Civils Affairs Role in the SOCOM Enterprise

Introduction 

Arguably, among the most critical issues confronting the United States’ military is the proliferation of insurgent entities such as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the Taliban, and Al-Qaida (Banfield & Bleakley, 2012). These organizations' vicious techniques jeopardize political stability in the Middle East, the authority of U.S. efforts in Iraq, and international security. To bring efficiency into the military operations is such frontiers; the U.S Special Operations Command (SOCOM) developed the Civil Affairs (CA) element (Moiser, 2017). The personnel working in the CA units provide back up for military commanders by collaborating with government authorities and civilian populations in the regions they are operating to counter irregular threats. Often, the CA operators identify and provide essential supplies required by the native population during military campaigns and disaster situations (Moiser, 2017). Because special operations soldiers lack requisite knowledge on the local terrain , the teams are tasked with aligning operational priorities to identified targets. With the rapidly changing environment, special operations forces (SOFs) are compelled to remain flexible in adopting tactics that would refine their fundamental communication, combat, and survival competencies; while improving their capacity to partner and build mutually beneficial relationships with local communities. The ultimate objective of Civil Affairs elements is to support military chiefs, ambassadors, and host jurisdictions to address their security and diplomatic issues ( Olson, 2010). This paper aims to analyze the various roles of the Civil Affairs in utilizing special operations capabilities to neutralize asymmetrical threats. 

The Three Core Competencies of Civil Affairs 

The Civil Authority (CA) has three key competencies, with each having specific roles. According to Banfield and Bleakley (2012), these capabilities are espoused within the unit’s function in designing and executing military operations. The CA tasks are organized under each competency, entailing structuring human resources, information, and procedures into actionable capacities to accomplish the set objectives. 

The following are the core competencies and their corresponding functions: 

The Civil Affairs Activities (CAA) Competency 

Civil Reconnaissance 

Civil reconnaissance entails the verification or denial of threat-related presumptions by scouts within the military forces. These individuals are specially trained to support mission commanders in determining enemy combatants' capabilities while assessing the impact of terrain on mobility and warfare tactics. As White (1996) claims, the reconnaissance teams' role is straightforward but vital to the military chiefs’ decision-making processes. Today, modern surveillance units are described as human lookouts that are inspired in information gathering rather than the conventional notion that they are mere database handlers ( White, 1996). 

Concerning their role in addressing irregular threats such as terrorist groups and rogue nations, Civil Reconnaissance is considered a critical element in contemporary warfare. According to Walton (2012) , technological innovations and other operating environment patterns continue to make such threats deadlier and capable of generating extensive damage. Most security experts affirm that the future of U.S. national security will be assured by its military’s ability to respond to these asymmetrical threats vigorously ( White, 1996) . Similarly, the efficiency of hybrid warfare using the CA branch of U.S forces is shaped by its combination of various aspects of the socio-political operational arena. As the military’s only legionnaires in understanding warfare geography, the reconnaissance team’s expertise allows them to identify and effectively respond to existing threats. Since a military chief typically allocates a surveillance objective to the recon teams based on priority information and their abilities, the CRTs must be primed to counter unforeseen challenges. As White (1996) declares, this entails being pragmatic regarding the terrain and population density in their operation area. Additionally, the CRTs' techniques and training should optimize their potential in field assignments. 

Because of military operations' fluid nature, the current configuration of reconnaissance asset teams is flexible and integrated ( Regulation, 2004) . When evaluating the possibility of these missions' success, population density considerations are critical because some areas need more personnel than others. Based on the supported command’s requirements, CRTs also maintain the freedom to integrate complementary skills into their workflows so long as these extra capabilities do not sidetrack them from the civil reconnaissance mission ( White, 1996) Proper training that incorporates modern surveillance technology is the primary way of ensuring maximally efficient CRTs. As CA’s tactical team, force protection for the combat forces is factored to mitigate enemy ambush situations. Focus on this aspect during drills is refined by cross-training with expeditionary troops and other Special Forces units ( White, 1996) . As reconnaissance assets, civilian recon teams are better placed to deploy drone technology to support the overall mission objectives. While there is no alternative for frontal interface regarding human engagement, aerial surveillance technology is suitable for areas with dense forest covers. As Olson (2010) suggests, drone technology is also integral from a force protection viewpoint, enabling CRTs to ascertain strategic routes' safety. 

Civil Engagement 

Civil engagement entails collaborative efforts made by the CA with local authorities and civil populations to increase the missions' success rate. Moiser (2017) contends that for this to be effectively achieved, the military personnel seek to understand the communities and the warfare theatre, including the underlying causes of conflicts. Since asymmetrical threats are not entirely military predicaments, some of the responses require subtle approaches. Hence, they are more likely to need long-term civil engagement to win the war. In cases where U.S military intervention is necessary, such as in Iraq and Vietnam, the CA embraced a cooperative approach to understand, design, and adjusts in collaboration with other agencies and partners at the host nation. The “winning hearts and minds” concept stresses the need for active civilian engagement to magnify the competitive space of the armed forces. According to Moiser (2017, the engagement efforts seek to protect U.S. interests and daunt conflict overseas. The civil affairs forces are the main catalysts for military-to-civil engagements in conjunction with international organizations (IGOs) and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). 

Through civil engagement competency, the CA offers both the army and civilian leaders an expanded situational awareness of different operational issues. The acquired insight into the pertinent civil factors is used to design military operations and support future security collaboration efforts in countering irregular threats (Regulation, 2004). Furthermore, it should be used in identifying the existing resources needed for contingency operations. Notably, civil engagement along the conflict resolution spectrum should be used in aiding commanders with the thorough incorporation of civilian partners and capabilities to warrant a unified effort and synchronized action. 

The military campaign against ISIS in Syria failed to deliver a satisfactory outcome because requisite trust-building and a civilian partnership were not created in advance (Moiser, 2017). The situation in Syria embodies the complexity of modern warfare against unconventional enemies. In such environments, civil-military relations become strained, and hostility from the local population may hamper the armed forces' strategic action. Such circumstances highlight the necessity of timely collaboration with all stakeholders to facilitate a smooth military campaign that effectively utilizes resources. Therefore, the CA should understand the interests of the Department of Defense (DOD) and plan early on to involve civilian entities with diverse cultures and interests in the mission. According to Banfield and Bleakley (2012), including civilian counterparts in the strategy planning requires the CA to manage expectations, corroborate the various interests, and unify all actions. Consequently, civil affairs can act as strategic facilitators by building a coordinated effort with all civilian partners. 

Military Government Operations (MGO) Competency 

Transitional Military Authority 

The U.S forces are mandated by law to assume civilian responsibilities as a transitional military authority to fill a power vacuum when one emerges (Banfield & Bleakley, 2012).  The MGO ensures that violence, chaos, and a state of lawlessness do not arise when the official government has either been overthrown or conferred its powers to the military branch. In light of irregular threats such as the prevalent extremism in the Middle East, the occupation forces can act as an interim authority until a legitimately elected government is in place. Because asymmetrical conflict is a competition for legality and influence over populaces, military governments use this mandate to quash any enemy that might want to take advantage of the situation to cause more harm. For instance, during the Arab Spring, these threats manifested themselves as groups that sought legitimacy by preying on grievances against oppressive regimes. According to Olson (2010), the extent to which the armed forces are engaged in politics and the general governance of a country is dependent on the possibility of anarchy. 

As aforementioned, the U.S military establishment is a designated guardian of the rule of law during certain state of emergencies. In some cases, Olson (2010) alleges that an army government acts as a standby authority in a region that has been legally occupied with maintaining political stability. For example, the military government backs the U.S symbols of national power overseas by implementing authority roles stipulated by U.S foreign policy and international law. After the Port-au-Prince earthquake, a military government was tasked with ensuring law and order in the spirit of civil-military coordination (Moiser, 2017). In some instances where an interim civilian government has been instituted, the military authority may continue to support the current government until assurance that law and order are sustainable. 

Civil Affairs Supported Activities (CASA) Competency 

Foreign Assistance 

The United States Army is involved in numerous foreign aid initiatives overseas. The CA activities are conducted strategically with the hope of reciprocity from the countries receiving foreign assistance from the U.S government (Banfield & Bleakley, 2012). Typically, the DoD uses the military to deliver funds, medical supplies, food, and other commodities to enhance its national security profile and American influence globally (Olson, 2010). Since the 9/11 disaster, foreign military aid to countries such as Pakistan, Yemen, and Oman grew dramatically in a deliberate effort by the U.S to combat global terrorism. Foreign assistance has its origins in the Marshall Plan, which cemented foreign assistance policy in the U.S. The initial concept was to build the capacity of European allies to fight the influence of communism (Banfield & Bleakley, 2012). U.S. military uses foreign assistance as a strategic tool to advance global peace, which is under a constant threat from irregular adversaries. 

