US special operations leaders are having to do more with less and learn from the war in Ukraine

FORT LIBERTY, North Carolina – Forced to do more with less and learn from the war in Ukraine, U.S. special operations commanders are juggling adding more high-tech specialists to their teams while reducing their overall forces by about 5,000. soldiers over the next five years.

Contradictory pressures are forcing a broader restructuring of command teams, which are often deployed on high-risk counterterrorism missions and other sensitive operations around the world. The changes under consideration are being influenced by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including lessons learned by British special operations forces in that country.

The U.S. Army Special Operations Command, which is bearing the brunt of personnel cuts, is considering plans to increase the size of its Green Beret teams — typically about 12 members — to bring in people with more specialized and technical skills. One possibility would be to add computer software experts who could reprogram drones or other technical equipment in real time.

But similar changes could have repercussions on all military forces.

“A 12-person detachment could be reinforced,” said Gen. Bryan Fenton, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. He said an Air Force pilot, a Navy ship driver, a cryptologist or a cyber specialist may be needed as battlefields become more challenging and high-tech.

The United States is “drawing many lessons learned from the experience in Ukraine, particularly through the eyes of our UK special operations partners, who not only did this in their formations, but also learned very quickly that they needed other elements of their force joint,” he told the Associated Press in an interview.

For example, he said British commandos needed Royal Air Force pilots to help advise on drone operations and Royal Navy teammates “to help them understand, more than a SOF teammate.” (special operations forces), the way a ship in the Black Sea sails. .”

Most of the cuts result from the Army’s decision to reduce the size of its force by about 24,000 and restructure its troops as the U.S. transitions from counterterrorism and counterinsurgency to focusing more on large-scale combat operations. The Army has also struggled to meet recruiting goals and has had to reduce the overall size of its force.

Army Special Operations Command, which Fenton said is absorbing about 4,000 ordered cuts over the past year and a half, is looking to bring in people with high-tech skills.

“I think one of the questions is to what extent can you teach a Green Beret versus some of these specialties that are extremely technical,” said Maj. Gen. Patrick Roberson, deputy commander of the command at Fort Liberty, North Carolina. “You can teach someone how to use a drone. But then saying I want to have a software engineering program that drones, that’s something different.”

The cuts to the Army’s special operations forces have sparked some opposition in Congress, including during recent hearings on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers noted the impact at Fort Liberty. Fenton also spoke bluntly at the hearings about the growing demand for special operations forces.

He said U.S. regional commanders around the world consistently want more and that cutting forces means “we will be able to meet less of what they demand. And I think we owe our assessment to the secretary of defense as we move forward.”

For years during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the number of special operations forces and support personnel grew, especially because they were often spread across small, remote bases where they needed additional security and other logistical help. Now, Pentagon leaders say the numbers could go down a bit.

Fenton said a cut of about 2,000 special operations employees was ordered by the department about a year and a half ago, including about 750 in the Army. This was followed this year by a 3,000 cut in Army special operations. The cuts will be spread over five years.

“So the actual Army drawdown in total is almost 4,000, and the remaining 1,000 will come from the joint force, SEALs, Navy raiders and other Army units,” Fenton said.

For Roberson, the question is where to reduce Army troops. “Cuts can crystallize your focus and your vision about, okay, what’s important to me? What is the future? What I really need to have,” he said in an interview at his office in Fort Liberty.

He and other Army leaders have said that a significant percentage of special forces cuts are in positions that are already open and therefore would not affect existing personnel. Roberson estimated that at least 30% of cuts occur in open positions.

For other reductions, he said he is looking for layoffs, including among trainers and instructors. Army leaders also said psychological operations and civil affairs, both part of Army command, are facing cuts.

“At the end of 20 years of war, it’s always a good time to look back and say: OK, what did I have when this started? What I’ve learned? What did I do, what was important to me?” Roberson said.

And even if the size of all teams isn’t increased, he said the Army needs to be able to quickly augment them with specialists. In some cases, a mission may need just a few technical support members, and other times it may need six or seven, he said.

More broadly, as your strengths absorb the cuts, your training should also be altered or increased to include more technology, robotics or sensors and signals intelligence information, Roberson added. Right now, he said, his troops are trying out various options at the National Training Center in California and on the ground in Iraq and Syria.

Adaptability is key, he said, and “we have to figure out how we’re going to make the most of this.”