Special Operations

Research Topics

Joint Special Operations University

7701 Tampa Point Boulevard

MacDill AFB, FL 33621

https://jsou.socom.mil 2016
Joint Special Operations University

and the Center for Special Operations Studies and Research

The Joint Special Operations University (JSOU) provides its publications 

to contribute toward expanding the body of knowledge about joint special 

operations. JSOU publications advance the insights and recommendations 

of national security professionals and the Special Operations Forces (SOF) 

students and leaders for consideration by the SOF community and defense 

leadership. 

JSOU is the educational component of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. The JSOU 

mission is to educate SOF executive, senior, and intermediate leaders and 

selected other national and international security decision makers, both 

military and civilian, through teaching, outreach, and research in the 

science and art of joint special operations. JSOU provides education to the 

men and women of SOF and to those who enable the SOF mission in a joint 

and interagency environment. 

JSOU conducts research through its Center for Special Operations 

Studies and Research (CSOSR) where effort centers upon the USSOCOM 

mission: 

USSOCOM mission. USSOCOM synchronizes the planning of Special 

Operations and provides Special Operations Forces to support persistent, 

networked and distributed Global Combatant Command operations in 

order to protect and advance our Nation’s interests.

Press publications are available for download from the JSOU Library 

web page located at https://jsou.libguides.com/jsoupublications.

Joint Special Operations University

Brian A. Maher, Ed.D., SES, President

Kenneth H. Poole, Ed.D., Director, Center for Special Operations Studies and Research

Robert Nalepa, Lt. Col., U.S. Air Force, Ret., Editor in Chief

Will Irwin, MMAS, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, Ret.; 

Peter McCabe, Ph.D., Political Science, Colonel, U.S. Air Force, Ret.; Gregory Salomon, Colonel, U.S. Army; 

Adam L. Silverman, Ph.D., Political Science and Criminology; Resident Senior Fellows

Anna-Marie Wyant, M.A., English, JSOU Press Editor

Frederick Zimmerman, Master Sergeant, U.S. Marine Corps, Ret., JSOU Press Editor

Editorial Advisory Board

Roby C. Barrett

Ph.D., Middle Eastern & South Asian History 

Public Policy Center Middle East Institute and 

JSOU Senior Fellow

Joseph D. Celeski

Colonel, U.S. Army, Ret. JSOU Senior Fellow

Chuck Cunningham

Lieutenant General, U.S. Air Force, Ret. 

Professor of Strategy, Joint Advanced 

Warfighting School and JSOU Distinguished 

Senior Fellow

James J.F. Forest 

Ph.D., Higher Education Administration

Associate Professor, School of Criminology and 

Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts 

Lowell and JSOU Senior Fellow

Mario Forestier

Chief Warrant Officer, U.S. Army, Ret.

Director, Joint Special Operations Command 

Center for Counterterrorism Studies

Thomas H. Henriksen

Ph.D., History, Hoover Institution 

Stanford University and JSOU Senior Fellow

Bernd Horn

Colonel, Canadian Dept. of National Defence 

Ph.D., War Studies

Director, CANSOFCOM Professional 

Development Centre

Russell D. Howard

Brigadier General, U.S. Army, Ret.

Senior Research Fellow and adjunct professor, 

Middlebury Institute of International Studies at 

Monterey and JSOU Senior Fellow

John D. Jogerst

Colonel, U.S. Air Force, Ret.

James Kiras

Ph.D., History, School of Advanced Air and Space 

Studies, Air University and JSOU Associate Fellow

William W. Mendel

Colonel, U.S. Army, Ret. 

JSOU Senior Fellow

Alvaro de Souza Pinheiro

Major General, Brazilian Army, Ret.

JSOU Associate Fellow

James F. Powers, Jr.

Colonel, U.S. Army, Ret.

JSOU Senior Fellow 

Bryan C. Price

Major, U.S. Army

Ph.D., Political Science

Director, Combating Terrorism Center at 

West Point

Richard H. Shultz, Jr.

Ph.D., Political Science

Director, International Security 

Studies Program, The Fletcher School, 

Tufts University and JSOU Senior Fellow

Robert G. Spulak, Jr.

Ph.D., Physics/Nuclear Engineering

Sandia National Laboratories 

and JSOU Associate Fellow 

Jessica Glicken Turnley

Ph.D., Cultural Anthropology

Galisteo Consulting Group 

and JSOU Senior Fellow 

Francisco R. Wong-Diaz

J.D., Ph.D., Political Science

Professor of international affairs and law and 

JSOU Senior Fellow

Rich Yarger

Ph.D., History 

JSOU Senior Fellow
The JSOU Press

MacDill Air Force Base, Florida

2015

Special Operations

Research Topics

2016
This list of research topics and other JSOU publications can be found at 

https://jsou.socom.mil (click on Publications) and on the JSOU library web 

site at https://jsou.libguides.com/jsoupublications.

Comments about this publication are invited and should be forwarded to the 

Director of the Center for Special Operations Studies and Research, Joint Special Operations University, 7701 Tampa Point Blvd., MacDill AFB, FL 33621.

*******

The JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research (CSOSR) is currently 

accepting written works relevant to special operations for potential publication. For 

more information, please contact the CSOSR Director at jsou_research@socom.mil. 

Thank you for your interest in the JSOU Press. 

*******

This work was cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited.

ISBN: 978-1-933749-97-6
iii

Contents

Foreword........................................................................................v

Introduction..................................................................................vii

A. Priority Topics ........................................................................... 1

B. Ensure SOF Readiness ............................................................... 9

C. Help Our Nation Win ............................................................. 15

D. Continue to Build Relationships.............................................. 23

E. Prepare for the Future .............................................................. 27

F. Preserve Our Force and Families.............................................. 33

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List.................................... 37

v

Foreword

The Joint Special Operations University (JSOU) Special Operations 

Research Topics 2016 publication highlights a wide range of topics collaboratively developed and prioritized by experts from across the Special 

Operations Forces (SOF) community. The topics in these pages are intended 

to guide research projects for professional military education (PME) students, JSOU faculty, fellows, students, and others writing about special operations during this academic year.

JSOU executes the joint education mission of United States Special 

Operations Command (USSOCOM) and is a globally recognized academic 

institution that serves the entire Department of Defense and advances the 

SOF community’s intellectual readiness. This research will provide a better 

understanding of the complex issues and opportunities affecting the strategic 

and operational planning needs of SOF.

As the USSOCOM Commander has stated, “The value of our people 

and our unique capabilities are exponentially improved with better education, ideas, concepts, and situational understanding.” These topics will stir 

creativity and critical thinking among the best and brightest in our SOF 

network to generate new ideas. These new ideas formed after careful research 

and analysis will lead to the development of innovative solutions for the most 

pressing issues and concerns that face our community.

Topics are organized to address the five SOF priorities as identified by the 

USSOCOM Commander. To develop this list of topics, recommendations 

were solicited from the USSOCOM headquarters staff, the theater special 

operations commands (TSOCs), component commands, SOF chairs from 

the war colleges, select research centers, and think tanks. Then the attendees 

reviewed, revised, rated, and ranked the topic submissions at the annual 

Special Operations Research Topics Workshop. That workshop produced the 

first draft of this comprehensive list of issues and challenges of concern to 

the greater SOF community. The list was reviewed and vetted by the headquarters, TSOCs, and component commands prior to publication.

I encourage SOF personnel to contribute their experiences and ideas 

to the SOF community by submitting completed research on these topics 

to JSOU Press. If you have any questions about this document or ideas for 
vi

future topics, contact the Director, Center for Special Operations Studies 

and Research, via e-mail at jsou_research@socom.mil. 

I challenge you to assist the SOF enterprise in shaping the future strategic 

environment by researching critical issues and using that research to develop 

innovative solutions and recommendations.

Brian A. Maher, SES

President
vii

Introduction

The JSOU Special Operations Research Topics 2016 represents a list of 

SOF-related topics that are recommended for research by those who 

desire to provide insight and recommendations on issues and challenges 

facing the SOF enterprise. As with the past several years’ topics publications, this list is tailored to address priority areas identified by USSOCOM. 

There are five SOF priorities: Ensure SOF Readiness; Help our Nation win; 

Continue to build relationships; Prepare for the future; and Preserve our 

force and families. This publication also includes the Key Strategic Issues 

List (KSIL) developed and maintained by the USSOCOM J5; Strategy, Plans, 

and Policy Directorate.

SOF PME students research and write on timely, relevant, SOF-related 

topics. Such activity develops the individual’s intellect and provides a professional and practical perspective that broadens and frames the insights 

of other analysts and researchers in regard to these topics. This list and 

the accompanying topic descriptions are a guide to stimulate interest and 

thinking. Topics may be narrowed or otherwise modified as deemed necessary (e.g., to suit school writing requirements or maximize individual interests and experiences). The researcher should explore and identify doctrine, 

capabilities, techniques, and procedures that will increase SOF efficacy in 

addressing them. At the same time, the research on these topics should be 

used to inform policymakers, the larger military profession, and the public 

of the issues and challenges facing the SOF enterprise.

Section A (Priority Topics) identifies topics of particular importance. 

Sections B, C, D, E, and F each focus on one of the SOF priorities. Section G 

contains the KSIL developed by USSOCOM J5. The KSIL is a set of questions 

relevant to increasing USSOCOM’s understanding of the global security 

environment and is built around trends expected to continue for the next 

10 to 20 years.

These topics reflect a consensus of the SOF experts who participated in 

the Special Operations Research Topics Workshop as particularly worthwhile in addressing immediate SOF needs and in building future capacity for 

emerging challenges. They have been vetted through the USSOCOM headquarters, TSOCs, and components prior to publication to ensure emerging 
viii

topics were addressed. Previous years’ research topics lists provide a repository of issues that were highlighted in the past. These lists may provide 

prospective researchers with additional ideas for relevant research. Previous 

editions of these publications (2009 through 2015) are available on the JSOU 

public web site on the publications page located at: https://jsou.socom.mil/

PubsPages/Publications.aspx.

Please share this reference with fellow researchers, thesis advisors, and 

other colleagues, and feel free to submit additional topics for consideration. 

You may also visit our publications page on the JSOU public website to see 

if JSOU has a publication that relates to your area of interest. There is also 

SOF relevant material available on the JSOU Library web site, which can 

be found at: https://jsou.libguides.com. We encourage you to send us your 

completed research on these topics.
1

A. Priority Topics

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

A. Priority Topics

Topic Titles

Ensure SOF Readiness

A1. SOF as a strategic instrument of war: How to employ SOF to 

achieve national security objectives

A2. Beyond stealth to maintain technical overmatch: What do SOF 

need from future/advanced technologies (“third offset”)?

A3. Training SOF for the future: Identifying skill gaps associated with 

the next fight

Help Our Nation Win

A4. Unconventional warfare: Is America politically prepared to support 

an expanded capability and interest in UW? 

