< Back to Current Version

U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Issues for Congress

Changes from June 9, 2005 to April 17, 2006

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Order Code RS21048 Updated June 9, 2005April 17, 2006 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Issues for Congress Andrew Feickert Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary Special Operations Forces (SOF) play a significant role in U.S. military operations and the Administration has given U.S. SOF forces greater responsibility for planning and conducting worldwide counterterrorism operations. The Department of Defense (DOD) is presently examining options for creating a dedicated Marine Corps special operations unit. A recently approved a series of retention bonuses for selected SOF noncommissioned officers (NCOs) and warrant officers is currently being offered in an attempt to keep senior SOF personnel in service longer. DOD is reportedly also considering transferring some Civil Affairs units from the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) to conventional forces. This report will be updated as events 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) has called for a 15% increase in special operations forces beginning in FY2007. Proposals to elevate the command of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and the realignment of civil affairs, psychological operations (psyops) and combat search and rescue (CSAR) functions out from under the control of the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), has raised concerns that SOF is perhaps becoming too focused on immediate versus long-term results. This report will be updated as events warrant. Background Overview. Special Operations Forces (SOF) are small, elite military units with special training and equipment that can infiltrate into hostile territory through land, sea, or air to conduct a variety of operations, many of them classified. SOF personnel undergo rigorous selection and lengthy, specialized training. By the end of FY2006, SOF is expected to grow to an end-strength of almost 53,000 personnel.1 The U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) oversees the training, doctrine, and equipping of all U.S. SOF units. Operations in the Global War on Terror. SOF forces continue to operate in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are actively pursuing key insurgents. Approximately 1,000 SOF troops — primarily from Europe — will reportedly train African troops from Senegal, Niger, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Algeria, and Tunisia during June 2005 in a variety of military skills that can be used in counterterror and counterinsurgency 1 2005 Annual Report, United States Special Operations Command, p. 17. Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress CRS-2 operations.2 U.S. Naval Special Forces have also recently conducted small-scale counterterrorism training exercises with Indonesian forces.3 U.S. SOF continue their involvement in the Philippines and Colombia where their role is strictly limited to training the armed forces of those respective countries in counterterror and counterinsurgency tactics. SOF Enhancements. As a result of DOD transformation initiatives and lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq, SOF is undergoing a number of enhancements in personnel, organization, and equipment. During the next three to four years, two additional SEAL teams will be added to the existing five teams; in 2008 the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) plans to add 550 special forces soldiers to its active duty Operational Detachment-Alphas (A Teams)4 and 192 to National Guard A Teams.5 The Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) is also planning to add additional combat controller and combat aviation advisor personnel.6 U.S. Special Operations Command is also reportedly planning on adding two active duty Civil Affairs (CA) companies, two Reserve Civil Affairs (CA) battalions, and two active duty Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) companies to SOCOM over the next few years.7 USASOC also plans to form a new MH-47 Chinook battalion and AFSOC plans to convert four C-130H Hercules transport aircraft into AC-130U gun ships.8 AFSOC reportedly anticipates replacing 34 MH-43 Super Stallion heavy lift helicopters with about 50 CV-22 tilt-rotor Osprey aircraft sometime in FY2009.9 Authority for Planning Operations. In January 2003 DOD gave USSOCOM greater responsibility for planning and directing worldwide counterterrorism operations. Instead of being primarily a supporting command that provides forces to other regional U.S. commanders, USSOCOM will more often be a supported command capable of planning and conducting operations in its own right.10 To facilitate this new authority, 2 Charlie Coon, “U.S. Special Ops Troops Preparing to Train Foreign Soldiers in Africa,” European Stars and Stripes, May 15, 2005. 3 “U.S. Navy SEALS in Indonesia Anti-Terrorism Drill,” Reuters.com, May 9, 2005. 