Editors & Authors

Editors

Over the past decade, the Gazette has published many articles on maneuver warfare, enough to place it clearly among the leaders in the discussion of this style of warfare. In fact, the subject has been covered so extensively that readers have been prompted to ask “How much is enough?” More than once we have felt some doubts ourselves and have suggested to would-be authors that the subject was “for all practical purposes, exhausted.” Then again we expect others have said the same for similar discussions throughout history, such as the British debate over mechanization that occupied the pages of the RUSI Journal and Army Quarterly for much of the 1920s and 1930s. Little does one know . . . .

In truth, of course, styles of warfare and military theory are anything but static. No one has the last word. Complex ideas and concepts are born but partially developed and poorly defined. They must mature and bloom, and they must adapt to ever-changing environments. While admittedly a couple of the maneuver articles may have been rehashes (we called them “useful summaries”), most broadened and clarified the underlying ideas and contributed to the growth and evolution of the concepts.

Still the process goes on. In this issue three more articles assess the maneuver topic. Maj R. Scott Moore (p. 24) expands maneuver warfare into the area of operational art and examines what aviation and combat service support must do if that style of warfare is to realize its full potential. LtCol Gary W. Anderson (p. 57) follows the Commandant’s advice and focuses on lowintensity conflict, pointing out areas in which maneuver warfare theory-at least as normally defined-seems less applicable. William S. Lind, et al. (p. 59) discuss what is meant by the term “combined arms” when it is properly understood. They offer a theoretical foundation that should be of practical value in every Marine fire support coordination center.

There is a lesson here-a lesson about the dynamic nature of the military professional. Almost nothing is final, or beyond change, or as clear or as good as it ought to be. Maneuver warfare is a part of OH 6-1 Ground Combat Operations and the new FMFM 1 Warfighting. It will continue to mature, and we expect you will continue to write about it-a development that will be all for the good.

J.E.G.

Authors

The Commandant’s “Annual Report of the Marine Corps to Congress,” p. 14, emphasizes the institutional changes accomplished in 1988, and offers a view of the future. Gen A.M. Gray also made members of Congress aware of the greatest issue they and the Corps face: how the Marines can best contribute to national security within the constraints of the budget.

For the third time in eight years Maj R. Scott Moore has won the annual MajGen Harold W. Chase Prize Essay Contest. His entry, “The Art of MAGTF Warfare,” p. 24, was selected from a field of over 32 other Chase essays submitted in 1988. He is assigned to MAG-26 at MCAS New River as an air-ground exchange officer. More 1988 Chase Contest entries appear on p. 37 (LtCol Charles L. Armstrong), p. 38 (Maj Richard J. Macak), p. 42 (Maj R. David Clarke), p. 49 (Capt Jon T. Hoffman), and p. 66 (LtCol Christopher J. Gregor).

This month’s Focus on Low-Intensity Conflict continues the discussion launched under the same title in Mar88. Now, more Marines are fueling the discussion. Maj Susan J. Flores, who first wrote for the Gazette in Oct88 with an assessment of reconnaissance, takes a look at “Marine Corps Employment in Low-Intensity Conflict,” p. 30. She is joined by four 1988 Chase contest contributors (see above) and two Reserve officers.

Share this: