Here’s a piece I wrote today for the Daily Standard discussing the turnaround in MRAP demand. Don’t say I didn’t tell you so…
It was the cause du jour for the 110th Congress; a silver bullet that would save lives in an increasingly unpopular war, make even the most superfluous lawmaker look like they were on top of defense issues, and bolster the military credentials of any Pentagon-hostile Capitol Hill denizen.
It even had a catchy acronym: MRAP.
The so-called “Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected” vehicle became the latest symbol of the Bush administration’s callous treatment of men and women in uniform–it was the new “body armor shortage” issue. And the “V-shaped hull” behemoths were easy to latch onto for lawmakers looking for a hardened steel club to batter the White House’s handling of the war and equipping of America’s troops.
“This is outrageous and another example of this Administration’s gross mismanagement of this war. Our troops are being killed and these vehicles save lives. No more delays; no more excuses,” Democratic presidential candidate and outspoken MRAP advocate Joseph Biden (D-Del.) said in an August 24 statement.
Most people didn’t realize that MRAP vehicles were already in the Iraqi theater–used primarily by explosive ordnance disposal units that cruised the main supply routes for roadside bombs. When the issue exploded into the political debate, however, Congress flooded the Pentagon with money and mandates to outfit nearly every patrol with the IED-hardened vehicle–with some calling for a one-for-one replacement of up-armored Humvees.
A new defense secretary fresh out of confirmation hearings and eager to make nice with a Democratic Congress acceded to lawmakers’ demands and launched a crash program to get as many MRAPs to the field as industry and logistics could bear.
But if anyone spoke for caution in this plan (and I was one of them), they were quickly shouted down as chicken hawks–dismissed as ignorant of the risks and deadly violence of plying Iraq’s bomb-strewn roads.
But now the game has changed. Finally sober minds are beginning to prevail and the services are finding the courage to push back. Let’s say the surge gave them the “breathing room” to take a moment to really examine whether these vehicles fit their battle plans or were, as one defense researcher termed them, just a “million dollar Kleenex.”
To be sure, MRAPs have their place in a counterinsurgency. The Marine Corps was blamed early this year for taking too long to purchase their MRAPs. But the head of the Corps’ Systems Command, which buys all Marine gear, rightly called the MRAP a “boutique vehicle”–one that had very specific uses but could not be employed in place of Humvees in all cases. In October, the first fissures emerged in the MRAP debate when Marine Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson revealed Marine commanders in Iraq were asking Pentagon leaders to slow down their shipment of the vehicles to Iraq. The vehicles come in three different sizes–from 10 to 25 tons–and even the smallest versions are too heavy for some bridges and roads and too wide for village streets. Nevertheless, the Pentagon, at the behest of Congress, began to flood the zone with orders, shipping the vehicles almost as soon as they came off the line.
“I would say ‘relax.’ We don’t know how we’re going to use them, nobody does,” Nicholson told me. “And anyone who says ‘this is exactly how many we need and this is exactly how we’re going to use them’ is not being truthful.”
Nicholson was speaking for Marine commanders, but it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to figure his sentiment was shared by Army leaders in Iraq as well.
Many also wondered how the large, intimidating vehicles would work in a counterinsurgency campaign that emphasized interaction with the population and a “hearts-and-minds” approach. Not to mention that if the surge strategy worked, the IED risk to troops would drop and billions would have been spent on a vehicle that had outlived its usefulness.
“Our concern is there seems to be this rush to judgment on spending a fairly large amount of money on a program that hadn’t been planned for and not much discussion about how you actually plan to operationalize this and incorporate it into the force,” said Dakota Wood, former Marine transport officer and co-author of the CSBA analysis report “Of MRAPs and IEDs: Force Protection in Complex Irregular Operations.”
Unfortunately, any reasonable approach to fielding these vehicles was shouted down by war opponents.
But since arguments against the surge are harder to come by these days, the services are taking the first steps in slowing the MRAP freight train. Late last month, the Marine Corps announced it would cut 1,300 vehicles from its order, saving the Pentagon $1.7 billion and removing the logistical headache of moving the weighty vehicles to the field and trying to find something to do with them.
