This essay examines Colonel David M. Shoup's leadership during the Battle of Tarawa, one of World War II's deadliest amphibious operations. Using four distinct leadership qualities—understanding, directing, leading, and assessing—the paper evaluates how Shoup navigated the chaos and violence of this 76-hour island assault that killed over 6,000 combatants. The essay argues that while imperfect, Shoup's performance earned him the Medal of Honor and shaped his later advocacy for military reform. His experience at Tarawa became a critical turning point in his understanding of warfare and defense strategy, ultimately influencing his tenure as Commandant of the Marine Corps under President Eisenhower.
War is a unique consequence of human life and interaction. Those willing to participate in war find a way to make themselves relevant and important throughout history by providing stories of courage, fear, and bravery that help others learn from violent conflicts and battles.
The extremely violent and deadly Battle of Tarawa, which occurred during the island-hopping campaigns of World War II, provided the world with some of the most gruesome and shocking results of armed conflict. The battle itself was an orgy of blood, death, and destruction, where countless human lives were sacrificed. What good is war if we cannot learn and take important lessons from these tragic events?
The purpose of this essay is to describe how Colonel David M. Shoup navigated this battlefield and became a useful guiding point for military leadership. This essay investigates Shoup's role in this battle through several different lenses to evaluate his success in commanding and leading this military operation. The essay examines Shoup's performance through four distinct qualities or steps of leadership: understanding, directing, leading, and assessing. The essay concludes that Shoup's performance during this battle, while not perfect, certainly merited the accolades and honors that were bestowed upon him for his work. His transformation later in life regarding armed warfare and conflict also points to the Battle of Tarawa as a critical moment in his development as a military strategist and advocate for reform.
The massive human death and destruction that occurred during World War II affected the Americans and Japanese fighting for supremacy in the Pacific Ocean. Tarawa, an island located southwest of Hawaii, provided the necessary ground for Shoup and his Marine group to perform amphibious assaults in direct support of the island-hopping campaign that would eventually lead to Japan's surrender. Despite this campaign's brutal and focused efforts, it ultimately succeeded in advancing American strategy, though the atomic bombs would ultimately cause Japan to submit.
Tarawa marked a significant turning point in warfare and amphibious assault. Shoup's role in this new and uncharted territory presented the world with a new definition of duty, honor, and country. Alexander (1993) wrote, "few battles have ever matched Tarawa's concentrated violence at point-blank range in such a compressed period of time. Six thousand Japanese and Americans were killed in 76 hours within an area smaller than New York's Central Park. The Tarawa assault had a significant impact on American strategy in the Pacific, the national psyche, and the institution known as the Navy-Marine Corps team. Some of Tarawa's legacies, both positive and negative, persist today."
The insanity of war and the predicament that Shoup found himself in as leader of this battle provide excellent learning lessons for other leaders. The military leadership required to succeed at Tarawa can be applied to all forms of military leadership in today's world and provides a historical account of bravery, death, and strength matched in few recorded forms of warfare and struggle throughout history.
Understanding as a leadership quality requires leaders to synergize and coordinate many different factors. The military leader must derive from a point of purpose or mission and creatively apply those qualities throughout the contingencies of his unit. Oftentimes in battle, confusion and chaos rule. Understanding allows the brain's functions to work in harmony with the body itself to perform acts of bravery and courage. This model is useful when applying it to Shoup and his men.
The style of fight represented at Tarawa was almost suicidal, as casualty rates were very high and nearly all of the approximately 20,000 Japanese soldiers were killed in this assault. Shoup understood this reality and convinced himself first of the insanity of this effort, then relayed it to his soldiers. Shoup had an internal knowledge of the chaotic and incoherent nature of warfare, and understood that it required a leap of faith to succeed and to allow others to succeed.
By acknowledging the insanity of this effort while remaining focused on the mission, Shoup provided an understanding approach to leadership that ultimately succeeded. The Marine siege of the island was successful, though it came at a heavy price. As Jablon et al. (2005) notes, "At the battle of Tarawa, Shoup's coolness in desperate straits would save the day and earn him the Medal of Honor. He held the assault together during the first critical day and a half as chaos and confusion reigned. Nothing went according to plan. The low tide stranded men and landing craft and prevented reinforcements, radio communication broke down, and naval bombardment did not destroy most Japanese positions."
Providing direction is a key and implicit task of the leader. For Colonel Shoup, during the Battle of Tarawa, direction was very difficult to give due to the circumstances of the day. But all war is chaos, and this situation, while larger in scope, represents the challenges that all leaders face on the battlefield. Confusion is a leader's worst enemy as it suspends action and places the unit in a state of shock and fear.
Shoup's ability to direct his large Marine amphibious force began prior to the battle. The groundwork for success was laid well in advance through operations orders, training events, and combat experience that preceded this conflict and ultimately led to its success. Directing is essentially allowing things to happen and having faith and confidence in those who work with you to perform at a high level. This quiet confidence that Shoup emitted during this battle resulted in nearly total victory—less than 20 Japanese soldiers survived, and the atoll was brought under American command and control.
Leading is an ambiguous and vague action that can be seen in the fabric of other actions and words. The best leaders allow their men to shine and take credit for success while accepting blame in a paternalistic fashion. Shoup's ability to lead during this battle was evident in his earning the Medal of Honor for his actions.
Wright (2012) documented Shoup's leadership during the critical opening phase: "The final rehearsals for the landings on Tarawa were carried out at Efate in the New Hebrides. The designated leader of Regimental Landing Team 2, Col William Marshall, suffered a heart attack and Shoup was given the job of implementing his own plans. Although wounded coming ashore after Shoup landed on D-day, he immediately set up a command post and directed operations throughout the most critical period of the battle. His leadership and devotion to duty won him the Medal of Honor, and he went on to a distinguished career being appointed Commandant of the Marine Corps by President Eisenhower" (p. 15).
The ability to synthesize and correlate the events of the Battle of Tarawa had the most long-lasting and profound effect on the career and reputation of Colonel David M. Shoup. The battle itself represents mankind at its best and worst simultaneously—Shoup's courage and bravery depended on the depravity of war and the often senseless death and destruction carried out in the name of peace and freedom. The effects of this battle played a large role in how Shoup assessed his role as a leader in the Marine Corps.
Shoup and Eisenhower both understood the utter devastation and horror of warfare and sought to approach defense in a new way as the military evolved. As Power (2013) notes, "Shoup and Eisenhower also shared the belief that the 'military-industrial complex' could cause damage to the nation, as the defense industry moved closer and closer to the Defense Department. General Shoup promoted efficiency within the Headquarters and made sure all efforts directly supported Marines in the operating forces, even cutting his own household staff and ending much of the pomp and circumstance, including fancy welcoming ceremonies, normally attached to his visits to operating forces" (p. 22).
Shoup's ideas about war and how the Marine Corps should operate within that construct were built upon a life of selfless service to his country. The Battle of Tarawa highlights how in the depths of confusion and chaos, strong leaders are forged and created to take on tougher and more challenging opportunities. The operational execution of Tarawa is evident despite the heavy casualties among the Marines. An enemy as strong and dug in as the Japanese on that island was indicative of the conditions that tested and ultimately defined Shoup as a useful and heroic leader who answered the call of duty when it was given to him in a most violent and surprising manner.
You’re 97% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.