A5. SOF in Africa: Learning from recent interventions and future 

opportunities

A6. Preventing, countering, and disrupting foreign fighter flow

Continue to Build Relationships

A7. Identifying, assessing, developing, and motivating potential 

partners in irregular warfare: Supporting effective partnerships

Prepare for the Future

A8. Resource scarcity, competition and conflict: The impact on SOF 

capabilities and approaches

A9. SOF challenges and opportunities in future operating 

environments: Where and how SOF can be decisive

A10. SOF and war by proxy: Strategic asymmetry and points of 

advantage

Preserve Our Force and Families

A11. Mitigating SOF suicides: Susceptibility and risk factors

A12. Examine the implications and effects of adopting programs to 

optimize SOF human performance: Are there limits to enhanced 

physical and mental capabilities?
2

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

Topic Descriptions

Ensure SOF Readiness

A1. SOF as a strategic instrument of war: How to employ SOF to 

achieve national security objectives

Special Operations Forces (SOF) have become one of the primary 

military capabilities for senior policymakers and Department of 

Defense (DOD) leaders to employ in the uncertain environment of 

today. This reflects a shift from the use of conventional forces (CF) to a 

heavy reliance on SOF. What are the implications for U.S. strategy for 

senior leader reliance on SOF? How should SOF be best employed to 

achieve national security objectives? What is the effectiveness of SOF: 

their role; their use as a strategic tool of warfare; and their ability to 

meet the security needs of the United States and the international 

community? What are the impacts of CF budget and personnel reductions upon SOF capabilities (equipment and personnel recruitment)? 

 A2. Beyond stealth to maintain technical overmatch: What do SOF 

need from future/advanced technologies (“third offset”)?

In the fall of 2014, then-Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced 

the “Defense Innovation Initiative,” an initiative to develop a “third 

offset” in technology (stealth was part of the second offset). The 

third offset is meant to give U.S. forces technological overmatch of 

its adversaries. Possible examples of this new offset include robotics, 

autonomy, miniaturization, 3-D printing, big data, and/or swarming. Innovation is not constrained to the defense industry, and the 

DOD may have to look to the commercial market for breakthrough 

technologies. What capabilities and/or advances in technologies need 

to occur to ensure United States’ SOF (USSOF) maintain a technological advantage over our adversaries? How can SOF capitalize on 

the third offset? What are the future technology-based threats to 

SOF operators across the range of military and special operations? 

Can SOF overcome these threats? How can SOF benefit from these 

same technologies for operators’ safety and effectiveness? How can 

SOF use recent technological advances to sustain a force in austere 
3

A. Priority Topics

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

environments, or decrease the footprint of a force in a situation that 

demands low visibility?

A3. Training SOF for the future: Identifying skill gaps associated 

with the next fight

The future operating environment is defined by an increasingly 

interconnected global commons paired with the increasing effects 

of non-state actors. SOF preparing to operate within this environment 

are bound by fiscal constraint, decreasing resources, and manpower 

limitations amongst an era of expanding SOF requirements. While 

the characteristics of warfare within this environment will continue 

to evolve, what are the skills not yet currently present within special 

operations that are assessed as necessary for success? How can U.S. 

Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) effectively prioritize 

training efforts while addressing the risks assumed with inaction? 

Given the likely requirement for foreign internal defense (FID) and 

unconventional warfare (UW) missions, how critical are language 

capabilities? How does culture and cultural intelligence play a role? 

Should training be broadened throughout all SOF or focused on specific SOF specialties?

Help Our Nation Win

A4. Unconventional warfare: Is America politically prepared to support an expanded capability and interest in UW? 

UW consists of operations and activities that are conducted to enable 

a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow 

a government or occupying power by operating through or with an 

underground, auxiliary, and guerrilla force in a denied area. UW 

has become an increasingly important tool of U.S. policy as resistance forces in many parts of the globe organize to confront oppressive regimes. This topic should examine the success and failures 

of past UW operations to include: the Office of Strategic Services 

in World War II, Russian UW in the Ukraine/Crimea, the initial 

stages of Operation Enduring Freedom with the U.S. in support of the 

Northern Alliance, Contras in Nicaragua, and the U.S. in Operation 

Iraqi Freedom in partnership with the Kurdish Peshmerga. Other 

considerations:
4

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• How can SOF be better trained and equipped to capitalize on 

opportunities and enable resistance operations in times and 

locations of choice as approved by U.S. authorities?

• In each example of successes and failures of past UW operations, describe the conditions. How was success defined?

• What were the best practices?

• Are the American people and political leaders prepared to support UW given ethical questions and the long-term demands 

of UW?

A5. SOF in Africa: Learning from recent interventions and future 

opportunities

Comparatively speaking, Africa has become the new frontier and an 

area in which USSOF are active or becoming more active, in particular in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. It is a huge continent with 

unique challenges. This topic looks at the differences and uniqueness 

in SOF operations in Africa versus the Middle East, Europe, or other 

regions. Other considerations:

• What are the greatest obstacles to SOF effectiveness in Africa, 

and how can they be overcome? Have other regions encountered similar issues? If not, why?

• What can USSOF learn from prior French, Canadian, and British interventions in Africa?

• What regional dynamics are of greatest concern? What problems cross multiple regions of the continent? 

• What unique logistical and operational problems does Africa 

present? What are the dynamics of religious and cultural 

conflict? 

A6. Preventing, countering, and disrupting foreign fighter flow

The steady state of foreign fighter flow (FFF) across and into various 

Geographic Combatant Command (GCC) areas of responsibility 

continues to be a concern, as an example, into and out of Syria. This 

flow has been attributed to a range of factors, including the recruiting 

campaigns orchestrated by violent extremist groups and the ease with 

which militants from the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe can 

access this region. The same is true of FFF across Southeast Asia and 
5

A. Priority Topics

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

the relationship of VEOs with the FFF phenomenon. This research 

topic seeks to explore the antecedents of FFF with a focus on the 

social, environmental, and psychological factors that deter or motivate foreign fighters to join or support extremist causes across GCC 

areas of responsibility. What efforts have been made to deter, disrupt, 

and destroy these foreign fighter threats? Have they been successful? 

Additionally, the study should address FFF-defeat and counteringFFF operations. Other considerations:

• How do lethal operations, such as airstrikes, impact these 

antecedents? 

• How might influence operations weaken these causal factors? 

• What are the information environment’s most appropriate 

leverage points for deterring or disrupting FFF? 

• How do SOF identify, track, and monitor the activities of those 

foreign fighters that return home to do damage to the home front?

Continue to Build Relationships

A7. Identifying, assessing, developing, and motivating potential 

partners in irregular warfare: Supporting effective partnerships 

Irregular warfare (IW) is a violent struggle among state and non-state 

actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s). 

Recent conflicts have highlighted opportunities and policy dilemmas in the conduct and support of IW. In most of these conflicts, the 

United States has partnered with state or non-state actors to support or 

oppose an existing government. What are the best practices and other 

mechanisms for understanding, identifying, assessing, developing, 

and motivating potential partners’ behavior, objectives, organization, 

and composition to successfully partner with SOF? Which partnership 

efforts are most effective and most cost-efficient? What other interests or issues must be considered (stability, capability, et cetera) when 

partnering with others in conducting and supporting IW?

Prepare for the Future

A8. Resource scarcity, competition and conflict: The impact on SOF 

capabilities and approaches

Water is becoming the new oil. Resource scarcity and specifically 

potable water scarcity is projected to be a major driver of conflict in 
6

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

many parts of the world where USSOF operate. How will competition 

over resources shape conflict in the future, and what are the implications for USSOCOM? SOF are expected to operate in environments 

where potable water shortages are pervasive. How will SOF capabilities be impacted when operating in water-scarce environments? 

Research can focus broadly on analysis of current SOF capabilities 

for operating in water-scarce environments. What future technological advances should USSOF be cognizant of that can help small SOF 

units operate successfully? What are the potential “mine, save, and 

recycle” alternatives? Is “harvesting fog,” a method of retrieving moisture in coastal areas, still a viable practice in other environments? 

How does resource scarcity affect Joint Intelligence Preparation of 

the Operating Environment doctrine “systems perspective?” What 

are the land use issues and implications for the local populations?

A9. SOF challenges and opportunities in future operating environments: Where and how SOF can be decisive

Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has inexorably moved to a 

less stable and less predictable global environment. Predicting future 

instability, conflicts, and direct and indirect threats to U.S. interests is profoundly important to USSOCOM. What are the projected 

global hot spots in 5, 10, 15 years? What future state, non-state, social, 

and technological “game changers” could impact global U.S. interests? What do SOF need to understand about the myriad projections and predictions regarding the future operating environment 

so USSOCOM is prepared for the future? Where should USSOCOM 

focus future “Phase 0” activities to enhance stability and prevent conflict? Should there be increased emphasis on campaign planning and 

the application of operational design to help develop strategies for 

activities short of war?

A10. SOF and war by proxy: Strategic asymmetry and points of 

advantage

Proxy wars with external support for combatants in civil war situations are common in warfare, yet arguably the least understood 

aspect of modern conflicts. A comprehensive understanding of the 

types of proxy interventions since 1945—their magnitude, intent, 
7

A. Priority Topics

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

and outcome—can provide inferences for USSOCOM strategies for 

proxy interventions and UW. Do USSOF have a valid knowledge base 

on the “success” or “failure” of proxy wars since 1945? Considering 

safe havens, financial flows, military assistance, military training, 

UW, level of economic development, size of adversary CF, and air 

superiority, what are the advantages of proxy wars? What case studies 

are relevant for examining strategic asymmetries and the points of 

comparative advantage between the opposing forces?

Preserve Our Force and Families

A11. Mitigating SOF suicides: Susceptibility and risk factors

According to a 2014 New York Times article, “In the past two and a 

half years, 49 Special Operations members have killed themselves, 

more than in the preceding five years. While suicides for the rest of 

the active-duty military have started to decline after years of steady 

increases, they have risen for the nation’s commandos.” SOF suicides 

continue to happen, even with focused attention on increasing awareness in order to mitigate the risk of suicides throughout the chain of 

command. What’s driving the increase? What has been overlooked? 

Are the current statistics an anomaly or a gauge for concern? What 

indicators correlate with susceptibility to suicide? Are there unique 

risk factors associated with SOF suicides? Are SOF suicides precipitated by different factors among the specialties within the SOF community? What preventive measures can be taken to reduce suicide 

in the SOF community?

A12. Examine the implications and effects of adopting programs to 

optimize SOF human performance: Are there limits to enhanced 

physical and mental capabilities?

An extensive study directed by a former USSOCOM Commander, 

Admiral Eric Olson, revealed that the current operational environment has been more difficult than operators and their families 

expected, leaving little time for them to adjust to the daily strains 

of perpetual absences. The study noted troubling consequences, 

with increases in domestic and family problems, substance abuse 

and self-medication, risk-taking behaviors, post-traumatic stress, 

and even suicides. The study found that SOF were frayed. There has 
8

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

been legislative resistance to fund USSOCOM human performance 

programs and infrastructure as opposed to Military Service-funded 

programs. USSOCOM human performance efforts are currently integrated under the Preservation of the Force and Families (POTFF) 

initiative. What are the values of SOF-specific human performance 

programs? Should it be a stand-alone program more aligned with 

operational needs? Should or will the human performance initiative 

be considered an operational USSOCOM requirement? Why should 

USSOCOM spend money on such additional programs? What are 

the limits for the program to research enhanced or augmented physical and mental capabilities? What are the moral and ethical issues 

of optimizing mental and physical capabilities through the use of 

biomechanics, pharmaceuticals, and genetic therapies?
9

B. Ensure SOF Readiness

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

B. Ensure SOF Readiness

—The right people, skills, and capabilities ... now and in the future

Topic Titles

B1. How does USSOCOM ensure it has the right people, skills, and 

capabilities now and in the future?

B2. SOF and conventional force integration: How to achieve 

operational and strategic effects while minimizing risk

B3. SOF-specific education: Core competencies and the future SOF 

operator

B4. Adapting the acquisition environment: Technology advances at the 

speed of the commercial market

B5. SOF team cohesion: What breaks a SOF team?

B6. Validity of SOF selection standards: Assessment, selection, and 

predictions for SOF success

B7. Assessing tactical operations for strategic effect: Is there a 

disconnect?

B8. The new special operations equilibrium: What is the right balance 

between surgical strike and special warfare capabilities?

Topic Descriptions

B1. How does USSOCOM ensure it has the right people, skills, and 

capabilities now and in the future?

To ensure SOF readiness now and in the future, there must be an 

understanding of current readiness and a plan to develop people, 

equipment, capability, and decision making. How can SOF leaders 

develop a more holistic and SOF-centric understanding of SOF’s current readiness, to include critical Service enablers? What knowledge, skills, and abilities are required by SOF operators, civilians, 

and by Service enablers—how does USSOCOM obtain, manage, and 

maintain them? How does the command develop a creative, leadingedge research and development process that integrates people, skills, 

equipment, and capabilities holistically? For equipment and capabilities, how does USSOCOM maintain SOF buying power and establish 
10

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

fiscal agility? What are the decision-making processes and supporting 

analytics (particularly risk and causalities) that are required for SOF 

to organize effectively to prepare for a future defined by unpredictability and increased use of irregular/hybrid modes of warfare by 

state/non-state actors?

B2. SOF and conventional force integration: How to achieve operational and strategic effects while minimizing risk

As budgetary pressure continues to squeeze the military, SOF and CF 

must continue to find ways to maximize effects through combined 

efforts and resources. Command, control, and manning, to include 

type of manning, are important considerations in this process. In 

addition, the ability to advise and fight against an asymmetric enemy 

is a key consideration. How can SOF and CF better leverage each 

other? For example, how can SOF be value-added to the U.S. Marine 

Corps’ Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs), and how can the MEUs 

meet SOF theater logistics and mobility needs? How do SOF optimize 

partnerships and reinforce supported and supporting relationships 

within SOF; CF; and Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational (JIIM) structural constructs to achieve operational and 

strategic effects and minimize risk in irregular and traditional operations across the range of military operations? How do SOF bridge 

critical seams between JIIM partners to conduct operations under 

Title 10 Authorities, Title 50 Authorities, and/or the Ambassador’s 

Title 22 Authorities to achieve success in future complex operating 

environments?

B3. SOF-specific education: Core competencies and the future SOF 

operator

Do current education policies and practices meet current and future 

SOF needs? How can SOF receive adequate education on SOF-specific subjects? What are the gaps and requirements for SOF-specific 

education? What changes are required to ensure SOF receive sufficient education in SOF-specific subjects? What are the applicable 

benefits of Service professional military education (PME) programs 

versus notional SOF-specific PME programs? How can SOF-specific 
11

B. Ensure SOF Readiness

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

education at Service PME programs be beneficial to the SOF community? What will the core competencies of the future SOF operator be?

B4. Adapting the acquisition environment: Technology advances at 

the speed of the commercial market 

Commercial technology development, and in some cases, government 

research and development, is occurring at faster rates and often by 

non-traditional companies that have little or no DOD involvement. 

Traditional acquisition approaches are much too restrictive and slow 

for these new, changing technologies. How can SOF adapt our current skill sets and regulations to take advantage of these technology 

advances and continue to upgrade our technologies at the speed of 

the commercial market? How can USSOCOM address its processes as 

well as Congressional constraints? What is the link between research, 

development, test, and evaluation/acquisitions and future capability 

gaps?

B5. SOF team cohesion: What breaks a SOF team? 

SOF team failure is historically infrequent but may have catastrophic 

effects to an overall effort. The increased probability of employing 

SOF in small numbers for long periods under austere conditions is a 

POTFF issue as much as an operational issue. Is there evidence that 

suggests whether (social or task) cohesion erodes during long duration missions such that a team “breaks” and must be withdrawn? 

What breaks a team down is important, and how can USSOCOM 

identify those who are susceptible and not susceptible to what breaks 

a team down? How a team is defined is important. By focusing on 

teams from the various components, what factors have an impact on 

their teams? Factors could include strategy; assessment and selection 

for specific missions sets; training; tactics, techniques, and procedures; mixed gender teams; partner nations; and/or POTFF.

B6. Validity of SOF selection standards: Assessment, selection, and 

predictions for SOF success

SOF selection standards have come under scrutiny. Do today’s SOF 

standards accurately reflect the requirements of SOF? Have changes 

in the global environment made them outdated? Do the standards 
12

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

exclude those USSOCOM may want to serve in SOF? How does 

USSOCOM address those career fields that do not have selection 

criteria? Should there be a single joint SOF standard? What are the 

metrics in assessment and initial selection that predict success in 

both the initial training pipeline and the longer SOF career? Are high 

attrition rates a true measure of assessment and selection of SOF?

B7. Assessing tactical operations for strategic effect: Is there a 

disconnect?

The political leadership of the U.S. faces questions regarding its commitment to strategic victory as the country commits forces to the 

tactical battlefield. How resolved is the U.S. to follow through at the 

strategic level? Distributed operations and mission command require 

understanding of the intended end-state at the lowest level. How does 

a perceived disconnect affect operational campaign planning and 

tactical-level battles and engagements? What have the lessons been, 

and are SOF able to improve strategic performance at the combatant 

command level? How can USSOF bridge the gap between the tactical 

and strategic levels?

B8. The new special operations equilibrium: What is the right balance between surgical strike and special warfare capabilities?

Army Doctrine Publication 3-05, Special Operations, describes the 

two mutually supporting critical capabilities of surgical strike and 

special warfare. Surgical strike is the execution of activities in a precise manner that employ SOF in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environment to seize, destroy, capture, exploit, recover or damage 

designated targets, or influence threats. Special warfare is the execution of activities that involve a combination of lethal and nonlethal 

actions taken by a specially trained and educated force that has a 

deep understanding of cultures and foreign language proficiency 

in small-unit tactics, and the ability to build and fight alongside 

indigenous combat formations in a permissive, uncertain, or hostile 

environment. SOF surgical strike capability, the direct action role, 

offers policymakers and political leaders an attractive military option 

for difficult or complex situations. This surgical strike capability is 

a key instrument of national power, but it is not the only mission of 
13

B. Ensure SOF Readiness

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

SOF and not necessarily the sole option for U.S. policymakers. Also, 

SOF must be capable of succeeding in their special warfare role on 

missions that may be carried out over long periods of time and in 

complex, often ambiguous, environments. As both surgical strike 

and special warfare are part of SOF DNA, what is the right balance 

in capability? Does this balance remain static or does it change over 

time? Is the balance different based on geographic and cultural areas? 

Is special warfare effectively considered as an option in strategic and 

operational planning? If not, what activities can promote understanding of SOF’s special warfare capability among policymakers and other 

U.S. Government agencies?

15

C. Help Our Nation Win

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

C. Help Our Nation Win

—Prioritizing and synchronizing global SOF activities to meet 

complex global challenges

Topic Titles

C1. How can SOF be optimally employed to shape the strategic security 

environment?

C2. Sealing the seams: Command and control of the SOF network 

across GCC boundaries

C3. Lessons from SOF training efforts in Afghanistan, specifically in 

training the General Directorate of Police Special Units and the 

Afghan Local Police

C4. Comparison and quantification of the effects of lethal and 

influence activities: Consider second order effects and provide 

measures of effectiveness

C5. Information sharing has improved tremendously at the 

multinational level. How do SOF capitalize on those successes to 

improve information sharing at the operational level?

C6. Combating violent extremism: Are some countries, such as 

Indonesia, with a large Muslim population immune to extremist 

violence? If so, why, and what are the contributing factors?

C7. Defining the SOF contribution to computer network operations: 

What are SOF’s roles, responsibilities, and authorities?

C8. Improving the process: Developing discrete, multi-year campaigns 

to shape, prevent, and/or win

C9. Violent extremism in Syria and Iraq: How does the coalition 

capitalize on years of operating in Iraq and previous tribal 

relationships to defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?

C10. The campaign against the Tamil Tigers: Does the campaign 

disprove the old adage, “We can’t kill our way to victory?” Was it 

an operational success or strategic failure?

C11. SOF’s involvement in fighting narcoterrorism: Are SOF authorities 

compatible with the mission?
16

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

C12. Identify efficient and effective media for conducting and assessing 

military information support operations: Are the old media 

techniques, such as leaflets, still effective?

Topic Descriptions

C1. How can SOF be optimally employed to shape the strategic security environment?

Special operations actions and activities can have disproportionate 

affect for the resources and personnel employed, but SOF are a limited 

resource. How does USSOCOM synchronize and prioritize special 

operations, actions, and activities globally? Does the command present coherent SOF employment options and recommendations? How 

can USSOCOM better provide coherent and unified SOF capabilities 

to the GCCs? How could the command expand the range of available 

options through requisite authorities, capabilities, and relationships?

C2. Sealing the seams: Command and control of the SOF network 

across GCC boundaries 

Global SOF operations will increasingly involve adversaries who conduct activities and operations across traditional GCC seams within 

the air, ground, sea, and cyber domains; this will challenge SOF to 

respond in kind. Recent examples include command and control 

(C2) of SOF aviation (specifically non-standard aviation; strike; and 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets) and SOF teams’ 

pursuit of terrorist networks spanning across GCC boundaries. Does 

current joint doctrine SOF C2 structure sufficiently address these 

challenges and the evolving dynamic of cross-GCC, or seam operations? Are the authorities, leadership traits, and technical capabilities required for success currently available? What are some specific 

recommendations to enhance existing doctrine and/or implement 

new C2 concepts? Other considerations:

• GCC boundaries are readily available open source and threat 

groups routinely capitalize on these boundaries to secure safe 

haven. Are authority changes required to combat cross-border 

threats? 
17

C. Help Our Nation Win

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• DOD C2 Research Program has done some notable work on 

C2 Agility. The concept has grown from mission command 

distributed control to parallel operational design efforts by 

enabling commanders to understand and design their C2 

approaches. What are the implications for SOF C2? How can 

SOF capitalize on this developing concept?

C3. Lessons from SOF training efforts in Afghanistan, specifically in 

training the General Directorate of Police Special Units and the 

Afghan Local Police

Currently, there is a national strategic emphasis on partnership 

efforts. What can SOF learn from efforts to train the Afghan National 

Police, with particular attention to the General Directorate of Police 

Special Units (i.e., National Mission Units, Provincial Response Companies, and the Afghan Local Police)? Other considerations:

• What type of support is received from other government agencies such as Department of State (DOS) and/or Department of 

Justice to conduct that type of training? What cultural aspects 

require special attention? What are the associated sustainment 

issues? 

• How does this compare with coalition training of Iraqi police? 

Which lessons from Iraq were transferable to Afghanistan? 

Which ones were not? Why?

C4. Comparison and quantification of the effects of lethal and influence activities: Consider second order effects and provide measures of effectiveness

The benefits of lethal versus influence (nonlethal) activities continue to be controversial at the tactical through strategic levels and 

include actions at the village level as well as cross-border drone 

strikes against terrorists. Due to a lack of coherent/organized supporting information, mission analysis does not provide adequate 

guidance for comparison of courses of action involving lethal versus 

nonlethal activities. What are the key parameters (e.g., costs, psychological impacts, policy considerations) that would allow applesto-apples comparisons of disparate courses of action? What methods 

of wargaming and analyzing secondary, tertiary, and greater orders 
18

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

of effect relevant to a comparison of lethal and nonlethal courses of 

action so that they can be incorporated into the planning process? 

What are the individual and interactive effects of simultaneous influence messaging and lethal strikes on adversary, allied, and neutral 

audiences? Other considerations:

• Exploratory study of both approaches from a cultural and geopolitical approach to support comparative analysis.