“What’s happened since September of 2006 has been absolutely amazing by most counts. We have not lost nearly the numbers of vehicles that we were experiencing because attacks have gone down dramatically,” said Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway at a Pentagon press conference a few days ago. “And I will say that in incorporating greater use of the vehicles, we found that especially the heavy variants don’t give us the combat flexibility that a smaller, lighter vehicle does. And commanders in the field have said off-road, you know, it’s just a little problematic in places.”
“That we could save the government $1.7 billion with a decision, that would have us scratching our head about what we’re going to do with this excess number of vehicles then in five years,” Conway added, “seems to me, it’s all win-win.”
And now, apparently, Army Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the number two commander in Iraq, is questioning whether his service needs its 10,000 MRAP order (down from 17,000 earlier this year). He told USA Today this week that with the success of the surge and the increase in tips and other intel on IEDs, the need for MRAPs has waned.
He’s going to chat with his commanders in the field to see what they need at this point, a realistic reaction to a changing security environment that many MRAP backers on Capitol Hill refused to believe possible.
And for now, Congress hasn’t whimpered that its sage military advice is being ignored.
“Those [in Congress] that we contacted who, again, were our supporters, sort of nodded and said, ‘well, it made sense.’ Another one said, ‘well, I always thought we were buying too many.’ Another said, ‘you know, if you don’t need it, why would you spend $1.7 billion of taxpayer money to go ahead and make the purchase?’” Conway recalled. “So at least at this point, we haven’t heard anything negative coming out of the Congress.“
– Christian
The MRAP purchase, sadly always seemed equal parts political stunt, and good intentions/bad information. I doubt all those in Congress who pushed for the MRAP were simply aiming for political points, but all clearly overreacted with the number purchased. This was a “President Bush doesn’t care” vote (even if some honestly felt that way).
I don’t know why it’s so hard to figure out what to do with the MRAPs when we finally exit. We’re gonna leave whatever we don’t need with the Iraqi Army and police, of course. God knows, they could use them.
Also, if you think the several-billion dollar price tag of MRAP procurement is so high, just think of the cost of the life-long care of veterans who have been brain damaged or suffered loss of limb because they weren’t sufficiently protected. You guys are all fired up to fight the next war, but we still have to figure a way out of this one.
I had always thought that the number sounded huge however and wondered how many convoys you where going to protect with those cause you can’t replace humvees with them if you ever need the leave an improved road.
It had not even occured to me about the weight issue. 10 tons is not much when you think about roads in the states but obviously Iraq is not the states. And that makes them even less useful.
Having said that we need something that has more armor than the humvee but doesn’t weigh as much as an MPAR. Something in the 5 to 6 ton range that is designed to carry the weight of itself.
This was a really good piece.
I’ve always considered solutions to military problems that are based on increasing the “ability to take a hit” to be short-term workarounds at best.
Seems events once again demonstrate the best defense is a really good offense.
Obviously the MRAP became political, and maybe the Marines don’t need a thousand of these things.
However, if you think this is the last time we will be in the situation of having to deal with situations where the MRAP is useful and saves lives, I think you are mistaken.
If I was over there in Convoy duty I would want to be in one.
The generals who are squirming because they don’t like being told what to do and see the MRAP as an item that shows they were unprepared for the insurgency, are not the ones sitting in a Humvee going down the highway, counting the seconds, waiting for the detonation.
Saying things like “counterinsurgency is about humans not machines” is nice and is true. But that does not help you if the Defense Department and the State Department have their head up their ass and your legs get blown off.…..
–Dennis
loldude whenever i see one of these things all i can see is what would happen if you had a tank a few rounds and a clear shot how freaking tall are these things i plan to inlist soon omfg i hope i get put in a stryker or omfg i never thouh id say this a bradly even i mean come on i know it can take a hit from a ied or a mine but sides and top were still screwed arnt we?
THE WEEKLY STANDARD!!! You’re writing for the Weekly Standard! Well I guess that’s a poke in the eye for all the readers that believed you’re a Democrat Party plant…More info please…how did you end up on their pages? Was this a requested article or one that they decided to pick up? Full disclosure Christian.
James, no the MRAP is not very vulnerable on the sides. They were built to withstand explosively formed penetrators on the sides, but even some Defense Department officials confirm that a Cougar MRAP is still vulnerable to some EFPs. The top itself is armored to protect airburst rounds, which if I am not mistaken, we have not encountered in Iraq.
Don’t worry. After we pull out of Iraq, the Iraqis can keep the things.
Anyone remember the brownwater navy and the A-37?
