Loadingads

Special warfare was a key component of American military operations long before Afghanistan and even before the heroic deeds of the Green Berets. Alfred Paddock's. Welcome to the United States Air Force. Learn about great opportunities for enlisted airmen, officers and health care professionals. The Air Force consolidated and transitioned officers of Air Force Special Warfare to a new Air Force specialty code to increase resourcing, improve talent management and enhance deployment capabilities. The Air Force Special Warfare (AFSPECWAR) A&S is located on the Medina Annex of Lackland Air Force Base, TX. A&S trains Pararescue, Combat Control, Special Reconnaissance, Special Tactics Officer and Combat Rescue Officers together in one course. 126 People Used View all course ››.

(redirected from Special warfare)
Also found in: Thesaurus, Acronyms, Encyclopedia.

special forces

pl.n.

special forces

pl n

Special Warfare Combatant Craft Crewman

Spe′cial Forc′es

n.pl.

special forces

Noun

1.

Special Forces - a division of the United States Army that is specially trained for guerilla fighting U. S. Army Special Forces, United States Army Special Forces division - an army unit large enough to sustain combat; 'two infantry divisions were held in reserve' U. S. Army, United States Army, US Army, USA, Army - the army of the United States of America; the agency that organizes and trains soldiers for land warfare Green Beret - a soldier who is a member of the United States Army Special Forces

Want to thank TFD for its existence? Tell a friend about us, add a link to this page, or visit the webmaster's page for free fun content.
Link to this page:

The Missing Middle in U.S. Coercive Options

• Related Topics:
• Low-Intensity Conflict,
• Military Strategy,
• Peacekeeping and Stability Operations,
• Special Operations Forces,

Download Free Electronic Document

Full Document

Format	File Size	Notes
PDF file	0.1 MB	Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Special Warfare

Research Synopsis

Format	File Size	Notes
PDF file	0.2 MB	Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

This report demonstrates the need for special warfare, a strategic and operational approach to securing U.S. interests. The U.S. requires new approaches for exerting influence to fill the missing middle between the costly indefinite commitment of conventional forces and the limitations of distant-strike options presented by drones and Tomahawk missiles. Because special warfare works principally through local actors, employs political warfare methods, and requires the integration of a much broader suite of U.S. government agency capabilities than are typically envisioned in conventional campaigns, the United States must adjust its conceptual models for military campaigns to achieve its goals through special warfare.The report has four specific aims: (1) to adapt conventional operational art to the unique characteristics of special warfare, (2) to identify the strategic advantages and risks associated with special warfare, (3) to explore how special warfare campaigns could be used to address challenges identified in strategic guidance, and (4) to provide guidance to military and civilian leaders and planners in designing and executing these campaigns.RAND authors recommend that DoD strengthen its special warfare planning capacity and culture, conduct institutional reforms to facilitate unified action among relevant U.S. government agencies, and place greater emphasis on developing capabilities required to prevail in the human domain.

Key Findings

Special Warfare Comes with Advantages...

• Special warfare can improve U.S. contextual understanding of potential partners and the situation on the ground.
• Special warfare's small-footprint approach allows the United States to pursue cost-effective, cost-imposing strategies.
• Given a decision to intervene, policymakers could use special warfare to avoid making commitments beyond U.S. interests.
• Special warfare's small-footprint approach can be more fiscally and politically sustainable than alternatives when underlying sources of conflict cannot be resolved in the short term.

Special Warfare Command

...As Well as Risks

• A U.S. partner may have core objectives that conflict with those of the United States.
• The opponent's level of capability and operational tempo relative to the partner's may render special warfare solutions ineffective within the required time horizon.
• Some partners may behave in ways that transgress America's normative standards and undermine their own sources of legitimacy.
• If special warfare campaigns are not carefully integrated into a holistic U.S. policy toward the targeted country, U.S. efforts can either turn into direct conflict or become out of balance.
• The global proliferation of information technology erodes the ability to keep covert activities covert, which can place the secrecy of operations at risk.

Authors Identified Eight Campaign Types That Might Help Address Current Strategic Challenges

• Hybrid guerrilla warfare in the defense.
• Support to conventional power projection.
• Support to distant blockade.
• Covert foreign internal defense for eliminating weapons of mass destruction.
• Counterproliferation against a global network.
• Foreign internal defense in a fractured state.
• Building a regional security exporter.
• Countergenocide unconventional warfare.

Recommendation

• When the United States seeks to achieve its goals through special warfare, it will require a different conceptual model to design and conduct campaigns than what it is accustomed to. Special warfare is not, in military parlance, purely a shaping effort, which implies either an effort to prevent or set the conditions for success in conflict. Nor is it purely a supporting effort to conventional campaigns. It is a way of achieving strategic goals, and given recent trends in security threats to the United States and its interests, it may often be the most appropriate way of doing so. As a result, the U.S. national security community needs to begin thinking seriously about special warfare capabilities, authorities, and options in strategic and operational planning. RAND authors recommend that DoD strengthen its special warfare planning capacity and culture, conduct institutional reforms to facilitate unified action among relevant U.S. government agencies, and place greater emphasis on developing capabilities required to prevail in the human domain.

This report is based on a project sponsored by LTG Charles T. Cleveland, commanding general of U.S. Army Special Operations Command. The research was conducted within RAND Arroyo Center's Strategy and Resources Program. RAND Arroyo Center, part of the RAND Corporation, is a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the United States Army.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

Document Details

• Copyright: RAND Corporation
• Availability: Web-Only
• Pages: 8
• Document Number: RR-828-A
• Year: 2014
• Series:Research Reports

Explore

Related Topics

Browse by Series

Browse by Authors

Stay Informed

RAND Policy Currents

Get weekly updates from RAND.