The “Force Design 2030” program was instituted with only one goal in mind: beating the People’s Republic of China.
At the start of this tumultuous decade, the United States Marine Corps (USMC) made an announcement that sent shockwaves throughout the United States military and the community of military analysts around the world. The branch announced that it was divesting from the M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank (MBT). In fact, as part of their “Force Design 2030,” the USMC was foregoing main battle tanks altogether. The Abrams would be mothballed and nothing would replace it. The Army, meanwhile, is upgrading their Abrams fleet to the AbramsX. But the Marines were done.
In the Abrams’ stead, the USMC was planning to have a coterie of systems replace the MBT. These systems included Long-Range Precision Munitions (LRPMs), unmanned systems, anti-tank weapons, and other systems. The remaining resources would be reinvested in other force priorities, such as focusing on greater integration of the USMC with the US Navy, enhancing the USMC’s ability to conduct long-range fires, and making the Marine Corps into a more agile, dispersed force.
Force Design 2030
This last bit is key to understanding the USMC’s “Force Design 2030.” Because the program was instituted with only one goal in mind: beating the People’s Republic of China. Gone would be the days when Marines were operating in the middle of deserts, far removed from the Navy’s fleet, conducting counterterrorism (CT) and counterinsurgency (COIN) missions. Back in 2020, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David H. Berger argued that the Chinese military threat required the USMC to return to its light, expeditionary, amphibious roots. So, no more tanks. If the Marines needed armor backup on specific missions, they’d call the Army.
Given the geographical realities of the Indo-Pacific, the region where American forces would fight against the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), any conflict would look closer to the island-hopping campaign the Marines successfully waged against the Empire of Japan in the Second World War. After 80 years of fighting all manner of threat actors who were wildly different, both in terms of their capabilities and the geographical areas in which they were located, the USMC’s expeditionary warfare muscles have atrophied.
At the same time, though, many American defense experts are skeptical of the move to completely abandon the MBT.
When Gen. Berger made his comments five years ago, Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), advised that the Marines not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. In their quest to prepare for the war the Pentagon really wants to fight, as the previous century showed, the USMC needs to be ready to adapt their forces to fight wars and enemies they never intended to. Cancian argued the USMC needed to keep a small cluster of Abrams handy, just in case it got into a pinch and couldn’t rely on the Army’s tanks.
Always Be Adapting
For better or worse, the Marines didn’t listen. 2025 marks the fifth year—and the midway point—of the shift to a new force design aimed to be completed in 2030. People like Cancian are right to point out that the Marines who went to fight in Vietnam had been conditioned to wage a war for control over the Fulda Gap in Europe against the nuclear-armed Soviets. Similarly, the USMC that hit Saddam Hussein in the 1991 Desert Storm was meant to fight the Soviet enemy in Europe that had evaporated that same year. And, by the time the Global War on Terror (GWOT) got underway in 2001, the Marines had to completely retool themselves to fight CT and COIN operations far removed from the fleet. The USMC truly became a different force.
Then again, between the Army and Marine Corps, the USMC has a proven track record of adapting far more efficiently to radical changes in the strategic environment. That GWOT example is key. The Army struggled for years after the Marines became proficient in the kind of fighting that was needed in the GWOT. Now that those fights are over and the strategic center of gravity is returning to great power competition, the USMC needs to be ready with that kind of fight.
Plus, the systems that the Marines want to replace the Abrams with just might be what the Corpsman ordered.
The Marines Are Building Systems to Reliably Replace the Abrams
Recognizing that America’s enemies have developed countermeasures that pose complications for US forces, the USMC wants to be able to conduct long-range precision fires from vehicles, like the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV). By engaging farther over-the-horizon, the USMC can better protect its own forces from those aforementioned countermeasures while still being combat-effective.
Unmanned systems, drones, are being considered as one of the replacements for the MBT. And not only aerial drones, but unmanned tank-like systems.
Consider the importance of anti-tank weapons in the Ukraine War, which both sides have used with devastating effects on each other. With this example in mind, the Marines want lighter, anti-tank weapons to fill the role of the Abrams. Systems like the Spike NLOS missiles offer significant range advantages and can be mounted on systems, like the JLTV.
In all, it seems the Marines are making necessary moves. They likely no longer need the MBT because the next major war will likely be fought in the Indo-Pacific, regardless of what happens in places like the Middle East or even Europe. Consequently, the Indo-Pacific is where the USMC needs to be laser-focused on becoming dominant again.
About the Author: Brandon J. Weichert
Brandon J. Weichert, a Senior National Security Editor at The National Interest as well as a Senior Fellow at the Center for the National Interest, and a contributor at Popular Mechanics, consults regularly with various government institutions and private organizations on geopolitical issues. Weichert’s writings have appeared in multiple publications, including the Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, the Asia Times, and countless others. His books include Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His newest book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine is available for purchase wherever books are sold. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.
Image: Wikimedia Commons.