The Marines are right, it is a boutique. As they are a boutique force, they already have enough single mission equipment to spash money on. EEEV anyone? V-22? AH-1W? UH-1Y? How long did they continue to operate the M-60 when it was clear that the abrams was a superior system?
How long did parochial, ‘Every marine is an expert marksman, we don’t need optics on issue rifles’ keep marines from getting ACOG’s and Aimpoints? The Rangers had them when I was there back in 1996.
Why can’t the Marine Corps handle the naval shipboarding operations? Coastal and riverine warfare?
Instead of answering why America needs a fourth airforce (ie their’s), the marines need to be asking why America needs a fourth land warfare element (the Navy’s). And before anyone tells me about unique capabilities, how are those ‘capabilities’ utilized in Afghanistan and urban Iraq?
As for the MRAP. If it saves a life, it is money well spent. Warfare is about saving lives. Accounting is about saving money. Be a soldier or a bean-counter.
Yea i know about its cappabilities in the armor area.what i was getting at is hight…look at it its HUGE i dont mean airburst though yes they are using those armor peircing gernade things(no i have no idea what there called though there probbly coming from the peaceful iranian nation which also keeps developing balistic missiles.…..ok now im confused if you dont want nukes why develope ballistic missiles?)
anyways what im thinkin about is how well can a mrap evade cannon fire fully loaded and how much gas does it take how top heavy? thats what im wondering if say(omfg i cant believe im saying it say we accualy did have to go into iran yea there tankers will love those things…look im not saying they dont do there jobs im saying this. today there saving lives what happenes if in the future they endup taking them…
who wants to be the guy screaming about you go to war with the weapons you have?
anyways an army cant function without money…
and leave the marines alone..
I always doubt procurement when it is driven by politics, not operational requirements. There is always a whiz-bang tech solution which more often than not adds complexity and cost while sucking funds ouof more deserving programs. This program is tailor made for political interference.
What if…
What if Iran was still shipping IEDs and EFPs to Iraq by the truckload? Would all the MRAP naysayers still be gloating over this reduction in planned vehicle purchases?
What if 75 percent of all Marine Corps casualties were still being caused by IEDs/EFPs? Would the plans to reduce the buy of MRAPs still be in place?
The “flavor” of this war has changed. Good news for sure but don’t be lulled in to a false sense that more MRAPs might not be needed next spring. Insurgents always take the winters off, last year being the sad exception to the rule. Besides General Orde whoever said that this lull is fragile…next summer we all might be yelling at the Pentagon for not having these vehicles laid up in anticipation for the up tick in violence.
This comment is for Joe the Ranger.
If you knew anything about history you would know that in both the gulf war and Iraqi freedom Marines were bombed and killed by our own Air Force more than once. I realize mistakes can and will be made but that is one reason Marines prefer thier own air cover. As a matter of fact when I was in Afghanistan with AH-1W’s and UH-1N’s we were the attack helicopter of choice over the AH-64.
Marine tactics teach us to agressively persue the enemy not set up camp and watch the ball game. We spend less and do more with it. Too bad other branches of the military and government don’t think that way.
The Marine Corps also leads the way in new technologies I.E. digital cammies. If the Marines wore rabbit ears on thier covers you can bet that the Army would soon follow. Mark my words, the V-22 will be in the Army inventory after it is perfected by the Marines.
By the way Marines still don’t need scopes. EVERY Marine is a rifleman. Survivability stats tell don’t lie.
Semper Fi!
In as much as the marines and rifle optics, they are using them now and praising them. So much for antiquated ‘back when I was in the Corps’ (or back in 2nd Bat for that matter).
My main point is that the Marine Corps wasted money on their H-1 programs. I did not question their need to have their own airforce. But with the H-1 system I believe the Navy has an improved H-60 program, and the Army as well. I think an existing modern airframe would serve Marines just as well and would have saved money.
As for agressively pursuing the enemy, you mean like in Tora Bora?
In World War Two the US Army conducted more amphibious operations, seized more territory, killed more japanese, and took fewer casualties than the Marine Corps.
Why are the SEALS performing tradition Marine missions, attacking from the sea?
Joe!
