News & Briefings
Get the latest news and SOF commentary here. Your source for all news SOF since 2017.
For decades, China's cyber espionage centered on stealing intellectual property from the United States to bolster its own military and economy. But as its hackers grew more proficient at penetrating sensitive U.S. systems, these efforts moved beyond theft to positioning themselves to physically disrupt critical infrastructure.
“Economic security is national security.” This core principle, long echoed across the U.S. interagency—from the White House’s National Security Strategy to Treasury and Commerce policy directives—has gained renewed urgency as strategic competition intensifies in the Western Hemisphere. In no place is this more evident than in Latin America and the Caribbean, where economic statecraft has become the terrain of contestation.
Navy SEAL and Navy SWCC training share a foundation rooted in rigorous training, water competency and high fitness standards. Many people ask about the differences between these Navy Special Warfare programs, and while both are highly selective and physically challenging, they differ in their tactical mission and training focus.
New frontiers of strategic competition beckon for immediate special operations forces (SOF) transformation to prevail in the space domain and the polar regions. Aligned with Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict Colby Jenkins’ call to think differently and work together, this article proposes two enhanced roles for combined SOF in the competition sphere—a Space Joint Terminal Attack Controller(SJTAC) function and an emphasis on “reverse” security force assistance (SFA) for selected NATO Arctic allies who rely on the principle of “collective defense” for national security. While numerous efforts across the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command and U.S. Space Force aim to meet the “all-domain fires” demand, and Allied Arctic-focused trainingand exercises have been in place for decades, this essay offers refined proposals in both areas for SOF. While seemingly distinct, both converge in the Arctic, where NATO SOF will require on-call space-based capabilities coupled with SFA essential for High North survivability and success.
The closeout of the Global War on Terror and the contentious politics over the withdrawal from Afghanistan gave the Army every opportunity to avoid deliberate introspection about institutional performance in fulfilling the various missions assigned to it. In particular, Security Force Assistance – the training and development of foreign military forces and institutions – was widely viewed as a mission that failed writ large.
After the failure to build a sustainable Afghan military that could survive without U.S. presence, many scholars and practitioners now argue that U.S. efforts to build foreign militaries are nearly predestined to fail and should rarely, if ever, be undertaken. In Training for Victory: U.S. Special Forces Advisory Operations from El Salvador to Afghanistan, Frank Sobchak pushes back against this view, arguing that “…we have not failed because advising our allies is too hard; we’ve failed because we have never taken it seriously …Building foreign militaries is a difficult, long-term, and often thankless endeavor. But it is not impossible” (2024, 177).
No results found.
Stay Up To Date
Subscribe to Our Newsletter and Stay Up to Date with the Latest Special Operations Forces Support News and Events