’ll be doing.

Leatherneck: Where will you live?
Gen Conway: We built a log home in Pennsylvania. My wife loves Washington, D.C. She enjoys the community over in Southeast Washington and the city at large. I think we’ll have a footprint in both places.

Leatherneck: Do you have any final thoughts you want to tell your Marines?
Gen Conway: I simply want to convey to my Marines how incredibly proud I am of them. Our Corps has done what the nation has asked us to do. We can say that because great young Marines have stayed dedicated to what we represent. They are highly valued and recognized by both the military and the civilian leadership inside the Pentagon.

Leatherneck: The Corps is losing its most senior warrior who has gone a thousand miles an hour on its behalf. We wish you and Mrs. Conway well.
Gen Conway: I appreciate it. Thank you for the opportunity.

Editor’s note: In addition to writing for Leatherneck, retired Marine LtCol Arthur P. Brill Jr. writes on national security issues for defense publications. LtCol Brill commanded an infantry company in Vietnam and retired from active duty as the Corps’ press spokesman. He also was the media spokesman in key positions for the Carter and Reagan administrations.