4 An A Team consists of twelve multi-skilled Army SOF soldiers and is the basic operating unit for Army Special Forces (“Green Berets”). 5 Joshua Kucera, “U.S. Boosts Special Forces to Meet Iraqi Challenge,” Jane’s Defence Weekly, Feb. 18, 2004. 6 Ibid. 7 Hearing of the Terrorism Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, FY2005 National Defense Appropriations Act, Mar. 11, 2004, p. 14. 8 Joshua Kucera, op.cit. 9 Ibid. 10 Jefferson Morris, “SOCOM Changing From ‘Supporting’ To ‘Supported’ Command, Official Says,” Aerospace Daily, Apr. 2, 3003; Rowan Scarborough, “‘Special Ops’ Gets OK To Initiate Its Own Missions,” Washington Times, Jan. 8, 2003, p. 8; Rowan Scarborough, “Rumsfeld Bolsters Special Forces,” Washington Times, Jan. 6, 2003, p. 1. CRS-3 USSOCOM reportedly reorganized its headquarters to better conduct collaborative planning with DOD, the Intelligence Community, and various government agencies.11 Command Structures. Congress in 1986 expressed concern for the status of SOF The U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) oversees the training, doctrine, and equipping of all U.S. SOF units. Command Structures. In 1986 Congress (P.L. 99-661) expressed concern for the status of SOF within overall U.S. defense planning and passed measures to strengthen its position. These actions included the establishment of USSOCOM as a new unified command. USSOCOM is headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, FL. The Commander Commander of USSOCOM is a four-star officer who may be from any service. Commander, USSOCOM reports directly to the Secretary of Defense, although an Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC) provides immediate civilian oversight over many USSOCOM activities. Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress CRS-2 Army Special Operations Forces.121 U.S. Army SOF (ARSOF) include 26,000 soldiers from the Active Army, National Guard, and Army Reserve who are organized into Special Forces units, Ranger units, special operations aviation units, civil affairs units, psychological operations units, and special operations support units. ARSOF Headquarters and other resources, such as the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, are located at Fort Bragg, NC. Five active Special Forces Groups (Airborne) are stationed at Fort Bragg and at Fort Lewis, WA, Fort Campbell, KY, and Fort Carson, CO. Special Forces soldiers — also known as the Green Berets — are trained in various skills, including foreign languages, that allow teams to operate independently in designated regions of the world. Two Army National Guard SF groups are headquartered in Utah and Alabama. An elite airborne light infantry unit, the 75th Ranger Regiment, is headquartered at Fort Benning, GA and consists of three battalions specializing in direct action operations. Army special operations aviation units, including the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) at Fort Campbell, KY, feature pilots trained to fly the most sophisticated Army rotary-wing aircraft in the harshest environments, day or night, and in adverse weather. The most frequently deployed SOF assets are civil affairs (CA) units, which provide experts in every area of civil government to help administer civilian affairs in the theater. The 96th Civil Affairs Battalion (Airborne) is the only active CA unit; all other CA units reside in four Army Reserve Civil Affairs Commands located in Pensacola, FL, Mountain View, CA, Riverdale, MD, and Bronx, NY. Psychological operations units disseminate information to large foreign audiences through mass media. The 4th Psychological active duty 4th Psychological Operations Group (Airborne) is stationed at Fort Bragg, and two Army Reserve groups are located in Cleveland, OH, and at Moffett Federal Airfield, CA. Finally, Fort Bragg is also home to specialized supporting units and Special Mission Units that support a variety of ARSOF and joint missions. 11 Harold Kennedy, “SOCOM Creates New Hub for Fighting War on Terror,” National Defense, Feb. 2004. 12 Information in this section was taken from General Bryan Brown, “U.S. Army Special Operations: Focusing on People — Humans are More Important than Hardware,” Army, Oct. 2001, pp. 157-162. CRS-4 Air Force Special Operations Forces.13 Air Force Special Operations Forces.2 The Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) includes about 10,000 active and reserve personnel, of which about 22% are stationed overseas. AFSOC is headquartered at Hurlburt Field, FL, which is also the home of most of AFSOC’s active units, including the 16th Special Operations Wing, the 720th Special Tactics Group, the 18th Flight Test Squadron, and the U.S. Air Force Special Operations School. The 352nd Special Operations Group is at RAF Mildenhall, England, and the 353rd Special Operations Group, is at Kadena Air Base, Japan. Reserve AFSOC components include the 193rd Special Operations Wing, Air National Guard stationed at Harrisburg, PA, the 280th Combat Communications Squadron, Air National Guard stationed at Dothan, AL, and the 919th Special Operations Wing, Air Force Reserve stationed at Duke Field, FL. AFSOC’s three active-duty flying units are composed of more than 100 fixed and rotary-wing aircraft. The V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, a Marine Corps priority, is also being developed for AFSOC. If procured, SOF CV-22s will conduct long-range vertical takeoff and landing infiltration, exfiltration, and resupply missions. 1 Information in this section was taken from General Bryan Brown, “U.S. Army Special Operations: Focusing on People — Humans are More Important than Hardware,” Army, Oct. 2001, pp. 157-162. 2 For additional information on Air Force SOF units, see Robert Wall, “Conflict Could Test Special Ops Improvements,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, Oct. 1, 2001, p. 30. CRS-3 Special Operations Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Squadron.3 The Air Force is currently standing up a special operations Predator UAV squadron at Indian Springs Auxiliary Field, NV. The squadron will initially consist of 24 MQ-1 aircraft but could eventually add the larger MQ-9 Predator B when the aircraft completes development. The Air Force has not announced a specific timetable for the completion of the stand up of the AFSOC Predator squadron. The Air Force was formally tasked to stand up this squadron in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review.4 Naval Special Operations Forces.5 Naval Special Operations Forces.14 The Naval Special Warfare Command (NSWC) is located in Coronado, CA. The major operational components of NSWC include Naval Special Warfare Groups 1 and 3 stationed in San Diego, CA, and Naval Special Warfare Groups 2 and 4 in Norfolk, VA. These components deploy SEAL Teams, SEAL Delivery Vehicle Teams, and Special Boat Teams world wideworldwide to meet the training, exercise, contingency and wartime requirements of theater commanders. NSWC has approximately 5,400 total active-duty personnel — including 2,450 SEALs and 600 Special Warfare Combatant-craft Crewmen (SWCC) — as well as a 1,200-person reserve component of approximately 325 SEALs, 125 SWCC and 775 support personnel. SEALs are considered the best-trained combat swimmers in the world, and can be deployed covertly from submarines or from sea-based aircraft. Issues for Congress Creation of Marine Special Operations Forces. The Marine Corps will reportedly form a new organization, tentatively named the Foreign Military Training Unit (FMTU), to support USSOCOM and regional commanders in the training of regional militaries.15 The Marines have been involved in a number of training missions in recent years in places such as Chad, Niger, and the former Soviet republic of Georgia and these new units will be built in partnership with Army SOF and the U.S. Special Operations Training Command. According to reports, there will be 24 FMTU teams, consisting of 13 members each, who will receive special training in foreign languages and cultures, and these teams 13 For additional information on Air Force SOF units, see Robert Wall, “Conflict Could Test Special Ops Improvements,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, Oct. 1, 2001, p. 30. 14 Information in this section is from the U.S. Naval Special Warfare Command’s Official website, [http://www.navsoc.navy.mil/navsoc_missions.asp], accessed on May 26, 2005. 15 Information in this section is from Jon R. Anderson, “Marine Corps Creating Training Unit to Aid Local Militaries in Foreign Hot Spots,” Stars and Stripes, Feb. 25, 2005; “Marine Corps to Support U.S. SOCOM in Training Foreign Militaries,” Inside the Navy, Apr. 25, 2005; and Bradley Graham, “Larger Special Operations Role Being Urged on Marines,” Washington Post, May 8, 2005. CRS-5 will be aligned to four regions: the Middle East, Europe, the Pacific, and Latin America. The Marines reportedly plan to have the FMTU fully operational by the end of 2005. DOD, USSOCOM, and the Marines are reportedly considering options for developing a Marine unit of approximately 3,000 Marines to be permanently assigned to USSOCOM to participate in combat missions in support of the war on terror.16 According to reports, DOD, USSOCOM, and Marine Corps leadership have met to discuss this proposal on several occasions, but a decision has yet to be reached. If such a unit is agreed upon, some argue that by taking 3,000 or so of the Marine Corp’s best Marines away permanently to form this unit, that the Marines Corps could suffer an appreciable loss of leadership which could have operational ramifications for conventional Marine forces. If such a course of action is decided upon, Congress might act to review how such a proposal might impact Marine Corps conventional combat forces, particularly if this proposed Marine Corps special operations unit is non-commissioned officer (NCO) and junior officer-heavy — as are Army SOF A-Detachments and SEAL Platoons. Such a loss of some of the Marine’s best leadership could have a more pronounced impact on the smaller Marine Corps than it does on the much larger Army