• Key parameters to address.

• Secondary and tertiary effects to consider, as well as the individual and interactive effects.

C5. Information sharing has improved tremendously at the multinational level. How do SOF capitalize on those successes to 

improve information sharing at the operational level?

USSOCOM has made tremendous headway in minimizing bureaucracy and maximizing information sharing with coalition forces. 

A great example is the development of the J3-International office at 

the USSOCOM headquarters. Another example is operation of the 

NATO Special Operations Component Command in Afghanistan. 

Although strides have been made at the national and international/

strategic levels, how well do these successes in information sharing translate to the operational level? How does the development of 

coalition information sharing capabilities/deconfliction impact the 

operational level? What equipment, tools, processes, and authorities are available at the operational and tactical level to ensure effective and efficient C2 and situational awareness at the right time and 

place to support mission success? How can information assurance 

be improved to increase mission effectiveness among USSOF, CF, 

interagency, and coalition forces?

C6. Combating violent extremism: Are some countries, such as 

Indonesia, with a large Muslim population immune to extremist 

violence? If so, why, and what are the contributing factors?

Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world but seems 

to be immune to the type of extremism and violent extremist organization groups that other Muslim countries/populations encounter. 

Admittedly, there are groups operating in those areas and attacks do 
19

C. Help Our Nation Win

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

occur, but not to the extent that they exist or occur in the Middle East 

and Africa. Other considerations:

• Is this a true premise or simply a perception?

• Identify the factors within Indonesia that make it immune—or 

support the perception it is immune—to those types of groups 

or attacks.

• If the premise or perception is true at the regional level, is this 

also true from a global perspective? That is, are some areas more 

susceptible or less susceptible to radicalization? If so, why?

C7. Defining the SOF contribution to computer network operations: 

What are SOF’s roles, responsibilities, and authorities?

Computer network operations (CNO) are related to every aspect of 

the operating environment to include planning, intelligence processes, and nonlethal targeting. The role of SOF in CNO needs to be 

defined to better support SOF-CNO training, planning, and contributions to the wider security effort. The broader CNO community 

requires SOF take their place with other U.S. Government agencies 

and elements of private industry to support CNO. An area of interest 

is the study, planning, development, and fostering of cyber rebellions, 

akin to cyber UW. Other considerations:

• What are the authorities and skill required to plan and conduct 

such operations?

• How would SOF integrate with other interagency efforts to 

support such an operation?

C8. Improving the process: Developing discrete, multi-year campaigns to shape, prevent, and/or win

This proposal focuses on the SOF design, plan, and conduct of discrete, multi-year irregular campaigns. The intent is synergizing tactical and operational special warfare and surgical strike with the 

full suite of SOF; coalition force; JIIM; and partner capabilities and 

objectives. The goal is to shape the operating environment, counter 

threats, and advance U.S. interests prior to a threat or crisis necessitating large-scale military intervention. Other considerations:

• How do SOF design, plan, and conduct those IW campaigns 

today? How should they do it in the future?
20

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• How can doctrine be adapted to ensure that SOF operational 

design will provide specific considerations unique to special 

operations across the spectrum of conflict?

• What are the events or threats in the past necessitating large 

scale military interventions that could have been precluded 

given more up-front shaping efforts? How could that have been 

accomplished?

C9. Violent extremism in Syria and Iraq: How does the coalition 

capitalize on years of operating in Iraq and previous tribal relationships to defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?

The United States has called upon SOF to play a major role in combating ISIS in Syria and Iraq, to include the training of Iraqi Security 

Forces. This primarily involves training forces and retraining of some 

forces previously trained by SOF or CF during the U.S. tenure in Iraq 

(2003 to 2011). How can SOF best undermine this extremist organization given the U.S. policy of “no boots on the ground [participating 

in combat operations]”? What other non-state organizations in Syria 

and Iraq should be supported or undermined? As an example, what 

networks or systems, such as social media and previously developed 

tribal relationships, can/should be leveraged to support this mission?

C10. The campaign against the Tamil Tigers: Does the campaign disprove the old adage, “We can’t kill our way to victory?” Was it an 

operational success or strategic failure?

U.S. leadership has been saying the nation “cannot kill our way to 

victory,” but the successful campaign against the Tamil Tigers may 

be an example of that approach working in the past. The campaign 

against the Tamil Tigers is often cited as an example of annihilation 

strategy. Was this an anomaly, or are there lessons to be learned from 

this approach? Are there limits to this strategy? Is there more to the 

story that would indicate the indirect approach was applied? Other 

considerations: 

• Is this approach culturally palatable to American values? 

• Does the approach adhere to national and international laws? 

• Does the approach exceed the international test for 

“proportionality?”
21

C. Help Our Nation Win

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• What about those who were displaced and not eliminated—

does a diaspora allow for regeneration in the future?

C11. SOF’s involvement in fighting narcoterrorism: Are SOF authorities compatible with the mission?

At times, the line between traffickers and terrorists can be indistinguishable, and SOF can encounter both within their battlespaces. The 

nexus between traffickers and terrorists, prevalent in Africa, the Caucasus, and South America, provides the impetus to reexamine SOF 

authorities to address both threats. One might make the argument 

that SOF should have the same authorities to deal with traffickers as 

they do with terrorists. Other considerations:

• How are SOF being used in the fight against narcoterrorism 

south of the border and abroad? If SOF are not being used, 

why not? 

• Do SOF possess the required authorities for this fight? How does 

integration with the Drug Enforcement Agency under counter-narcoterrorism (CNT) authorities affect SOF C2? Would 

integration of Coast Guard activities and capabilities into 

USSOCOM broaden SOF authorities to work in this domain?

• Given the objectives and priorities from a GCC perspective, 

what are the ways to control these CNT activities most effectively and efficiently? 

C12. Identify efficient and effective media for conducting and assessing military information support operations: Are the old media 

techniques, such as leaflets, still effective?

Growing fiscal constraints and shifting communications paradigms 

demand a critical evaluation of traditional military information support operations (MISO) media to ensure SOF continue to provide 

combatant commanders with cost-effective options for shaping the 

human domain. Consider the costs associated with production, distribution, dissemination, and evaluation for traditional and webbased MISO at all levels of war, as well as strengths and weaknesses 

of current MISO methods for targeted audiences at different levels of 

war. What form of media is appropriate for conducting and assessing 

MISO for various target audiences at all levels of war? 

23

D. Continue to Build Relationships

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

D. Continue to Build Relationships

—Global understanding and awareness that creates options

Topic Titles

D1. Purposeful relationships and information sharing: How can we 

improve?

D2. Culture and human nature in building partner capacity of SOF: 

Why are there different outcomes?

D3. Enabling a SOF network under conditions of financial austerity

D4. Educating SOF partners: Effectiveness, funding, and human rights 

vetting

D5. Role of USSOCOM in technology procurement for international 

SOF

D6. Multinational basing: Advantages, constraints, and obstacles

D7. Virtually expanding the SOF network: Capacity building by 

leveraging technology

D8. Aviation within security force assistance and foreign internal 

defense: What is the SOF role?

Topic Descriptions

D1. Purposeful relationships and information sharing: How can we 

improve?

To increase effectiveness, SOF must develop purposeful relationships, interact in an informed manner, and facilitate information 

sharing. How can leaders at all levels throughout the SOF enterprise 

more effectively employ the network of purposeful relationships to 

conduct special operations? What interactions are consistent with 

current command information/guidance? What can USSOCOM do 

to establish an effective collaborative information environment to 

enable information sharing, enhance situational awareness, and support decision making?
24

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

D2. Culture and human nature in building partner capacity of SOF: 

Why are there different outcomes?

Competing theories on the development of nations cite different factors that lead to success. Cultural explanations are sometimes invoked 

to explain differences in national outcomes. Others have pointed to 

human nature as a critical factor. Which factors are most salient to 

building partner capacity, and how should SOF capacity-building 

efforts address those factors? How do cultural differences affect perceptions of capacity and success in capacity building?

D3. Enabling a SOF network under conditions of financial austerity

In the U.S. and most of its partner nations, budgetary pressures are 

constraining the amount of funding available for SOF and international SOF networking. What options are available for sustaining the 

funding of the SOF network? What aspects of the SOF network are 

most deserving of funding, and where can cuts be made without seriously degrading the network? How can partner nations be convinced 

to make greater contributions? To what extent will greater partner 

contributions dilute U.S. leadership of the SOF network, and what 

are the advantages and disadvantages of non-U.S. leadership of the 

SOF network? How do reductions in CF capabilities affect the SOF 

network, and how can these problems be mitigated?

D4. Educating SOF partners: Effectiveness, funding, and human 

rights vetting

SOF have a lengthy history of involvement in training foreign partners; however, their experience in educating those partners is considerably less extensive. Recent efforts to support education in partner 

nations have encountered political stumbling blocks. How important 

are these educational initiatives, and what can be done to expand 

them? Should SOF support educational initiatives in countries where 

the military has been implicated in human rights violations or problematic behaviors? What funding sources are appropriate, MFP-11 or 

security assistance under International Military Education and Training, and under what conditions? What are the essential SOF network 

partner education requirements for effective partnered operations?
25

D. Continue to Build Relationships

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

D5. Role of USSOCOM in technology procurement for international 

SOF

USSOCOM has numerous opportunities, but few authorities, for 

helping foreign partners obtain technology and equipment. Should 

USSOCOM have a greater role in procuring technology for international SOF? How would it contribute to interoperability and the 

expansion of the SOF network? Should USSOCOM receive additional 

funding and authorities to facilitate acquisition for partner SOF? 

Should support be limited to SOF in the SOF network? How would 

this effort be coordinated with other DOD and DOS efforts?

D6. Multinational basing: Advantages, constraints, and obstacles

Interest in multinational SOF basing has increased with the growth 

of the SOF network. What constraints and obstacles stand in the 

way of multinational basing? What countries and regions are best 

suited to multinational basing? What lessons can be learned from 

past joint and multinational basing efforts? What are the advantages 

and disadvantages? 

D7. Virtually expanding the SOF network: Capacity building by 

leveraging technology

With increasing demands to counter violent extremist organizations, 

SOF find themselves stretched thin. Can SOF satisfy GCC theater 

security cooperation and SOF objectives by conducting capacitybuilding activities virtually? What technologies can facilitate virtual 

interactions? To what extent would it relieve pressure on SOF deployment requirements and durations? What activities can be performed 

adequately by virtual means, and which require physical presence? 

Has the spread of modern communications technology reduced the 

importance of face-to-face contact?

D8. Aviation within security force assistance and foreign internal 

defense: What is the SOF role?

Many partner nations would like additional assistance from SOF in 

aviation, but budgetary constraints have prevented SOF from meeting all of the demand. What role should SOF aviation play in security force assistance and FID? In which operational environments 
26

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

can SOF aviation contribute the most? How valuable is SOF aviation 

assistance to the achievement of U.S. national strategic objectives? 

How can aviation contribute to the enabling of the SOF network? 

How does/should SOF efforts mesh with those of other DOD and 

DOS efforts?
27

E. Prepare for the Future

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

E. Prepare for the Future

—SOF ready to win in an increasing complex world

Topic Titles

E1. How can SOF prepare to succeed in an increasingly complex 

world?

E2. Continuity of global special operations post-national or post-global 

catastrophic event: Full-spectrum implications

E3. Education of the Special Operations Force: Preparing SOF for the 

future

E4. SOF successes in preventing wars: Effectiveness of persistent 

peacetime engagement

E5. How have the successes of the last 25 years affected the culture of 

U.S. special operations?