WTF! Rifle optics???? The statement “every Marine a rifleman” has to do with the mindset of all US Marines. Not to cast aspersions on the fallen but after that Private was captured, the Army did an after action and discovered that Marine support units had better combat skills than their Army counterparts. Not a knock on them at all just an illustration of differing operating models. Because the war on terror brought different factors into play, the Army corrected and lengthened combat training for non-combat arms Soldiers. As for the Seals doing Marine missions…consider that Special Ops creep. The 82nd was once tasked with seizing airfields but the Rangers took that mission. Marines once did all ship boardings and the Seals took that…no big deal it happens, its the result of justifying a Special Ops community when there is no shooting war. If you’re up on your readings then you know that the new Sea Strategy has Marines returning to those shipboard duties…it happens, there’s a war on and SpecOps is busy as hell.…but I guess it all boils down to you not being a fan of the Eagle , Globe and Anchor huh????? Oh well Hillary has P.E. too.…
Rather than Congress or the services making this decision, the combatant commander needs to determine how many MRAPs are required. Right now, that hasn’t happened yet.
Some of the arguments being used to pare down the MRAP buy don’t hold water.
First, the Commandant of the Marines argued that MRAPs can’t go on ships. Baloney. The Marine’s MRAPs are shorter than the 7-ton trucks the Marines use and lighter than the LVSR and both of those trucks can go shipboard with the MEU. It is true that some of the Army’s MRAPs are too tall to go on amphibs, but that’s the Army!
Second, the situation in Iraq has improved so we don’t need them. How do we know that the situation won’t degrade? And if it does get worse, you can’t just ramp back up production like it’s a water faucet.
Third, who’s to say we won’t need these vehicles for the next war? That’s quite an assumption particularly with 4th Generation Warfare. It sounds some folks in the Pentagon are saying, let’s get out of counter-insurgencies and back to force-on-force because we’re better at it. Good luck with getting your adversaries to agree to that.
Fourth, off-road mobility limitations are indeed a problem — I’ll give you that. But mobility can be improved with some limited automotive upgrades. Sure, it won’t be able to go everywhere, but most tactical wheeled military vehicles can’t anyway! By the way, here’s a picture of a current MRAP on an “off-road confidence course“
http://www.blackanthem.com/News/scitechlead/Army-Looks-at-Long-term-Need-for-Mine-resistant-Vehicles12607.shtml
Fifth, here’s another kicker: it’s been said that the Commandant also likes the Force Protection Cheetah because it has superior mobility compared to the current MRAPs. Here’s the problem: how do you intend to buy Cheetah’s if you reduce the requirement to the point that you can’t buy anymore? Who’s advising the Commandant on this requirement cut anyway?
Finally, I know that the rush to buy MRAPs was an emotional decision. The reality is that insurgencies and counter-insurgencies are inherently emotional in nature. The center-of-gravity for the enemy is not America’s infrastructure or cities, it’s our national psyche. So, recognizing that adequate protection for service members is physically possible, near-term and achievable and then taking action to provide the equipment shouldn’t be looked down upon.
There might be good reasons to throttle back the rate of purchases. To turn off the faucet now might not be such a good idea.
The number of MRAPs don’t bother me but what does is the fact that there are not enough replacement parts in country for even the first hundred MRAPs we gave out. Now we have alot of deadline MRAPs waiting on parts and no idea when we will get them.
No need to apologize about the service and support troops combat capability. I served with the 1/509th at Fort Polk and worked extensively for the Echelons Above Division section.
Most of the people we engeged acted as though they were on an extended camping trip and displayed a complete lack of kill or be killed attitude. I have no complaints about the level of training the average support marine undergoes in comparision to the average army support personnel.
I always wondered why the armed services insist on using linear logistics on a non-linear battlefield. The title MSR should be banned on non-linear battlefields.
Our product at Force Protection is the Gold Standard. The DOD does not like my arrogant style. So i told them what i thought about them period ! While i was at a formal party we joked about this so all my buddies shorted the stock and made millions. If i had known that this would of happened i would of shorted it also. Sorry about the Cheetah delay my buddies need to cover an awful lot of shares.
I see our men and women getting blown up in Humvees even now. More deaths by Humvee than probably any other single cause in this war…
Hey Christian, why don’t you make it your mission to go tell the folks of those dead soldiers and Marines that we had to keep them in Humvees so we could be “mobile”, mix with the locals, etc. I’m sure they will understand that their loved one might have survived with an MRAP, but will agree the death of their loved one was worth the sacrifice for “mobility”