Special Operations Forces in Great Power Competition:
A Policy Research Agenda for Operational Relevance and Value-Added Capability
Time to Read: 14 minutes
For almost two decades, defence policy discussions on the employment of special operations forces (SOF) have focused on their role in the irregular fight typified by places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and regions farther afield. More to the point, SOF has been the proverbial “force of choice”
for the type of conflict countries like Canada and the United States found themselves embroiled in during the opening two decades of the 21st Century.[ii] However, the situation is changing.
More precisely, what was old is new again. The United States is stepping back from global leadership, China is testing the waters (every pun intended) and Russia is executing a continuous spoiler role in international politics. These features combine to create a condition of renewed competition between powerful countries; what is now being called ‘great power competition’.[iii] Given this shift, does SOF still enjoy the central role it did during the opening decades of the 21st Century? What considerations are needed to adapt SOF employment concepts to these new realities?
Disentangling Warfare Terms: Unconventional, Irregular, or both?
History’s most recent analogy for great power competition is the Cold War and during that period, unconventional warfare (UW) and irregular warfare (IW) were integral features of great power activities. If history is any indication, UW and IW will continue to feature heavily in the decades to come. Despite their persistence, actually defining such terms has proven difficult. Indeed, simply knowing it when you see it – as postulated in a 2012 article in Small Wars Journal – is unhelpful. [iv] Put simply, they are confused concepts in need of clarification. From a doctrinal standpoint, Canada has not officially defined either concept. Neither term appears in the capstone doctrinal publication Canadian Military Doctrine, nor do they appear in Operations or in CANSOFCOM’s latest publication Beyond the Horizon. Moreover, there is no reference to either term in operational-level Army doctrine. Recent services papers from the Canadian Forces College have in fact leaned on US military definitions when these topics arose.
https://www.thekcis.org/publications/insight-12#:~:text=%5Bix%5D%20Within%20this%20setting%2C%20national%20SOF%20often%20represent,IW%20capabilities%20for%20engaging%20in%20great%20power%20competition.