E6. The fundamentals of “wars amongst the people” and implications 

for SOF

E7. Counter-radicalization and counter-lone wolf attacks: Technology, 

social media, and ideology

E8. Role of SOF in political warfare: Achieving national objectives 

short of war

E9. The human domain in crisis, conflict, and war: Influencing 

cognitive behavior

E10. What is the future design of USSOCOM?

E11. Agile information systems that enable SOF network partner 

integration and SOF C2

E12. Strategic developments in special operations: What are the lessons 

for future SOF development?

Topic Descriptions

E1. How can SOF prepare to succeed in an increasingly complex 

world?

SOF must protect and defend our nation’s interests throughout the 

world. How does the command develop, manage, and preserve the 

total Special Operations Force? Can USSOCOM more effectively 
28

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

develop concepts and conduct joint experimentation with JIIM 

partners to address emerging threats and opportunities? Are SOF 

resources aligned based on an adaptable strategy informed by concepts, experimentation, prioritized future capabilities, and defined 

risk? Is support to the GCCs optimal, or can it be improved by obtaining authorities and leveraging Service and partner-nation capabilities?

E2. Continuity of global special operations post-national or postglobal catastrophic event: Full-spectrum implications

Given the interconnectedness and vulnerabilities of American and 

global core systems and infrastructure, society is at risk of service 

disruptions should those systems fail. How does USSOCOM maintain continuity of special operations capabilities and activities after a 

catastrophic disruption or destruction of critical regional, national, or 

global systems, whether deliberate, accidental, or by natural disaster? 

What are the full-spectrum implications for USSOCOM? How does 

USSOCOM overcome various levels of diminished or lost capability or capacity in communications, administration, movement, and 

support to SOF operations and installations? How does USSOCOM 

mitigate or circumvent such disruptions so that the command may 

continue to operate and provide the unique SOF capabilities? How do 

SOF conduct a strategic counterstrike if electronic communications 

are no longer available? 

E3. Education of the Special Operations Force: Preparing SOF for 

the future

The USSOCOM Commander has stated, “The value of our people 

and our unique capabilities are exponentially improved with better 

education, ideas, concepts, and situational understanding.” What 

does USSOCOM need from its educational institutions to ensure 

SOF are prepared for the future? What constitutes a special operations education? Do SOF need to be taught what to think, or how 

to think? Are current and envisioned SOF courses valid? What are 

the professional career fields and academic areas most critical to the 

future of SOF development? 
29

E. Prepare for the Future

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

E4. SOF successes in preventing wars: Effectiveness of persistent 

peacetime engagement

USSOF are active in scores of countries around the world, emphasizing the importance of shaping the environment during “Phase 0” 

operations. What are the historical examples of USSOF deployments 

and operations in “Phase 0” that prevented instability and conflict, 

and ultimately protected U.S. interests and homeland? What conflicts and crises were prevented or ameliorated through persistent 

peacetime engagement by SOF? How was SOF flexible and adaptable 

to adjust to changing situations and make valuable contributions in 

unexpected ways?

E5. How have the successes of the last 25 years affected the culture of 

U.S. special operations?

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has experienced a 

period of significant unipolar hegemony in the world, particularly in 

the military and security sectors. U.S. special operations units have 

enjoyed a level of prestige and support that significantly changed the 

nature of the relationship between SOF and other nations’ forces. Has 

the power position occupied by the U.S. led to a culture of superiority 

in special operations units that is counter to their original strengths 

and purpose? How have the SOF Truths, values, and imperatives 

stood up during this period? Are SOF in tune with our foreign partners’ specific military needs, or is there an expectation that all our 

SOF partners should replicate USSOF? Does the special operations 

community think differently or simply think it is different? What 

lessons are there for future SOF development?

E6. The fundamentals of “wars amongst the people” and implications for SOF

The U.S. Government’s understanding of modern warfare, characterized by asymmetric threats, is complicated, inconsistent, and 

changing frequently. What should the U.S. Government do differently to prepare the nation for war and engage in modern warfare? 

How should the Government utilize and integrate SOF in an era of 

persistent engagement to maximize the strengths of U.S. and partner 

nation SOF?
30

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

E7. Counter-radicalization and counter-lone wolf attacks: Technology, social media, and ideology

During the last decade radicalization has increased, and along with 

lone wolf attacks, is expected to grow. How do SOF contribute to 

U.S. and global efforts to counter-radicalization? What are specific 

SOF counter-radicalization capabilities? How can the SOF network 

contribute? Lone wolf actors inspired by extremist propaganda pose 

legitimate threats to the U.S. homeland and interests. What are the 

implications of next generation technology and social media savvy 

violent extremists? Is ideology truly the center of gravity for violent 

extremist organizations? Historically, how have ideologically-rooted 

violent extremist movements ended? What are the current shortfalls 

in policies, strategies, and techniques to thwart the spread of extremist ideologies? What U.S. and partner nation agencies have capabilities 

to integrate with SOF?

E8. Role of SOF in political warfare: Achieving national objectives 

short of war

Political warfare is the employment of all of a nation’s means and 

instruments, short of war, to achieve national objectives. Some nation 

states and non-state groups are actively engaged in political warfare 

against the United States and its partners. Nation states and nonstate groups that possess the elements of national power (i.e., diplomatic, information, military, economic, financial, intelligence and 

law enforcement) are adapting to the global environment to develop 

and implement strategies and achieve objectives that would have 

previously been accomplished through traditional warfare. Are SOF 

properly configured and employed to see the signs of political warfare? What contributions can USSOF make to identify and counter 

political warfare activities globally?

E9. The human domain in crisis, conflict, and war: Influencing cognitive behavior

Defining and understanding the “human domain” and how SOF 

can influence cognitive behavior in myriad operational environments continues to be a topic of interest. As former USSOCOM 

Commander Admiral William H. McRaven once described it, “the 
31

E. Prepare for the Future

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

human domain encompasses the totality of the physical, cultural, and 

social environments that influence human behavior.” What affects 

people’s perceptions and decision-making that SOF can favorably 

influence to prevent/mitigate/deter crisis and conflict? What are the 

future advanced technologies and cultural social practices for engaging underdeveloped populations in support of partner governments 

to achieve U.S. interests?

E10. What is the future design of USSOCOM? 

SOF have complex organizations, a diverse set of capabilities, and a 

wide range of officially assigned missions. How should USSOCOM 

and the SOF network be structured and organized to resource and 

organize U.S. and partner SOF for the future? How should USSOF 

be employed 25 to 35 years in the future? How can SOF ensure that 

USSOCOM’s unique and varied SOF capabilities are employed to 

their fullest and most enduring effect by the GCC? Is a future redesign required for USSOCOM headquarters, the four Military Service 

SOF component commands, and the TSOCs to effectively meet future 

demands and control future operations?

E11. Agile information systems that enable SOF network partner 

integration and SOF C2

Agile information systems include, but are not limited to: e-mail, 

instant messaging, text messaging, face-to-face stand-up meetings, 

portal pages, et cetera. What are the future agile information systems 

that USSOCOM should be focused on incorporating into the SOF 

network in the next 15 years? 

E12. Strategic developments in special operations: What are the lessons for future SOF development?

The modern American experience with special operations has a 

checkered past. Since the creation of the Office of the Coordinator 

of Information in 1941, the U.S. Government has seen fit to implement numerous legislative and strategic military changes that have 

culminated in the current USSOCOM and component commands. 

While several histories have been written about the components and 

USSOCOM, none have approached the depth of knowledge required 
32

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

to holistically understand precisely what significant stakeholders 

thought about the problems the solutions were meant to solve and 

why they took the positions they did. Why did those individuals or 

organizations who proposed those solutions do so, and what lobbying and counter-lobbying occurred, and why? What made for good 

legislation and what holes were left by certain declarations or laws 

enacted? What work remains to be done to more perfectly form a 

national special operations capability that could have been solved by 

previous legislation, and why was it left undone?
33

F. Preserve Our Force and Families

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

F. Preserve Our Force and Families

—Short- and long-term wellbeing of our SOF Warriors and their 

families

Topic Titles

F1. Understanding the challenges of social reintegration for SOF

F2. Show no weakness: Addressing the stigma associated with seeking 

medical and mental healthcare for SOF

F3. Examine the lessons learned from the SOF Family Pilot Program

F4. What are the vulnerabilities and potential threats to the 

wellbeing of SOF Service members and their families through the 

exploitation of social media?

F5. The Care Coalition: “We will keep the faith with you”

Topic Descriptions

F1. Understanding the challenges of social reintegration for SOF

When SOF deploy, they leave behind the familiar American lifestyle and enter into a foreign culture where they must adapt to local 

customs, practices, and environments. They also shift from a training status to a fully operational one which requires them to be in a 

prolonged heightened state of awareness. With the high-tempo of ingarrison SOF training and repeated deployments over several years, 

there is no longer a definitive separation of deployed and home station lifestyles to decompress; many refer to it as a purely military 

life. General Joseph Votel, USSOCOM Commander, stated at his 

confirmation hearing that “SOF live within a short-term deployment 

and training cycle that result in little or no reintegration period with 

families ... we are always at war.” What are the social reintegration 

challenges of returning SOF? With what frequency should SOF be 

assessed? Does successful reintegration differ across marital status, 

race, religion, gender, or Military Service? If so, how? What makes it 

difficult to reintegrate socially? What are the challenges of social reintegration, especially for single Service members who do not benefit 

from programs supporting family reintegration? Is there a propensity 
34

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

for certain SOF specialties to reintegrate better than others, and what 

lessons can USSOCOM learn from these successes? What policies, 

programs, and practices best assist with social reintegration?

F2. Show no weakness: Addressing the stigma associated with seeking medical and mental healthcare for SOF

Today’s military leaders publicly encourage forces to seek medical 

or behavioral healthcare; however, surveys indicate there remains a 

stigma associated with it. What else can be done to “destigmatize” 

SOF operators and their families seeking medical and behavioral 

healthcare? Are there any adverse consequences to “destigmatizing” medical and behavioral healthcare treatment? What elements 

of military and SOF culture are present that challenge the effort 

to balance mental fitness with duty performance? Is a culture that 

rewards personnel based on how many hours they work, how many 

days they deploy, and how many sacrifices they make counterproductive to establishing programs that support restoring and maintaining 

reduced levels of stress? How can a SOF operator take leave, reduce 

time away from family, and/or seek measures to reduce stress when 

those efforts are possibly stigmatized as non-productive or perceived 

as a weakness? What are the implications of SOF personnel and families seeking outside healthcare under the exigencies of non-disclosure agreements? What roles could a “SOF-for-Life” program play 

in assisting active and retired SOF to cope with stressors? Could an 

analysis of the retired SOF population’s coping mechanisms assist in 

improving current treatment protocols? Is the stigma associated with 

mental health treatment organizationally or culturally imposed? To 

what extent do SOF operators contribute to stigmas which prevent the 

seeking of healthcare or counseling for themselves and their families?

F3. Examine the lessons learned from the SOF Family Pilot 

Program

During the last two years, USSOCOM has received unprecedented 

authorities and funding for POTFF initiatives. The SOF Family Pilot 

Program is well underway. What metrics should be used for assessing success and efficacy of the program? How does POTFF compare 

to U.S. sister Service initiatives? Are there similar or comparable 
35

F. Preserve Our Force and Families

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

programs in place with partner nation SOF? What are their best 

practices that could be adopted by USSOF? Can the sharing of POTFF 

lessons and programs be leveraged to “thicken” the SOF network and 

improve relationships with key SOF partners? Can they be used in 

partnership capacity building?

