Despite their “quiet professional” ethos, special operations forces have received a lot of attention in the past several years. From movies such as “Zero Dark Thirty” to speeches at football games and graduations, recent, public conversation about special operations forces has dispelled many of the myths and legends about this long misunderstood group of American war fighters.
Two crew members keep watch on the rear ramp of a CH-47 Chinook while flying over the mountains in the Khas Uruzgan district of Afghanistan on March 16, 2013. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jessi Ann McCormick, US Army, Flickr.
Or has it? There’s no doubt that special operations forces perform some of the US military’s most sensitive and important missions. But the targeted raids that garner media attention represent just a fraction of what they do. As the number of troops assigned to US Special Operations Command has increased in recent years, so has the organization’s funding. But so have the number of deployments and the types of missions, and so has the presence of American special operators around the world. To keep our special operations forces at the ‘tip of the spear’ and to enable them to continue to drive innovation within the military, the next president will need to carefully consider when, how, and why he or she chooses to use them over other tools of national power.
1) Since September 11, 2001, both the size and budget of special operations forces have grown. Do you think that they have been used appropriately since that time?
The base budget for and the number of troops affiliated with the United States Special Operations Command have reached their highest levels since the command’s inception in 1987. Many would argue that the increased number and frequency of asymmetric threats faced by the United States justify the expansion. But as the conventional forces face increased budgetary pressure, it is tempting to use special operations forces for missions, such as large-scale stability operations and certain types of military assistance, which could be addressed as well or better by conventional forces. This temptation to use special operations forces—who operate below the radar of the American public—has too often proven too difficult for leaders to resist. If you were president, which missions would you prioritize for special operations forces, and which, in your opinion, would be better handled by the conventional force?
2) In Iraq, should US special operations forces be allowed to accompany foreign troops into combat? How do you define the term “combat troops”?
In its attempts to “degrade and destroy” the Islamic State, the current administration has relied heavily on air assaults and a small cadre of special operations officers who have advised Iraqis outside of combat situations. Billed by some as “running a war from cell phones,” these advisers are prohibited from accompanying foreign troops into combat. Yet coaching from the sidelines has yielded mixed results, and the Iraqi Army is still nowhere near where it needs to be to defend Iraq from ISIS, let alone to take back cities such as Ramadi or Mosul. Leaving aside the question of whether the presence of American combat troops will be required to defeat ISIS—as many senior strategists agree may be the case—as president, will you allow special operations officers to leave their bases and provide advice in combat situations?
3) As president, how will you prepare special operations forces to address hybrid, unconventional, and special warfare?
The United States is increasingly facing threats that are not easily categorized, countered, or in some cases, are difficult to attribute directly to a specific adversary. In Ukraine, troops whose funding sources and loyalties were initially unclear acted on behalf of Russia’s interests without directly affiliating with Moscow. Some argue that Iran’s leadership is deliberately pursuing a long term strategy of conflict with the United States—one that falls below the traditional threshold of war but that, nonetheless, has serious national security implications. American special operations forces must prioritize the development of language skills, regional expertise, and improved military information support and technical capabilities. As president, what will you do to help the American military maintain its edge in circumstances where the nature and the source of the threat are unclear?
4) How will you articulate the importance of large-scale special operations training exercises to the American people?
Domestic military exercises are nothing new, yet some Americans have become convinced that a US Special Operations Command unconventional warfare training exercise, dubbed Jade Helm 15, is in fact the manifestation of a federal plot to impose martial law throughout the United States. In fact, training exercises such as these are precisely what special operations forces need to improve their understanding of emerging dimensions of warfare. As president, will you support special operations training initiatives that better prepare our soldiers to face contemporary challenges?
5) What new technologies should be developed or supported to help our special operations forces maintain their fighting edge?
As the military’s innovators, special operations forces are frequently used as a testing ground for the application of cutting-edge technological applications to warfare. In the future, American troops will require total situational awareness, unrelenting precision, and highly networked capabilities to engage with and defeat nebulous and dynamic threats. How will you facilitate the cross-fertilization between the military’s innovators—special operations forces—and private sector innovators, such as Silicon Valley technology firms? What technologies should be developed to keep special operations forces in the lead against any enemy that they might face?
from AEI » Latest Content http://ift.tt/1Uld1zn
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment