Redefining the Indirect Approach, Defining Special Operations Forces (SOF) Power, and the Global Networking of SOF

• Main Author: Scott Morrison
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Henley-Putnam University 2014-07-01
• Series: Journal of Strategic Security
• Subjects: Asymmetric warfare; Military affairs; Special operations forces; Stability operations; Strategy
• Online Access: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jss/vol7/iss2/7/

The current Defense Strategy assigns Special Operations Forces (SOF) to play a central role in countering terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and irregular warfare. However, there has been little published that defines the role of Special Operations alongside air, land, and sea domains. The U.S. Special Operations Community struggles to define its own theoretical concepts such as direct approach and indirect approach. The U.S. SOF circles typically define direct approach with direct action and the indirect approach with foreign internal defense or security force assistance. Military theorist Liddell Hart viewed the indirect approach as a method to orient upon, target, and upset an adversary’s equilibrium in order to plan for and direct decisive blows. Today, the SOF indirect approach is arguable more applicable due to the prevalence of non-state threats and internal conflicts. Following Hart’s definition, precision raids are among the integral components of a broader application of the indirect approach. The approach also networks U.S. government power as a force when used in concert with allies and local partners. Global networking along with balanced precision raids will exponentially increase the utility of SOF power and position it to appropriately complement all domains to tackle 21st century challenges.