F4. What are the vulnerabilities and potential threats to the wellbeing of SOF Service members and their families through the 

exploitation of social media?

The proliferation of social media over the last decade and the increased 

reliance on it for communications, gaming, entertainment, and news 

has created a potential threat to Service members and their families. 

Not only can SOF members and their families be identified through 

social media, but nefarious actors can then use that information to 

harass and threaten them. How does this specifically affect SOF, who 

could be considered targets of higher value? As the millennial generation and subsequent generations increasingly rely on social media to 

connect, how will this impact the safety and security of our forces 

and their families? To what extent has social media already been 

exploited to track, seek retribution, or exact revenge against Service 

personnel involved in operations overseas? To what extent does the 

dissemination of information identifying SOF by name through YouTube, Vimeo, and Vine impact the safety and security of our forces 

and their families? What is the threat to the families of SOF based on 

their postings to social media sites, and how will those posts impact 

the Service member and his or her ability to perform their mission in 

an effective manner? With the declassification and release of details 

of previous SOF missions and operations, what are the implications 

for the families and descendants of SOF personnel already retired 

or deceased? How do USSOCOM and the Military Services address 

these issues and mitigate their impact on SOF and their families?

F5. The Care Coalition: “We will keep the faith with you”

In 2005, USSOCOM established an aggressive program to internally 

care for SOF wounded, ill, or injured Service members and their 

families. The stated goal of the Care Coalition is “to accomplish the 

mission by, through, and with government and non-government 
36

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

organizations.” The program has evolved from immediate care and 

recovery assistance to include a Comprehensive Recovery Plan, a 

Comprehensive Transition Plan, and intends to provide direct, lifelong assistance to SOF personnel who are wounded, ill, or injured. In 

addition to transition assistance and mentoring, an adaptive sports 

program and fellowships were added. Documenting its history, evolution, and measures of effectiveness are of interest to USSOCOM leadership. How effective is the program? Can it be considered a model 

advocacy program for other Military Services? Has it had a direct 

effect in increasing special operations readiness? What metrics can be 

considered to measure its effectiveness? With expected future budget 

constraints, is it a long-term sustainable program?
37

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Overview

The J5 Strategy Division is responsible for USSOCOM’s understanding of 

the global security environment, which helps articulate appropriate strategy 

and force development requirements. The Key Strategic Issues List (KSIL) is 

a set of questions the J5 believe to be relevant in an attempt to support this 

understanding and is built around trends expected to continue for the next 

10 to 20 years. This is a living document and it will change to address other 

questions as the J5 is able to generate satisfactory answers to some, while 

identifying additional questions to explore. If individuals are interested in 

working with the J5 on one of the KSIL topics (with your organization or 

individually), please contact: Lieutenant Colonel Tom Nagle at (813) 826-

3132, Bob Jones at (813) 826-1294, or via e-mail at J5KSIL@socom.mil.

Discussion

In addition to using these questions as a method to focus J5’s thinking and 

research, the KSIL is also used as a tool to conduct engagements with outside organizations. They are used to both spur discussion and notify others 

what USSOCOM interests are. In cases where outside organizations share 

these interests, the KSIL provides a list of potential research topics. The J5 

is building a network intended for sharing insights and research products 

to better inform strategic thinking, while continuing to look for opportunities to become involved with researchers and receive feedback related to 

KSIL questions. In some cases, the J5 has sponsored travel to USSOCOM 

for briefings on the findings of a research project related to the question list 

to general officer-level personnel.

KSIL key points

• Aimed at improving understanding of global conditions and 

trends to enable better strategy for USSOCOM.

• Intended to invite debate among competing perspectives; multiple perspectives on a single question are valuable.
38

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• Relevant for academic inquiry to encourage participation from 

both civilian universities and professional military education 

schools.

• Focused around: What should be keeping us up at night when 

we think about the future?

What follows is a summary list of the KSIL and individual descriptions 

with objectives and pertinent research themes to support a comprehensive 

understanding of each strategic issue.

Topic Titles

G1. Weapons of mass destruction

G2. Information/digital age

G3. Shifting power distribution and diffusion

G4. Megacities

G5. Tactical actions versus strategic results 

G6. Conflict prevention 

G7. Human nature versus culture 

G8. Risk management 

G9. Interest-based strategies 

G10. Weapons technology proliferation 

G11. Disruptive and game-changing technologies 

G12. Adaptability and agility 

G13. Capability gaps 

G14. Long-term fiscal constraints 

G15. Strategic constraints 

G16. Demographics 

G17. Energy/other resources

Topic Descriptions

G1. Weapons of mass destruction

Are current policies and actions advancing or undermining our 

counter-proliferation intentions? Are the incentives for the acquisition and/or use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) rising or 

subsiding at the state level? What about the incentives for transfer 

of WMD to non-state actors? How can the U.S. favorably change 
39

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

these incentives? How can USSOCOM better contribute to counterproliferation efforts? 

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights across 

the breadth and depth of counter-proliferation efforts. Enabling technology for WMD is increasingly accessible for a range of actors, and 

counter-proliferation capabilities are not keeping pace. Therefore, 

incentives/disincentives for acquisition remain paramount. Sanctions 

have not proven especially effective in deterring some states from 

developing WMD capabilities. Enforcing global “rules” for possession 

of such weapons is also difficult in an era where states and populations are especially sensitive to any perceived infringement upon 

their sovereignty. The United States’ counter-proliferation effort is 

evolving, and our need for greater understanding of the associated 

issues is growing. The majority of our current counter-WMD efforts 

are aimed at nuclear proliferation, while growing evidence indicates 

that it is other forms of WMD that will be more problematic. 

Themes of interest include:

• Evolving incentives for transfer.

• Options for preventing or deterring proliferation.

• Systemic evaluation of the United States’ counter-proliferation 

program.

• Evolution of WMD policies, especially those associated with 

rogue states and non-state actors.

• Implications of U.S./United Nations proliferation policies on 

emerging states.

• Options to manage expanding membership to the “nuclear 

club.”

• Achieving the appropriate balance between nuclear, biological, 

chemical, cyber, and electromagnetic pulse counter-proliferation efforts.

• Potential advantages of focusing policy on management of 

consequences of possession.

• Evolving definitions of WMD. What is the next possible 

WMD? Most dangerous? Most Likely?

• Can we adequately survive/recover from a WMD event? 
40

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

G2. Information/digital age

Does the information/digital age impact the nature of stability? What 

are the implications of increasingly numerous empowered individuals? How does information transparency affect the interactions of 

states? What are the implications for our military operations and 

engagements? Are there opportunities? What are the specific implications for SOF in cyber warfare?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

how the information and digital age is changing the nature of the 

global strategic environment. Cyber tools are changing the relationships among and between individuals, informal groups, non-state 

actors, and states. Individuals and groups have been empowered by 

the accessibility of the Internet and social media, which has in turn 

driven rapid social change. States’ ability to adapt and respond to 

powerful narratives that emerge through these tools has been increasingly challenged by their speed, scope, and reach. Governments are 

also struggling to safeguard state secrets; sensitive information is 

increasingly vulnerable to disclosure. While the information and 

digital age may once have been an advantage to the U.S., it now finds 

itself struggling to keep up with the latest advances quickly spreading 

across the globe through the private sector.

Themes of interest include: 

• Implications for governance and regional stability.

• Falling cost of network development for non-state actors.

• Social media networks and cultural impacts.

• Development and leverage of distributed populations.

• Grievance mobilization; recruitment to causes/networking.

• Influence of “virtual” leaders.

• Effects on state decision cycles.

• Ability of U.S. to influence narrative/information wars.

• Appropriate versus needed U.S. Government authorities in 

the cyber realm.

• Impacts on the relationship between states and non-state 

actors.

• Operations security issues and bureaucratic practices (inability 

to change/update/procure systems appropriately).
41

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• Security of personal information.

• State secrets and malignant disclosure.

• Cost/benefits of open information sharing.

• Crowdsourcing and intelligence analysis.

• U.S. vulnerability to cyber-attack, and appropriate military 

preparation/response.

G3. Shifting power distribution and diffusion

Is the nature of power changing on the international stage? If so, is it 

doing so uniformly (i.e., is there a common understanding of “what 

matters” across regions)? Are power shifts creating a higher likelihood 

of conflict, if so, among and between which groups? Are today’s shifts 

in power unique or largely similar to historical experience? How does 

this change how USSOCOM/TSOCs/SOF conduct engagements and 

the range of SOF activities?

The objective of this research topic is to further develop our insights 

into how new power relationships are shaping the strategic environment. There are two main areas of interest on this question: internal 

and external power shifts. Internally, governments are increasingly 

challenged to meet the demands placed on them by populations 

that are becoming more aware of their relative circumstances. The 

disaffected are better able to organize using modern communications capabilities and pressure governments through either violent 

or non-violent means. Externally, regions with shifting power among 

states are likely to face turmoil. Even if a rising power intends to do 

so peacefully, the established power may act to preserve its position 

through violent means. It becomes more difficult to discern how governments facing multiple pressures both internally and externally 

are likely to interpret their interests and predict their actions. Stable 

relationships may degrade quickly under these conditions. Building 

a stable network of partners requires an alignment of interests; these 

interests may shift dramatically in the current environment and affect 

U.S. strategy. How does the U.S. deal with challenges to its power?

Themes of interest include: 

• Diffusion of power from traditional centers to new players.

• Associated impacts on interest alignment.
42

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• Changes in the nature/sources of power—regionally or 

globally.

• Implications for U.S. partners in terms of policy and military 

activities.

• The role of relative and/or absolute power gains in today’s 

world.

• Changes in the viability of security umbrellas (conventional 

and nuclear).

• Evolving constraints on power.

• Evolving utility of the use of force.

• Changing utility of types of military power.

• Approaches to resolving power struggles.

• Changes in the role and influence of international institutions.

• Challenges to Westphalian order, and ability of states to 

respond.

• Ability of states to resolve internal power struggles.

• The viability of mediator roles for the U.S.

• The relationship between power shifts and U.S. interests and/

or security.

• The relationship between business and states’ ability, or inability, to exercise power.

• Implementing effective strategies given changing contexts of 

power.

G4. Megacities

Do rapidly growing cities with massive urban slums pose a substantial challenge to vital U.S. national interests? What are the critical distinctions between such cities in developing versus developed nations? 

What is the basis of control/power/influence within a megacity? Who 

is most likely to wield it (governments, gangs, tribes, or anarchy)? Is 

it possible to create advantageous strategic effects under these conditions? Is the megacity environment unique for SOF? If so, what 

capabilities are required for understanding it and conducting the full 

range of SOF activities?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights and 

understanding of rapidly growing, hyper-connected megacities. This 
43

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

effort is based upon creating an understanding of the major trends 

at work in the early twenty-first century: population growth, urbanization, littoralization, and vastly increased electronic connectivity. 

Between 2012 and 2040, the world population is estimated to grow 

by 2.2 billion, but that growth will not be evenly distributed. Urban 

environments in littoral areas in the developing world will account 

for a significant portion of additional population growth, and draw 

in almost 1 billion rural-to-urban migrants, increasing the developing world’s urban population by more than 3 billion. These urban 

environments will consist of large, densely populated under-governed 

urban areas with dramatically increased electronic connectivity. Such 

an environment will account for drastic changes in demographics that 

are themselves sources of conflict for formal governance and wide 

opportunities for corruption, violence, and unrest (youth, unemployment, wealth disparity, disease, access to healthcare, sex distribution, 

et cetera). At the same time, greater connectivity between individuals 

able to share views and import ideas from regions beyond megacities 

increasingly allows violence, unrest, and extremist views to rapidly 

spread in densely populated urban areas with negative effects on the 

stability of megacities.