Given the growing trends of Islamic extremism and nuclear weapons' proliferation by rogue countries, the U.S. security stakeholders encounter a complex dilemma. Offering military assistance may be the only means of securing influence in strategic countries such as Pakistan which is situated in regions suitable for the U.S’s strategic interests. As Olson (2010) declares, even if foreign assistance fails to have the desired impact on cooperation efforts with the United States, other intangible benefits may accrue from such initiatives. Foreign military assistance occasionally enables the United States military forces to avoid unnecessary costs of aggressive warfare. 

Foreign Humanitarian Assistance 

The provision of humanitarian assistance is another enabler in combating irregular threats such as environmental disasters, chemical and biological warfare. The civil affairs units have a lengthy history in delivering emergency humanitarian aid that is required after armed conflict and natural disasters (Walton, 2012). The CA is uniquely qualified in dispensing this endeavor due to vast assets, including transport equipment, medical personnel, and evacuation capability. According to Moiser (2017), civil affairs units' crisis response capability can be used to offer emergency response teams with agile, customizable, and rapidly deployable search and rescue formations crucial in taking appropriate actions during emergencies. These contingents can offer a wide range of options to salvage individuals under threat, retrieve delicate elements such as weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), or handle other issues requiring rapid response. 

The civil affairs regiment mostly collaborates with non-governmental bodies such as the Red Cross. The humanitarian services also function along with affiliated and host nation’s military forces and organizations. In tackling irregular threats, humanitarian activities by the CA have saved millions of lives and generated goodwill domestically and internationally. Moreover, such operations have allowed the civil affairs forces to create partnerships, especially when countries participate in joint disaster response drills in preparation for real emergencies. 

Some scholars suggest that the United States military's participation in foreign humanitarian aid engagements should include specific strategic considerations that pursue the U.S national security interests (Banfield & Bleakley, 2012). Additionally, these noble actions by the civil affairs forces provide the United States with an opportunity to validate its values abroad and improve regional security. If not devised to safeguard its security interests, the FHA missions can be viewed as inadequate in that such opportunities consume valuable and limited resources while overstretching the military’s capability (Moiser, 2017). Conversely, the U.S. FHA operations should be guided by strategic intent and utilized prudently to alleviate human suffering in the face of natural and human-made disasters. 

Conclusion 

The paper primarily sought to establish that the CA is a solution to irregular threats that the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) continually handles in various parts of the world. Through the analytical process, this essay concludes that this is accurate. Through its key competencies, the CA gives SOF commanders, the DoD, and policymakers a unique capability when striving to counter these threats on a global scale. The civilian affairs’ capacity to deploy essential services to areas where they are needed, reconnaissance, foreign humanitarian aid, and crisis response makes it a critical element within the U.S military structure. The CA missions in regions such as Iraq, Pakistan, and Vietnam exhibit the value of this unit as it provides the foundation for future military campaign planning and intelligence gathering obligations. As evidenced in their operations in conflict-striven areas, the CA adopted a civilian engagement strategy that delivered a tactical advantage to the expeditionary forces. Such long-term interventions are essential in eliminating the terrorism sanctuaries from where established criminal groups launch their operations. In this era of global insecurity, SOCOM must remain agile in offering the U.S with a portfolio of additional capabilities to focus on future asymmetrical warfare. 

References 

Banfield, G. M., & Bleakley, J. G. (2012).  The role of civil affairs in unconventional warfare . Naval Postgraduate School of Monetary CA Defense Analysis Dept. 

Moiser, D. (2017).  USASOC 2035: Communicating the ARSOF Narrative and Setting the Course to 2035 . John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. 

Olson, E. T. (2010). Irregular Warfare: Countering Irregular Threats Joint Operating Concept. 

Regulation, A. (2004). Salutes, Honors, and Visits of Courtesy. 

Walton, T. A. (2012).  China's Three Warfares . Herndon: Delex Systems. 

White, J. (1996). B. Some Thoughts on Irregular Warfare. A Different Kind of Threat.  Studies in Intelligence [online] ,  39 (5).