In the 90’s I supported the Marine Corps’ Urban Warrior and Project Metropolis programs. The former set the focus on what we needed to accomplish in successfully fighting the 3BW. That focus centered on the tactical – solid TTP augmented by “select” technologies – “equipping the Marine” not “manning the equipment”. Pro Met did just that and produced the Basic Urban Skills Training (BUST) program.
My takeaway from all that was the theme of the Strategic Corporal was ever-present in everything the Corps did – from experimenting with new TTP and technologies as well as looking at training and education in a different light.
I never looked at the term General Krulak coined in his 1997 speech as meaning we expected our NCO’s to directly implement national strategy – as we well know that strategy may not be “well defined” at even the strategic and operational levels, much less the tactical. That said, in the perfect world the Strategic Corporal would have a full understanding of that strategy and be capable of conducting tactical actions that supported reaching the desired end-state. My interpretation of the Strategic Corporal metaphor was that the junior leader would be required to make decisions that could well affect operational and strategic outcomes and be empowered with authority that previously resided at much higher levels of command. I also believed we all fully understood the implications of modern news media and the “CNN effect” was often discussed.
I think the Commandant summed up what we tried to achieve in Urban Warrior and Pro Met in a 1999 article he wrote for the Marine Corps Gazette - The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War:
… The inescapable lesson of Somalia and of other recent operations, whether humanitarian assistance, peace-keeping, or traditional warfighting, is that their outcome may hinge on decisions made by small unit leaders, and by actions taken at the lowest level. The Corps is, by design, a relatively young force. Success or failure will rest, increasingly, with the rifleman and with his ability to make the right decision at the right time at the point of contact. As with Corporal Hernandez at CP Charlie, today's Marines will often operate far "from the flagpole" without the direct supervision of senior leadership. And, like Corporal Hernandez, they will be asked to deal with a bewildering array of challenges and threats. In order to succeed under such demanding conditions they will require unwavering maturity, judgment, and strength of character. Most importantly, these missions will require them to confidently make well-reasoned and independent decisions under extreme stress -- decisions that will likely be subject to the harsh scrutiny of both the media and the court of public opinion. In many cases, the individual Marine will be the most conspicuous symbol of American foreign policy and will potentially influence not only the immediate tactical situation, but the operational and strategic levels as well. His actions, therefore, will directly impact the outcome of the larger operation; and he will become, as the title of this article suggests -- the Strategic Corporal…
On edit: An afterthought - a couple of variables that might or might not make a difference in your project - pre-OEF/OIF (Telic) the Strateigc Corporal was the the combat arms Marine and Soldier - the "CNN effect" was media "in the immediate area", not prison guards' actions influencing national strategy and news media embeds (just two examples).
Bookmarks