Themes of interest include: 

• Perceptions versus reality on opportunities in megacities.

• Defining U.S. interests in megacities.

• Differences between cities and organized states.

• State’s power versus city’s local influence and power (preeminence struggle?).

• Role/impact of overlapping jurisdictions.

• Relationship between formal city core and informal periphery.

• Immigration integration/culture clashes.

• Competing methods of informal leadership and influence.

• How to develop relationships with informal leadership 

structures/players.

• Ability of the U.S. to balance relationships with cities and 

owning states.

• Role of demographic issues in exacerbating problems (economic, political).

• Natural disaster consequences and response.
44

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• Potential trends that reverse/increase/change migration to 

cities.

• Stress on surrounding resource system as cities grow.

G5. Tactical actions versus strategic results

Has there been a disconnect between our tactical actions and our 

strategic intentions during the war on terror? If so, are we resolving 

it? What have the strategic lessons been? Are we able to improve our 

strategic success without making major changes across the interagency? What types of strategic metrics should we use? How can SOF 

better assess and operate using measures of strategic performance?

The objective of this research topic is to further develop our insights 

into why tactical programs and activities intended to produce certain 

enduring effects during the U.S. response to the attacks of 9/11 have, 

by and large, fallen short of those objectives. Assessing the effectiveness of operations has been a deliberate activity since World War II, 

with a heavy emphasis on quantitative measures emerging in the 

Vietnam era. Various approaches (systems analysis, effects-based 

operations, et cetera) have fallen short in establishing compelling 

tactical metrics to desired strategic effects. There are a variety of factors that may contribute to this effect. This topic is intended to spur 

research into discrete areas, such as the effect of using tactical metrics 

to drive strategic effects, as well as into cross-cutting analysis that 

assesses how current thinking on operations assessment may impact 

strategic progress.

Themes of interest include: 

• The benefits and risks of employing immediate/local/objective 

measures of tactical performance to predict strategic progress.

• The benefits and risks of employing measures which are more 

subjective, broader in area, and accrue over time in an effort 

to give a better sense of strategic progress.

• Exploring how prioritizing tactical metrics may undermine 

strategic objectives.

• Exploring how assumptions of rationality may mislead tactical actions.
45

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• Aspects of human nature as a framework for assessing strategic 

progress.

• The development of a family of indicators of strategic progress 

that is naturally occurring, and easily collected and reported.

• The appropriateness of labels (i.e., regular and irregular warfare) for understanding conflicts.

• Comparing and contrasting measures of strategic performance 

in “state-based” and “populace-based” conflicts. 

• What would a counter-UW strategy consist of? Would it be 

more appropriate than the more traditional responses (e.g., 

counterterrorism, combatting terrorism, IW, et cetera)?

• Have policy decisions to preserve regimes deemed as good, 

or remove/replace regimes deemed as bad, created infeasible 

conditions in the current strategic environment for achieving 

the strategic goals desired?

• Is stability of governance (requiring changes that may increase 

short-term risk to U.S. interests) more important than stasis 

of government for long-term U.S. interests?

• How do changes in the strategic environment affect how we 

think about the strategies and tactics best suited to secure our 

interests?

G6. Conflict prevention

Are the deterrence-based theories behind the U.S. National Security 

Strategy adequate to address the current and future strategic environment? Are they appropriate for state and non-state actors? Is the 

competition and conflict we are currently experiencing necessarily 

detrimental to U.S. National Security Strategy? Is prevention of conflict practical? If so, what would a “prevention approach” entail? How 

could USSOCOM facilitate a new prevention approach?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

which approaches are appropriate for achieving U.S. national security 

objectives in the current and future strategic environments. It is possible that a heavy emphasis on a deterrence-based security approach 

is not adequate or appropriate, given the current and emerging strategic environment. Further, any potential successes in deterring 
46

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

conflict are difficult to measure or even understand, particularly 

given information that has come to light from the Soviet archives 

that indicate our assumptions on their rationality were unfounded. 

Simply deterring an undesirable event does not necessarily address 

underlying causes or grievances that may fester under conditions of 

artificially-imposed stability. The absence of conflict does not indicate 

the absence of threats to U.S. interests, and the costs associated with 

maintaining a status quo that is threatened in multiple dimensions 

grow quickly. A more comprehensive conflict “prevention approach” 

may provide a way to complement or replace the heavy emphasis on 

deterrence. A thorough examination of both approaches is required to 

improve strategy for the current and emerging strategic environment.

Themes of interest include: 

• Viability of modern deterrence strategies in the current/emerging strategic environment.

• U.S. security costs and benefits from conflicts and competition.

• Elements of a prevention-based approach.

• Determining the costs and benefits of a prevention approach.

• Exploring the relationship of prevention and deterrence. Are 

they complementary or in conflict?

• The role of prevention and deterrence at the tactical and strategic levels.

• Advancing U.S. interests through prevention and/or 

deterrence.

• Appropriateness of systemic assumptions (i.e., rational, unitary 

actors).

• Assessing the success of deterrence and/or prevention.

G7. Human nature versus culture

Have we focused too exclusively on the role of culture in attempting to 

explain recent crises? Are the problems we will face in the future more 

firmly rooted in human nature or human cultures? Is the answer to 

this question important for our strategic approach? For a force that 

distinguishes itself on understanding language, regional expertise, 

and culture, how do SOF incorporate/use aspects of fundamental 

human nature in its activities?
47

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

The objective of this research topic is to further develop our insights 

into a more comprehensive socio-cultural awareness. One must 

understand the culture where one operates to implement effective 

tactical programs, but should also explore the possibility that there 

are common aspects of human nature across cultures that are equally 

necessary to understand. This would assist in developing strategic 

concepts and frameworks that lend context and focus to tactical 

actions. As people become increasingly empowered to informally 

challenge formal power structures through legal means if available, 

or illegal means if necessary, an understanding of human nature may 

help develop a clearer understanding of these types of problems and 

conflicts.

Themes of interest include: 

• The distinctions and commonalities between societies that are 

stable and unstable.

• The distinctions between “naturally” and “artificially” stable 

societies.

• Commonalities across cultures with origins in human nature.

• The distinction between political and popular legitimacy in 

relation to stability.

• The distinction between political and popular sovereignty in 

relation to stability.

• The sufficiency, value, and role of various legal mechanisms in 

fostering stability across cultures.

• Is political conflict internal to a system of governance distinct 

from political conflict between systems of governance? How 

so, and so what?

• Do aspects of human nature provide strategic indicators for 

the health/stability of a society?

• How can SOF track strategic indicators while concurrently developing cultural awareness to improve tactical 

performance? 

G8. Risk management

In what areas does the U.S. or USSOCOM face a great deal of risk, 

given current and projected resourcing? Which areas are critical? In 

what areas are we able to accept risk? In what areas must we “buy 
48

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

down” risk to maximum extent possible? What are the most effective 

risk-management strategies available?

The objective of this research topic is to develop insights on the best 

practices for managing risk and pursuing a strategy in a rapidly 

changing environment. Globalization has created a more complex 

world, made up of a tangled web of relationships and other interdependent factors. Accurately predicting the types of threats and 

unforeseen events we must contend with is increasingly difficult. 

Current practice across the national security apparatus closely ties 

risk directly to threats; new “risks” (interpreted as threats) require 

new capabilities or programs to counter them. The wider range of 

potential crises, however, leads to a longer list of capabilities and 

capacities to optimally respond. Budget constraints prevent the U.S. 

from mitigating risk simply through identifying additional resource 

requirements. Though there has been a higher emphasis on “flexibility” as an approach to mitigate risk in recent years, multi-role 

platforms and capabilities that possess that trait are increasingly 

expensive. An approach that provides a better method of assessing 

risks associated with strategic choices and weighing trade-offs across 

the options will better support decision-making.

Themes of interest include: 

• Opportunity costs.

• Resource management and prioritization. 

• Improving risk assessment methodologies.

• Emerging sources of military and political risk.

• Opportunities for controlling risk.

• Errors in risk assessment and response.

• Organizational issues in effective risk management processes.

• Linking risk to strategy.

• Utility of measurements for levels of risk.

• Options to transfer/share risk with partners.

• National security equivalents of diversification or other risk 

management strategies.

• Multipurpose weapons platforms capabilities and pitfalls.
49

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

G9. Interest-based strategies

How can the United States best position itself to preserve and build 

upon a network of actors with interests that are congruent? How do 

we ensure stability of this network as governments change and adjust 

to the demands of their populations? How should USSOCOM posture 

itself to support an “interest-based” approach?

The objective of this research topic is to develop insights into an 

interest-based approach to strategy (national government, Military 

Service, or combatant command). This includes examining how interests are derived from organizational values, norms, and morals. If 

some interests change over time, shaped by evolving cultures, fortunes, and current events, are there vital interests that endure? As 

the global situation shifts due to power distribution and diffusion, a 

country’s interests may change to meet the new power arrangements. 

This can put a country at odds with former “partners” who used to 

have shared interests and bring former “threats” into closer alignment. Another aim of this topic is to explore relative advantages of 

other approaches to strategy (e.g., threat-based or influence-based 

strategies). Lastly, documents such as the National Security Strategy 

and national defense and military strategies describe U.S. national 

interests. As a functional combatant command with global reach, 

USSOCOM is in a unique position to support vital national interests in both direct and indirect manners. How USSOCOM can best 

provide this support may shift over time as the global environment 

evolves.

Themes of interest include: 

• Defining interests of states, individuals, and other actors.

• Utility of broad ideological versus narrow pragmatic interests.

• Realism versus liberalism.

• Evolution of U.S. grand strategy.

• Influence of partners’ interests on achieving U.S. interests.

• Incongruence between values and interests or how to better 

align values and interests.

• Utility of, or problems with, “special relationships” to an interest-based strategy.
50

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• SOF contribution to national interests beyond counterterrorism and counter-WMD.

• Dangers of over-reliance on threat-based strategic approaches 

to address current events.

• Concept of near-, mid-, and long-term strategy-making to 

address vital and important national interests.

• Reconciliation of divergent interests with partners.

• Can an interest-based strategy compete in the budgetary process with a threat-based approach?

G10. Weapons technology proliferation

How are the proliferation of innovation and the falling cost of weapons and dual-use technology changing military balances of power? 

How does advanced weaponry in the hands of non-state actors change 

the dynamic for SOF activities?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

how innovation proliferation, low-cost weapons, and dual-use technologies will impact the changing military balances of power. As 

recent history has proven, innovation and dual-use technologies can 

be stolen or appropriated by hostile military powers. Similarly, certain non-state actors and individuals will seek to acquire and exploit 

dual-use technological innovations and low-cost weapons. As the 

complexity of technological innovations continue to increase at an 

exponential rate, the universal appetite for these advancements is 

unlikely to wane. Existing control mechanisms such as international 

regulations and security arrangements may be insufficient to stem the 

tide of proliferation over time. The risk associated with the proliferation of certain technologies or weapons could potentially jeopardize 

global security and stability. Such an environment may compromise 

the comparative technological advantage enjoyed by the U.S. military 

and eventually tip the scale of power.

Themes of interest include: 

• New applications of emerging technology.

• Impacts of multiple centers of weapons innovation across the 

globe.
51

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• Sufficiency of international agreements to control detrimental 

effects.

• Cost-effective responses to new technological challenges.

• Appropriateness of exquisite, multi-role weapon platforms in 

a world of rapid innovation.

• Areas of the globe at highest risk due to technological innovation in weapons.

