Units that work with civilians often disregarded, soldiers claim.

• Author: Magnuson, Stew
• Position: ANALYSIS

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Experienced military troops who are trained to communicate with foreign audiences are crucial to winning hearts and minds in counterinsurgency operations. But these units--known as civil affairs and psychological operations teams--are neglected and underutilized, argue the authors of "United States Special Operations Command," a new book. that is sparking debate within the special operations community.

Written by two National Defense University instructors, David Tucker and Christopher J. Lamb, the book takes a detailed look at the roles and missions of special operations forces, including the less glamorous civil affairs and psychological operations, or psy-ops, teams.

One anonymous Army Reserve major who served a 10-month tour in Iraq shortly after the invasion described in the book being passed around from unit to unit. Few commanders knew what to do with his team--even those who were part of the U.S. Special Operations Command.

U.S. SOCOM oversees all civil affairs and psy-ops units.

"Working with the conventional military was not always easy," he said. "One commander ordered us to drive up and down the road with [our loud] speakers blaring so that we could get shot at and his guys could return fire. That was the last day we worked with him."

A civil affairs officer discussed the frustrations he encountered while attempting to restore electricity to the city of Kirkuk. The power plant was in good shape, but the employees were staying home because of widespread looting and fear for the safety of their families.

The commander of the U.S. Army infantry regiment in charge of the city declined to provide security to the workers' families--choosing to secure the oil fields instead.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

"Maybe they did not have the resources, but the impression they projected was more a lack of desire," said the officer.

Disputes within the Defense Department over what kind of missions special operations forces should undertake were never settled before 9/11 and six years later, debate continues, the authors said.

The book contends that SOF personnel should not be considered "elite" forces, but rather as their name suggests, "special." Their missions should consist of specialized tasks that more conventional forces are incapable of carrying out.

SOF missions are divided into two categories: "direct" and "indirect."

The direct, or "commando" side, might consist of units that hunt down and dismantle weapons of mass...