{"id":38069,"date":"2019-09-17T22:15:55","date_gmt":"2019-09-17T22:15:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/navytimes\/uncategorized\/2019\/09\/17\/op-ed-with-space-corps-lets-boldly-go-where-no-bureaucrat-has-gone-before\/"},"modified":"2026-08-08T19:36:51","modified_gmt":"2026-08-08T19:36:51","slug":"op-ed-with-space-corps-lets-boldly-go-where-no-bureaucrat-has-gone-before","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/navytimes\/news\/your-navy\/2019\/09\/17\/op-ed-with-space-corps-lets-boldly-go-where-no-bureaucrat-has-gone-before\/","title":{"rendered":"Op-ed: With Space Corps, let\u2019s boldly go where no bureaucrat has gone before!"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Uncle Sam wants YOU for the Space Corps!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For most readers, this sentence probably stirs images of interstellar battles that humble even the most finely crafted Marine Corps recruiting commercial. This has led many to criticize \u2014 even mock \u2014 the Air Force\u2019s nascent command. Others have sought to influence leaders in the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill as they construct the Space Corps\u2019 institutional architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, Air Command and Staff College professor Brent Ziarnick recently suggested that the Space Corps should adopt naval rank<\/a> if it is to achieve the \u201cfiercely independent sense of identity\u201d necessary to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Few could disagree with such a powerful, seemingly innovative proposal. And I must admit, as an officer in the Navy, the professor\u2019s pitch caught my eye. But I soon realized Ziarnick\u2019s proposition is misguided, if not dangerously na\u00efve.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The difference between a Navy \u201clieutenant\u201d and an Air Force \u201ccaptain\u201d is no panacea for an effective fighting force. The Space Corps can and should distinguish itself as an independent entity within the Air Force.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, the Space Corps could certainly draw proven concepts from the Navy \u2014 perhaps its historical model of leadership, which reaches more deeply than the fleeting novelty of our rank \u2014 in pursuit of this goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the future of the Space Corps depends on far more than naval gazing. To succeed, the Space Corps must first confront a hard reality: The military faces a looming anthropological catastrophe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
An homage to a space force that used Navy ranks, the Starship Enterprise model from the television series “Star Trek.” (Dane A. Penland\/ National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Birth rates in the United States have slowed<\/a> for four consecutive years, and experts project that 2030 will be the first <\/a>year in history that the population over 65 will outnumber those under 18.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, 87 percent <\/a>of young Americans between the ages of 17 and 24 are ineligible for service, and only 13 percent of this age group<\/a> will consider serving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This dynamic will encumber the Air Force\u2019s ability to identify and recruit capable Space Corpsmen. And the situation grows bleaker once you consider that the Space Corps will require a higher degree of technical skill than other branches, which are failing<\/a> to hit recruiting targets for the first time in years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even worse, the federal government\u2019s response to this problem has been inconsistent and self-defeating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On one hand, leaders have shuttered alternative sources of talented recruits. In 2016, the Pentagon froze the highly successful \u201cMilitary Accessions Vital to the National Interest\u201d program, which expanded the Army\u2019s talent pool by targeting non-citizen recruits with critical language or medical skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When it came to attrition, performance, education and advancement over the course of an enlistment, MAVNI recruits regularly outperformed<\/a> their domestic counterparts. But as is often the case in the military, merit was not enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, branches have lowered standards for drug use<\/a> and physical fitness<\/a> while simultaneously earmarking many millions of dollars for recruiting<\/a> and retention<\/a> bonuses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These efforts to create and preserve an increasingly professionalized military workforce have overlapped with an era marked by rising disciplinary problems in the armed forces. But has anyone stopped to ask whether these variables are related?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
In 1997, when NASA wanted to illustrate a smart and racially integrated crew of men and women working together in space, they turned to fiction: “Star Trek.” Nichelle Nichols, the actress who played Lt. Uhura in the original television series, even conducted a public relations campaign recruiting possible astronaut candidates for the space shuttle program. (National Air and Space Museum)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The military is targeting prospective accessions that, until recently, were not interested in serving either because (a) they were below standard due to criminal history, drug usage or other problems; or (b) their motivation to make more money in the private sector outweighed a desire to serve in uniform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This undoubtedly affects the ethos of a volunteer fighting force. The only questions left are how, and to what degree?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the Space Corps, we can quarantine the spread of these problems. Leaders must consider the type of young men and women the new command needs to flourish and then actively work to bring them into the force.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In support of this goal, the Space Corps should adopt a more sustainable and innovative approach to recruiting based on the MAVNI approach. But instead of focusing on language and medical skills, Space Corps recruitment should be part of a broader effort to counter the dwindling domestic numbers <\/a>of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) graduates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This initiative would simultaneously breathe life into the Space Corps\u2019 quasi-diplomatic function<\/a>, which some experts prioritize over future capabilities designed to wage war.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Space Corps also might draw inspiration from the Navy\u2019s \u201cMod Squad<\/a>\u201d model, pushing a greater degree of command authority to lower ranks in order to reinvigorate the culture of independent and invested leadership that was common to the early sea service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But today\u2019s military leaders appear more fascinated with faux innovation than anything else. The notion that \u201cnaval rank\u201d will produce a healthy Space Corps is merely a magical footnote to an age-old problem: Thought leaders, who are often (ironically) buoyed by rank or title alone, find comfort offering superficial solutions that border on insight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It doesn\u2019t matter whether we call members of the Space Corps \u201clieutenants\u201d or \u201ccaptains,\u201d \u201cspace corpsmen\u201d or \u201cairmen.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What matters is whether the architects of the Space Corps are willing to lean into the future and boldly go where no bureaucrats have gone before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That journey carries risk. But bold leadership courses through the veins of American history, and future generations should not bear the cost of today\u2019s timidity.<\/p>\n\n\n\t