• Potential changes to U.S. industrial base.

• How to adapt DOD to benefit from weapons innovation.

G11. Disruptive and game-changing technologies

What disruptive and game-changing technologies have potential 

global significance? How will these emerging technologies impact 

future conflict? How does USSOCOM leverage game changing technologies to advance SOF operations? Is USSOCOM’s acquisition process positioned to capitalize on rapid fielding of untested, potentially 

disruptive technology?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

emerging disruptive and game-changing technologies that could 

have global significance and/or impact on future conflict. Emerging 

disruptive technologies, particularly ones with broad applications, 

have the potential to transform existing markets or create new ones. 

When applied to a military problem, game-changing technologies 

can disrupt existing doctrines or TTPs and radically alter the balance between competitors. As the pace of technological development 

continues to accelerate, competitors will strive to integrate innovative technology to gain an advantage. More broadly, opportunities 

created by new technologies will alter societies in unforeseen ways, 

as social media has.

Themes of interest include: 

• Space exploration.

• Nanotechnology and wetware.

• 3D printing.

• Cyber innovations.

• Human enhancements.

• Multi-nation weapons procurement programs.
52

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• Bioengineering.

• Agro engineering.

• Impacts on position, navigation, and timing.

• A day without ... (pick a technology).

G12. Adaptability and agility

Is the USSOCOM enterprise an adequately flexible system capable 

of rapid change (in whole or in parts) when required? What “best 

practices” can be implemented to maximize our ability to generate 

capacity and capability when needed? How does USSOCOM position 

itself to provide the widest options possible for policymakers?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

USSOCOM’s ability to generate capacity, and its capacity to meet, 

protect, and advance U.S. national interests. SOF is commonly viewed 

as the force of choice when considering small footprint, cost-effective 

tactical operations that create strategic effects. In the last 13 years, 

the USSOCOM enterprise has grown from 25,000 to nearly 69,000 

personnel. This growth has enabled SOF to operate further, in greater 

capacity, and in more regions of the world than ever before. However, 

this growth in capacity does not come without consequences ... particularly as the United States enters a period of fiscal austerity. The 

2014 Quadrennial Defense Review is primarily focused on rebalancing the Joint Force, which includes reducing force structure of the 

Military Services. Special operations rely heavily on the Military Services to provide enabling support. Cuts to the Military Services’ force 

structure will impact special operations not only in enabling support, 

but in recruitment as well. The degree to which these cuts will impact 

SOF is yet to be determined. However, the USSOCOM enterprise 

will need to develop innovative approaches to not only maintain its 

own capability and capacity, but adapt to a leaner Military Services 

capacity that could impede USSOCOM’s activities.

Themes of interest include: 

• Bureaucratic and Military Services preferences.

• Barriers to innovation.

• SOF truths versus evolving strategic landscape.

• Developing capabilities and capacities prior to crisis.
53

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• Effects-based management and development of force.

• Defining a SOF narrative for the future (preparing for and 

preserving peace).

• Small footprint, cost-effective approaches.

• Integrating SOF into Military Service, GCC strategies.

• Alternative structures for optimal organization, management, 

and recruitment of SOF.

• Pushing “Joint” down to lower levels in SOF.

G13. Capability gaps

Are the methods the DOD and USSOCOM use to determine gaps in 

required capabilities adequate and appropriate for the current strategic environment? How do we balance effectiveness and efficiency? 

Are there widening gaps in any critical capabilities that we have been 

unable to address?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

how DOD in general, and USSOCOM more specifically, might better 

anticipate and respond to identified capability gaps. Although many 

observers of the strategic environment have pointed to fundamental 

changes that are occurring, the processes by which we prioritize and 

procure capabilities (materiel or otherwise) have remained basically 

unchanged for decades. Given lengthening procurement timelines 

and routine budgetary problems with major weapons systems, the 

DOD will eventually need to reexamine the methodologies that we 

employ to appropriately resource our strategies. Further, it is appropriate to explore whether the processes by which gaps are identified 

are adequately connected to a guiding strategy, and not dominated 

by more narrow bureaucratic preferences.

Themes of interest include: 

• DOD/SOF narrative, determining how best to employ forces.

• Balancing current demands against developing future needs.

• How to best determine/measure gaps. Threats? Opportunities? 

Other possibilities?

• Identifying and designing capability requirements.

• Role of understanding and design for capability requirements.

• Controlling bureaucratic preferences.
54

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

• Innovation in capabilities during fiscal constraints.

• Current, unaddressed capability gaps.

• Approaches in prioritization of requirements (no fail missions, 

enhancing capabilities, et cetera).

• Balancing effectiveness against efficiency.

• The responsiveness of the requirements process.

G14. Long-term fiscal constraints

Do the growing fiscal constraints in industrialized nations affect their 

perceptions of their interests and appropriate security postures? Are 

military alliances and partnerships likely to undergo changes due to 

fiscal pressures? Will powerful states be less likely to offer security 

guarantees? What types of military commitments will states be willing/unwilling to make for less than vital interests? Should this affect 

U.S. policy and basing? Beyond USSOCOM-specific budgetary pressures, how does the wider financial pressure affect USSOCOM/SOF, 

and are there opportunities upon which to capitalize?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into how 

growing fiscal constraints across developed nations will impact their 

security posture and the security environment writ large. Despite a 

variety of security challenges, the U.S. and other industrial nations 

are reducing defense spending. Economic recovery from the global 

recession of 2007-2009 has not been sufficiently robust to avoid spending cuts. Such an environment may force nations to reevaluate the 

interests for which they are willing to deploy military forces. Reduced 

commitments and security arrangements among partner nations may 

shape the strategic environment in unforeseen manners. 

Themes of interest include: 

• Uneven global economic recovery and security impacts.

• New and shifting regional economic and security agreements 

important to the U.S.

• Trends in responses to pop-up crises.

• Nuclear aspirant states and the changing role/manner of 

deterrence.

• The viability of massive weapons programs (e.g., F-35, K-46, 

Littoral Combat Ship, et cetera) in this environment.
55

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

• Shifting state perceptions of “vital national interests” versus 

“less than vital.” 

• Emerging multi-polarity, or multiple power vacuums? 

• Shifts in the nature of military responses in lower-intensity 

situations (e.g., air power, SOF, and drones).

• Impacts on the viability/credibility of security umbrellas.

• The effect of this security environment on incentives for other 

states to acquire conventional or unconventional weapon 

capabilities.

• Cost-effective strategies for the U.S. and partner nations to 

protect interests.

• Changes in support to multinational organizations and associated effects.

• The role and relationship of economic power to military power 

(is this changing?).

• The sufficiency of Goldwater-Nichols today; is there a next step 

for Military Service interdependence?

• The viability of burden sharing in a world with widely diverging interests and economic disruption.

G15. Strategic constraints

Does our strategic culture blind us to potential threats, sources of 

risk, and opportunities? Does our national security process have 

a similar effect? How can USSOCOM avoid overly restricted solutions to problems that are poorly defined or understood due to these 

constraints?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into how 

the idea of constraints affects strategy development. Constraints can 

either be self-imposed or forced upon us from the system we operate 

in. The cultural biases of the military and the DOD influence our 

strategic performance. Organizational culture theories suggest that 

our point of view on particular issues restricts our ability to perceive the full array of options available. Without the benefit of considering all relevant possibilities, our strategic performance may be 

degraded. Additionally, the United States’ position as a global leader 

ties us to the international political system and its processes which 
56

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

put constraints on our actions. Furthermore, our domestic system has 

legal, moral, political, and social constraints that affect our strategic 

outlook and subsequent plans to address national security issues. This 

topic is intended to assist in identifying sources of potential blind 

spots and constraints and locating effective and acceptable ways to 

provide new perspectives and approaches on enduring problems. 

USSOCOM must recognize the constraints we operate within in 

order to develop better strategic approaches.

Themes of interest include: 

• Definition of constraint and its implications for the military 

and USSOCOM, specifically.

• The impact of organizational culture on decision-making.

• Improving information-search heuristics.

• Current problems and identifying new perspectives.

• Constraints of the international and domestic systems.

• How does an organization develop a holistic strategy that 

accounts for constraints?

G16. Demographics

How does the rise of the middle class in developing nations affect 

the security threats and opportunities in those countries? What are 

the most dangerous population shifts or migrations on the horizon? 

What are the implications of “youth in revolt” in fragile states (situations in which youth lose touch with their culture as families are 

torn apart by conflict and respond in ways that separate them from 

traditional guidance)? Does the changing role of women in unstable 

regions have USSOCOM implications?

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

global demographic trajectories and the resulting implications for 

U.S. interests. As globalization and other factors create the conditions 

for a rising middle class in developing nations, it can also support 

the expansion of conflict. Immigrants fleeing conflict, or moving 

to regions with better opportunities, can challenge their new governments’ ability to respond. More affluent societies with higher 

educational levels typically have lower birthrates than immigrant 

groups from developing nations, which contributes to social stresses. 
57

G. USSOCOM J5 Key Strategic Issues List

Previous years’ topics lists are available online at https://jsou.socom.mil.

Europe is currently experiencing a range of problems associated with 

an inability to adequately integrate new arrivals. Angry unemployed 

youths have frequently taken to rioting, and immigrant groups are 

often isolated from both the larger society as well as their heritage. Is 

it possible for the U.S. to favorably shape the trends associated with 

this challenge?

Themes of interest include: 

• Relationship to U.S. interests.

• Interacting system (of demographic trends) or single-factor 

causality?

• Globalization.

• Education relative to birth rates.

• Transnational organized crime.

• Integration and resolving cultural stresses created by 

migration.

• Response of organic population to demographic shifts 

(cultural?).

• Politics of blame and out-groups.

• Perceived opportunities leading to permanent or temporary 

migration.

• Youth bulges, unemployment, and dissatisfaction—relative to 

governance.

• Technological empowerment of isolated immigrants. 

• Changing patterns in connections across diaspora 

communities.

• Needs versus demands versus expectations of the growing 

middle class on basic services, commodities, and energy.

• SOF implications in fragile states and shifting populations.

G17. Energy/other resources

Will changes in energy harvesting and consumption alter the global 

security environment? Will rising energy consumption in emerging nations impact the strategic landscape? Will demand for other 

resources (food, water, et cetera) shape conflict in manners that have 

implications for USSOCOM?
58

Special Operations Research Topics 2016

Please send your completed research papers on these topics to the JSOU Center for Special Operations Studies and Research.

The objective of this research topic is to develop new insights into 

energy and natural resource trends, the associated regional and global 

security impacts, and the implication for special operations. Many 

consider access to energy and other natural resources a critical element to international relations and assert that it has been a principal 

catalyst for conflict and war. Continued growing global demand for 

resources strains current distribution capabilities and depletes known 

reserves. Other changes in the energy and natural resources strategic 

environment may also impact the international order, perpetuating 

old struggles and possibly conflict among a new set of global actors.

Themes of interest include: 

• Shifts in regional power and world order.

• Political stress points.

• Economic competition.

• Global corporations.

• Nascent, alternative markets.

• Probable technological breakthroughs (enabling new energy 

sources or retrograde fuels).

• Cultural and social aspects.

• Nongovernmental organizations and transnational power 

structures.

• Climate and environmental pressures.

• Developing versus developed nations.

• Trends in self-sufficiency and dependency.

• Sources and distribution networks.

• Vulnerability of critical energy infrastructure.

• Potential humanitarian crisis points.

• U.S. presence and response.

• Opening of “new” frontiers: Arctic, Antarctica, Amazonia, 

Andes, Asia, Pacific, space/lunar, et cetera.