and Navy. SOF Retention Bonuses and Recruiting. In response to the growing number of senior special operations personnel leaving the service for higher paying security jobs in the private sector, DOD reportedly approved a series of retention bonuses aimed at senior sergeants, petty officers, and warrant officers — offering up to a $150,000 bonus if they sign up for an additional six years of service.17 Shorter service extensions also are eligible for bonuses, down to $8,000 for one year. Reportedly, about 1,500 special operations personnel qualify for these bonuses. In addition, about 7,000 mid-level special operations personnel will get an additional $375 a month in pay and senior operators with 25 years or more of experience will get $750 a month more. According to USSOCOM, U.S. Army Special Forces recruiting exceeded its FY 04 recruiting goal of 1,600 soldiers by recruiting 1,628 soldiers.18 USSOCOM also reported that they were ahead of their recruiting schedule for the first quarter of FY2005.19 Although recruiting in FY2004 exceeded its goals, U.S. Army Special Forces Groups are reportedly operating under the authorized strength, allegedly due to high attrition rates in the lengthy and demanding Special Forces Qualification Course and also because of senior special operations forces personnel leaving the Army for higher paying civilian 16 Information in this section is from Bradley Graham, “Larger Special Operations Role Being Urged on Marines, Washington Post, May 8, 2005 and Jason Sherman, “Rumsfeld Eyes Marines to Boost Commando Ranks for Terror War,” InsideDefense.com, May 19, 2005.. 17 Information in this section is taken from Thom Shanker, “Pentagon Sets Bonuses to Retain Members of Special Operations,” New York Times, Feb. 6, 2005 and Associated Press, “Incentives Offered to Retain Special Forces,” Los Angeles Times, Feb. 5, 2005. 18 U.S. Army Special Operations Command, “Special Forces Recruiting Exceeds Year-End Goals,” U.S. Army Special Operations Command News Service, Jan. 7, 2005. 19 Ibid. CRS-6 jobs.20 Some suggest, however, that private sector demand for experienced SOF personnel from all services may be softening some after the initial surge of hiring in 2003-2004.21 Even if this is indeed the case, USSOCOM personnel experts maintain that it is still too early to tell if these new bonuses will have an impact on retention.22 It is possible that Congress may explore the effectiveness of this new retention program and continuing efforts to recruit and train new special operations personnel. Such an examination could possibly prove useful in potential deliberations regarding expanding the size of special forces, as some in Congress have suggested. Civil Affairs Units Transferred to Conventional Forces. According to a report, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is considering shifting Army Civil Affairs units from under USSOCOM to the conventional Army.23 The reported rationale behind this possible move is to improve the Army’s security and stabilization efforts which have been criticized by some as ineffective, largely because conventional Army commanders do not understand how best to employ USSOCOM’s civil affairs units. Another result of this move is that it would permit USSOCOM to focus more exclusively on direct action missions designed to kill or capture terrorists. The Army reportedly opposes this proposal, stating that it would “undermine the systems and relationships carefully developed between the Army and USSOCOM since the mid-1980s,” and “would not be wise, given our involvement in current operations and the Global War on Terrorism.” Some civil affairs officers suggest, however, that their relationship with special operations forces has never been particularly comfortable and that they might fit in better with conventional forces. Congress might act to review the merits and drawbacks of this proposal. While such a move might, over time, improve the Army’s ability to conduct security and stabilization operation, some suggest that civil affairs units enjoy greater freedom of action and better funding under USSOCOM which some argue makes them ultimately more effective. 20 Information in this paragraph is taken from Rowan Scarborough, “Green Berets’ Numbers Fall Short,” Washington Times, Feb. 8, 2005, p. 1. 21 Richard Lardner, “Senior Soldiers in Special Ops Being Lured Off,” Tampa Tribune, Mar. 21, 2005. 22 23 Ibid. Information in this paragraph is taken from Thomas Ricks, “Army Contests Rumsfeld’ Bid on Occupation,” Washington Post, Jan. 16, 2005, p. 6 Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC).6 On November 1, 2005, DOD announced the creation of the Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC) as a component of USSOCOM. MARSOC will consist of three subordinate units — the Marine Special Operations Regiment, the Foreign Military Training Unit, and the Special Operations Support Group — totaling approximately 2,600 Marines. MARSOC Headquarters, the Foreign Military Training Unit, and the Special Operations Support Group will be stationed at Camp Lejeune, NC. The Marine Special Operations Regiment will also have its headquarters at Camp Lejeune and will have an element stationed at Camp Pendleton, CA. An activation date for MARSOC and its subordinate units has not yet been determined but MARSOC officials will reportedly deploy six Foreign Military Training Units and one special operations company this summer.7 USSOCOM and the Marine Corps were formally tasked to stand up MARSOC in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR).8 3 Information in this section is from Bruce Rolfsen, “Spec Ops Predators,” Armed Forces Journal, July 2005, pp. 18-19. 4 Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense review Report, February 6, 2006, p. 5. 5 Information in this section is from the U.S. Naval Special Warfare Command’s Official website, [https://www.navsoc.navy.mil/], accessed on May 26, 2005. 6 Information in this section is taken from DOD Press Release No. 1127-05, dated Nov. 1, 2005, Subject: Secretary of Defense Approves Marine Special Operations Command; Donna Miles, “Marine Corps to Join U.S. Special Operations Command,” American Forces Press Service, Nov. 1, 2005; and Christian Lowe, “U.S. Marine Corps to Create Special Operations Unit,” Defense News, Nov. 1, 2005. 7 Copley News Service, “Marine Corps Force Deploys in Summer,” San Diego Union Tribune, March 16, 2006. 8 Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p. 5. CRS-4 Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). According to DOD, the JSOC is “a joint headquarters designed to study special operations requirements and techniques; ensure interoperability and equipment standardization; plan and conduct joint special operations exercises and training; and develop joint special operations tactics.”9 While not official acknowledged by DOD or USSOCOM, JSOC, which is headquartered at Pope Air Force Base in North Carolina, is widely believed to command and control what are described as the military’s three special missions units - the Army’s Delta Force , the Navy’s SEAL Team Six, a joint unit allegedly designed to conduct clandestine operations, as well as the 75th Ranger Regiment, the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment and the Air Force’s 24th Special Tactics Squadron.10 JSOC’s primary mission is believed to be identifying and destroying terrorists and terror cells worldwide. Current Topics Global War on Terror. Special operations forces continue to operate in Iraq and Afghanistan where they are actively pursuing key insurgents. U.S. SOF continue their involvement in the Philippines and Colombia where their role is strictly limited to training the armed forces of those respective countries in counterterror and counterinsurgency tactics. U.S. SOF are also involved in operations in the Horn of Africa region as part of Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA) where the focus of U.S. activities is training regional militaries. Quadrennial Defense Review and Proposed SOF Expansion. In addition to standing up an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle squadron and the Marine Corps Special Operations Command, the 2006 QDR calls for the following initiatives to begin in FY2007: ! An overall increase of SOF by 15%; ! Increase in the number of Army Special Forces battalions by one- third; ! An increase in SEAL team manning and the development of a riverine warfare capability; and ! Expansion of Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs units by 3, 700 personnel - a 33% increase.11 According to analysts, such a proposed expansion of Army SOF would lead to an increase from 15 to 20 active duty battalions, creating approximately 90 additional ATeams.12 9 USSOCOM Website [http://www.socom.mil/components/components.htm], accessed April 4, 2006. 10 Sean D. Naylor, “JSOC to Become Three-Star Command,” Army Times, February 13, 2006. 11 Ibid. 12 Reuters, “Pentagon Plans Major Increase in Special Forces,” New York Times on the Web, (continued...) CRS-5 Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) to Become a Three-Star Reports suggest that DOD will accept an independent report’s Command.13 recommendation to make the commander of JSOC a three-star (Lieutenant General or Vice Admiral) versus its current two-star (Major General or Rear Admiral (Upper Half)) billet. The report was allegedly commissioned by the Secretary of Defense in October 2005 after meeting with USSOCOM leadership and then reportedly expressing a “lack of confidence” in USSOCOM’s assessment of its capabilities, having been told by USSOCOM officials that despite a substantial commitment of funds, that USSOCOM’s capabilities were “declining.” An additional recommendation from the independent committee chaired by retired Army General Wayne Downing (a former USSOCOM and JSOC commander) to temporarily remove JSOC from USSOCOM and have it report directly to the Secretary of Defense was reportedly opposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and therefore not implemented. Civil Affairs/Psychological Operations Shifted out of USSOCOM.14 One report suggests that the majority of Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations forces will be shifted from USSOCOM to the conventional Army. This reorganization, under discussion for more than a year, was reportedly ordered by the Secretary of Defense and plans for implementing this change are to be presented to him by this Spring. Under this new arrangement, reserve component civil affairs and psyops units will have an association with active Army brigade combat teams for training and deployment purposes. USSOCOM will retain active duty civil affairs and psychological operations units under its command. Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) to Move to Air Combat Command.15 According to one report, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General T. Michael Moseley, has decided to move the Air Force’s HC-130 and HH-60 rescue aircraft, along with its rescue officers and pararescue troops - also known as PJs - from the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) to the Air Combat Command (ACC). This move, supposedly based on lessons learned from Afghanistan and Iraq, is intended speed the ability to dispatch aircraft and rescue specialists to search for and retrieve downed air crews. General Moseley suggested that combat search and rescue, under previous command arrangements, was not always on the top of USSOCOM’s list of priorities and that CSAR assets were often used on SOF-type missions and not always available to conduct search and rescue operations. 12 (...continued) January 24, 2006. 13 Information in this section is from Sean D. Naylor’s, “JSOC to Become Three-Star Command,” Army Times, February 13, 2006 and SpecOps Beset by Command Confusion, Army Times, March 3, 2006. 14 Information in this section is from Joshua Kucera, “Civil Affairs, Psyops Shift Away from SOCOM,” Jane’s Defense Weekly, March 22, 2006. 15 Information in this section is from John T. Bennett, “Moseley: Move to ACC Will Elevate CSAR to “Primary Mission’ Status,” InsideDefense.com, February 27, 2006. CRS-6 Issues for Congress Is QDR-Mandated SOF Growth Achieveable? Congress may decide to examine the feasability of the QDR-mandated 15% increase in SOF forces, perhaps focusing on the proposed growth of Army Special Forces, Navy SEALs, and psychological warfare and civil affairs personnel. Volunteers for Army Special Forces and Navy SEALs, in particular, are subjected to rigorous assessment and selection regimens that traditionally yield only a handful of men selected to serve in these units around a 20% pass rate in the case of SEAL Basic Underwater Demolition (BUD) Training.16 In order to meet a growing requirement, USSOCOM has “overhauled” its accession schools, increasing the number of training cadre and number of classes to increase candidate throughput while allegedly “maintaining the same high standards.”17 USSOCOM’s goal for producing 750 enlisted Green Beret graduates per year starting in FY2006 was exceeded a year early as in FY2005, 790 new enlisted Green Berets successfully completed assessment and qualification training. USSOCOM notes that for the first few years of this initiative, additional SOF soldiers will be used to fill existing vacancies in Army Special Forces units but that USSOCOM is “now postured for additional future growth.”18 While USSOCOM may be graduating additional operators from its qualification courses, working against this increase is the continued attrition of SOF personnel due to retirement as well as those who voluntarily separate from the service. While retention is a significant focus for USSOCOM, little is known about how many SOF personnel of all ranks are leaving the service and a significant increase in these numbers could preclude any meaningful growth for USSOCOM forces. JSOC’s Increasing Role and Loss of Civil Affairs, Psyops, and Combat Search and Rescue Capabilities. Congress might act to review the implications of JSOC’s increasing role in special operations as well as the loss of civil affairs, psyops, and combat search and rescue capabilities. While proponents suggest that these and other changes will better enable USSOCOM to focus on intelligence gathering and direct action missions against individual terrorists and terror cells, others are concerned that by marginalizing the role of civil affairs, psyops, and training foreign militaries, that USSOCOM may not be optimally suited for fighting both the “long war” on terror as well as the insurgency in Iraq. Some USSOCOM officials suggest that while direct action missions may “show effect immediately” that they can be detrimental in an insurgency, whereas civil affairs, psyops and special forces participating in foreign internal defense, information operations, and civil-military operations historically tend to be more effective in long-running counterinsurgency campaigns.19 16 United States Special Operations Command, Posture Statement 2006, p. 15. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Sean Naylor, “More Than Door Kickers,” Armed Forces Journal, April 7, 2006.