The Marine Corps is studying the potential impact on its operations if Congress does not approve a war supplemental appropriations bill before leaving for the year, and as many as 24,000 civilian employees could be affected, a commandant said Wednesday.
Gen. James Conway told reporters at the Pentagon his commanders are preparing a report on the consequences of no additional war funding for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who is to testify before the House Armed Services Committee Tuesday.
Conway said that without additional money he might have to lay off civilian workers and make other adjustments by March 24. But they would have to notify the federal employees' unions of any personnel actions 90 days in advance, which could mean layoff notices going out Christmas Eve, he said. The general said he could not be specific on the likely extent of the cutbacks until the study was completed, and noted that many of the civilian employees "are absolutely critical" to the Marines' operations.
"We're hopeful this gets resolved" before any of those actions are required, he said.
The Army, which says it will feel the effects of no added war funding sooner, has issued notices to its installation commanders to prepare for cutbacks as early as January.
In a wide-ranging news conference, Conway said the Marines decided to buy fewer of the Mine Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicles than had been planned because of the reduced violence in Iraq and because the heavy MRAPs were not compatible with their expeditionary style of operations. Congress had made it a high priority to provide $8.2 billion in additional funds to buy thousands of the heavily armored vehicles to protect troops against roadside bombs and mines. Conway said the Marines only wanted 2,300 MRAPs, instead of the 3,700 initially programmed. He said acquiring fewer of the vehicles would save the taxpayers $1.7 billion and let the Army to get its MRAPs quicker.
The general said the Marines had checked to ensure their cutback would not hurt the companies that have been hustling to increase production and insisted "no Marine in Iraq or Afghanistan will face additional risk because of this decision." After the Marines leave Iraq, he said, the MRAPs would be used to support combat engineers and explosive ordnance demolition teams.
Recently returned from another visit to Iraq, Conway said Anbar province, which has been the Marines' primary responsibility, is much less violent because the local Sunni leaders have turned against al-Qaida. But it was up to Iraq's elected leaders to take the actions necessary to ensure security, he said. Conway said that after discussions with Gates and the other joint chiefs, it was clear that his proposal for the Marines to leave Iraq and take over the U.S. combat role in Afghanistan was not going to happen in the near future. He said the proposal was based on the assumption that the U.S. role in Iraq would shift increasingly to "sustainment" operations and "that's not what the Marine Corps does for this country."
His Marines would prefer to have a combat assignment, he said. And, if he could put 15,000 Marines in Afghanistan, instead of maintaining 26,000 in Iraq, his troops could spend 14 months at home, instead of seven months, between their seven-month deployments. In addition to more time with their families, that would allow them to train for the full spectrum of conflict, instead of only counter-insurgency missions, Conway said. |