Special Operations Forces: From Reaction to Preemption

Since the events of 11 September 2001, the use of Special Operations Forces (SOF) has significantly changed. Prior to this, Counterterrorism (CT) was primarily reactive in nature, reflecting the overall view of terrorism as a law enforcement matter. The events of 11 September provided a paradigm shift that changed the view of terrorism to an act of war and enabled a doctrine of preemption. This change has profound implications for the Special Operations Command (SOCOM), which is tasked as the lead military agency in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). Global deployments of SOF reflect a strategy aimed at both working with local populations and winning ‘hearts and minds’ through Unconventional Warfare (UW) and Foreign Internal Defense (FID), and the desire to conduct aggressive Direct Action (DA) missions. Aggressive use of SOF is referred to as black or high-end operations while missions centered on foreign populations are considered white or low-end. This thesis advocates the continued use of both white and black SOF. Criticisms, be they moral, legal, political, or ideological, ultimately fall short when compared to the threat of transnational terrorists and the proven value of SOF units in current deployments in the GWOT. Future SOF missions are likely to be small in scale and involve close cooperation with the CIA. The future of SOF in CT is uncertain. Future political and military leaders could prove to reverse the present use of SOF. However, given the current security environment marked by asymmetric threats the need for SOF various skills will likely continue.

Name thesis:degree_name

Master of Science in Defense and Strategic Studies

Level thesis:degree_level

Masters

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Defense and Strategic Studies

Year

2005

Author dc:creator

• Johnson, Matthew P.

Contributors dc:contributor

• C. Walton

• Special Operations Forces
• global war on terrorism
• preemption
• counterterrorism
• intelligence
• Defense and Security Studies

Statement dc:rights

• © Matthew P. Johnson

Repository record dc:identifier

https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses/1401

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:bearworks.missouristate.edu:theses-2402