A British soldier who galvanized Arab tribes in the Middle East to fight the Turks during World War I inspired the 1962 film “Lawrence of Arabia.”
Now the tale is spurring U.S. Special Operations Command officials to consider modeling its troops after T. E. Lawrence, himself — an intelligence officer whose intimate familiarity of Arabic culture allowed him to build long-term relationships with key political and military figures in the Middle East.
“We need to develop what I call the Lawrences of the world,” said Adm. Eric Olson, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. “We need Lawrences of every region, every country of the world … and we need them there for a long time,” he said at a National Defense Industrial Association conference.
Special operations forces and especially, Army Special Forces, arguably exude Lawrence-like qualities in many respects, officials said. Units are trained in specific languages and sensitized to regional cultures before they are dispatched to as many as 60 countries today to carry out missions.
But Olson’s vision confronts many challenges.
“We have a long way to go, there’s no doubt about that,” Olson said. “We don’t yet fully understand the nature of the conflicts we are in — the cultures, the societies of the areas in which we are operating. We don’t really speak the languages, or know the family histories, the tribal relationships, how business is done.”
As the United States prepares for a possible extended counterinsurgency campaign in South Asia, the skills that special operations forces contribute are critical, said Army Lt. Col. Charles Miller Jr., Afghanistan and Pakistan section chief of the planning and operations directorate at Special Operations Command Central.
“An enduring presence, one measured in patience, is the most appropriate way to engage our partners there,” said Miller.
But one of the obstacles that face special operations forces is that they already are stretched thin and are hardly in a position to take on new and expanded duties.
The Defense Department three years ago approved a 15 percent expansion of U.S. SOCOM by 2013. That would equate to 13,000 more personnel, including 3,700 troops for civil affairs and psychological operations units.
Col. Mark Lowe, commander of the 1st Special Warfare Training Group at Fort Bragg, N.C., said that the Army special operations force is on track to reach the expansion goals. But there are concerns about future recruiting efforts as the pool of eligible soldiers shrinks. Of special concern is the obesity in today’s youth, said Navy Cmdr. Ann Kubera, division chief of personnel operations at Special Operations Command. SOCOM also is seeking culturally attuned warriors who meet language proficiency criteria. “There’s a limited number of ‘SOF-able’ gene pools in the United States. When you also add requirements such as culturally attuned and language proficient, those kinds of people are even more difficult to find,” Kubera said.
The command last year partnered with the services in a pilot program that is called Military Accession Vital to the National Interest, or MAVNI. The program allows the Defense Department to track candidates who demonstrate oral proficiency in target languages and to recruit them even if they don’t hold a green card, she said.
Candidates who hope to join the Army’s Special Forces, whether recruited from the services or other programs, will face higher standards in training, said Maj. Gen. Thomas Csrnko, commander of the Army’s John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. Language and culture training will begin early in qualification courses and will be emphasized throughout an individual’s academic career. A culminating exercise will test those skills, he added.
There are other ways to bolster special operations force numbers, said Sam Miess, a retired sea-air-land (SEAL) officer who works for Concurrent Technologies Corp. There is a deep reservoir of former special operations personnel who currently work for industry and non-governmental organizations. Miess said those former operators should be asked to participate in missions such as foreign internal defense, civil affairs and information operations.
But David Litt, executive director for the Institute for Defense and Business’ Center for Stabilization and Economic Reconstruction, warned that such arrangements could create problems because former operators may work for agencies that traditionally do not see eye-to-eye with SOCOM. In the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, special operations forces have clashed with intelligence agencies. The State Department too has fought turf battles with the military over who should lead reconstruction and stability projects in the region.
Equipment shortfalls also are a critical problem, said Michael Vickers, assistant secretary of defense for special operations, low intensity conflict and interdependence capabilities.
It is a “safe bet” that the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review will address key capabilities that SOCOM requires, such as intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, rotary-wing lift, civil affairs, engineering and military police, Vickers said.
The number-one equipment gap in SOCOM is aviation, said Roger Carstens, a former Army Special Forces officer and now a military analyst at the Center for a New American Security. Special operations units are far too dependent on conventional forces for aviation support, he said at a hearing of the House Armed Services terrorism, unconventional threats and capabilities subcommittee. “We need dedicated SOF air,” said Carstens.
But SOCOM’s $6 billion budget may not be enough to fund major new equipment purchases.
“As we balance the force, we’re going to look very hard at several modernization programs,” said Vickers.
Carstens said SOCOM would benefit from a higher-profile presence at the Pentagon. The command needs representation on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he said. He also would like to see Vickers’ position elevated so that it would report directly to the secretary of defense, rather than to the undersecretary for policy.
Another issue that SOCOM leaders should tackle is to better define the missions of special operations forces, said Carstens. In current conflicts, jobs that traditionally belonged to SOCOM also are being done by conventional forces. “There is still confusion in the field as to who should be doing what,” he said.