Title: Strengthening the Relationship Between Embassies and U.S. Special Operations Forces--Part 1, The Current Environment.

• Author: Wilbur, Carter

Text:

The release of the National Security Strategy (NSS) [i] in 2017 and related National Defense Strategy (NDS) [ii] in 2018 shifted the United States' strategic focus to what has become known as Great Power Competition (GPC). These strategies acknowledge that the almost 20-year long fight against violent extremist organizations (VEOs) will continue, but add the need to address emerging and enduring threats from near-peer competitors such as Russia and China, and those approaching that status, such as Iran and North Korea. To address these authoritarian competitors requires the seamless integration of all aspects of U.S. power. Specifically, this article seeks to examine the current status of the relationship between U.S. embassies and U.S. Special Operations Forces (USSOF), while Part 2 will propose some specific ways to improve that working relationship.

According to Congressional testimony in 2017 by then-U.S. Special Operations Commander Gen. Raymond Thomas, USSOF forces deployed to 149 countries that year. The USSOF relationship with the U.S. embassies in the countries where USSOF units deploy is generally good, but what worked in the counter-terrorism (CT) fight in the post-9/11 world is not the best approach to succeed in the great power competition we face now and in the future. This new look at threats from competitors like China and Russia presents an opportunity to reexamine and reimagine the USSOF-embassy relationship to make it an even stronger, more effective, and truly coordinated partnership.

While organizational differences between embassies and USSOF formations range from the degree of resources available to them (USSOF draws from the much larger DOD pool of resources) to the flatter structure of embassies compared to military hierarchies, both are working to achieve U.S. foreign policy and security objectives. Each organization brings its respective culture, tools, experiences, legal authorities, funding streams (with respective restrictions), levels of risk tolerance, and approaches to unique problem sets, but it is worth repeating that both are working to achieve the same top-level U.S. goals as set out in the National Security and Defense Strategies. Too often, however, these efforts are not as fully integrated as they could be. The reasons vary, but include an overly narrow mission focus, difficulties in communicating between organizations, and even organizational reluctances to fully share information. When deep integration between embassies and USSOF units is achieved, it is usually personality driven, often drawing from a civilian agency's Foreign Service Officer who has a prior military service background, rather than from institutional level coordination[iii]. Working more closely together will help each organization achieve both its objectives and broader U.S. goals.

USSOF in Context

USSOF, by doctrine, has a role in each of the different phases of military...