The dynamic landscape of modern warfare underscores the importance of adaptability, especially when considering the capabilities of Special Operations Forces (SOF) in the face of irregular warfare and conventional conflict. Security paradigms shift, examining the implications of asymmetrical engagements and integrated deterrence, becomes imperative for understanding the strategic role of SOF within this context.
Irregular warfare, which embodies activities below the threshold of conventional warfare—such as information operations, espionage, cyber operations, and support to non-state actors—is increasingly prominent in global competition. Yet such activities as foreign internal defense, unconventional warfare, and information operations are core activities for irregular warfare.
Despite the importance of irregular warfare, a critical observation emerges: the DoD’s current disposition heavily favors conventional war readiness. To be clear, it is important for the United States to build conventional and nuclear capabilities to deter and—if deterrence fails—fight. Nevertheless, they can’t come at the expense of being adequately prepared to conduct irregular warfare.
Addressing doctrinal deficiencies is also crucial. Traditional warfare doctrine aims at military victory over adversaries, while irregular warfare focuses on securing or maintaining government legitimacy. Although the main difference between traditional and irregular warfare is the end state each aims to achieve, U.S. military doctrine defines them instead by their distinctive means.
Someone call for a downsizing of SOF. The war in Ukraine showcases a clear need for large forces capable of fighting conventional warfare; however, dismissing the strategic utility of SOF in large-scale conflicts would be a misstep. Special forces continue to play a significant role.
Irregular warfare will likely be a major form of both competition and warfare between the United States and its main adversaries. SOF are a critical component of irregular warfare. But the United States still has a long way to go in building a sufficiently-funded, organized, and coordinated irregular warfare campaign that includes SOF and other interagency organizations—such as the U.S. State Department, Treasury Department, and intelligence community—and foreign allies and partners.
Relevant articles:
– The Role of Special Operations Forces in Great Power Competition, CSIS | Center for Strategic and International Studies, Feb 8, 2023
– The Future is Irregular. Our Doctrine Should be Too., af.edu
– Time to Radically Downsize the West’s Special Forces, cepa.org
– ASD for Special Operations/Low, U.S. Department of Defense (.gov)