Reflections on Special Operations Forces Leader-Operator Talent Development
Day 8, Ep.12: Talent as Strategy.
Reflections on Special Operations Forces Leader-Operator Talent Development ...
Special Operations at the Edge of a New Era.
By Dr. Isaiah (Ike) Wilson III, professor, and president (emeritus), Joint Special Operations University1
In a dimly lit war room at MacDill Air Force Base, a group of elite military educators, strategists, and operators huddled over a series of maps, graphs, and data streams. Their mission was not to plan a raid or coordinate a drone strike but rather to rethink the very future of U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF).
At the center of this effort stood the Joint Special Operations University (JSOU), the intellectual nerve center of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). Its latest initiative—JSOU NEXT (JNEXT)—aimed to prepare SOF for a radically different strategic environment, one that would demand not just operational prowess but cognitive overmatch.
“We found ourselves living in a time when disruptive change continued to outpace our ability to see, understand, and anticipate it,” a senior JSOU official explained. “JSOU NEXT wasn’t just about educating operators—it was about sharpening the edge of SOF’s strategic advantage in what we came to call the Fourth Age.”
The Fourth Age of SOF: Adapting to a New Threat Landscape
Since its creation in 2000, JSOU trained and educated SOF personnel in everything from counterterrorism to unconventional warfare. But as the challenges of the last two decades began to give way to a more complex, multi-dimensional era of great-power competition, it became clear that the post-9/11 counterterrorism mission—where SOF cemented its reputation as the world’s premier special operations force—would no longer be the sole focus.
Instead, the evolving security landscape demanded that Special Operations pivot to a new paradigm: compound security competition (CsC).
This shift was not merely theoretical. The 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the Integrated Deterrence Strategy placed an increasing emphasis on positional advantage, strategic influence, and irregular warfare in the “gray zone”—a nebulous space between diplomacy and war, where China, Russia, and other adversaries were already waging sophisticated campaigns of coercion and subversion, often below the threshold of open conflict.
It was precisely this environment that JSOU NEXT sought to prepare SOF for, ensuring that operators would not merely react to geopolitical developments but would actively shape the security landscape in ways favorable to the United States and its allies.
Why Change? The Perils of Standing Still
For much of its modern history, SOF operated within a relatively stable framework of core tasks—counterterrorism, direct action, unconventional warfare, and foreign internal defense. These missions, though still vital, proved insufficient to overmatch the threats of the Fourth Age.
“Our adversaries were neutralizing American influence through economic coercion, disinformation, cyber warfare, and covert political operations,” a JSOU strategist noted. “They weren’t meeting us on the battlefield—they were shaping the battlefield before we even realized we were in a fight.”
To counter these tactics, SOF had to reconsider its use, utility, and identity. This was the essence of JSOU NEXT—a transformation of SOF’s education, training, and strategic approach to warfare in the 21st century.
JSOU NEXT: Sharpening the Edge of SOF’s Intellectual Advantage
JSOU NEXT did not simply seek to modernize curricula; rather, it envisioned a fundamental shift in the way SOF was educated and prepared for the future.
The initiative was built upon a “H.E2.R.O” framework, a structured approach to ensuring that the next generation of SOF operators would emerge as Highly Educated, Hyper (Tech & Teaming) Enabled, Responsible Operators—capable of understanding, adapting to, and outmaneuvering adversaries in an increasingly complex operational environment.
To achieve this, JSOU NEXT developed five (5) Joint-Combined SOF Core Competencies, each designed to bridge the gap between education and operational reality. These competencies included Resilience & Resistance Operations, which prepared SOF to lead irregular warfare and unconventional deterrence efforts in coordination with allies and partners. The second pillar focused on Strategic Influence & Information Advantage, recognizing that future conflicts would be fought not just on battlefields but in the information space, where adversaries were already weaponizing disinformation and social media to undermine democratic institutions.
The third competency, Strategic Intelligence & Emergent Technologies, addressed the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, cyber capabilities, and next-generation intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) technologies. These capabilities were integrated into SOF training to ensure that operators remained ahead of their adversaries in both technological sophistication and strategic foresight. The fourth competency, Design-Based Integrative Statecraft, emphasized SOF’s role in geopolitics, ensuring that operators could leverage diplomatic, economic, and military tools to shape the strategic environment. Finally, Leadership & the Joint SOF Professional Ethos reinforced ethical decision-making, adaptability, and SOF’s identity as a profession, ensuring that future leaders were as adept at navigating political complexities as they were at conducting high-stakes operations.
By integrating these competencies into its educational framework, JSOU NEXT sought to create a SOF force that would no longer merely adapt to change but anticipate and drive it.
SOF as the Nation’s Global Covering Force
As geopolitical tensions intensified, it became clear that geography was once again destiny and that positional advantage returned as a defining feature of modern conflict. In this evolving landscape, SOF was reimagined as America’s “Global Covering Force”—operating at the seams of competition, preempting crises, and shaping conditions before conflict even emerged.
This new concept required SOF to think beyond traditional combat roles. Special Operations needed to become the sentinels of strategic reconnaissance, operating in forward-deployed positions to identify and map emerging threats long before they reached a crisis point. They also had to develop positional advantages at key geopolitical nodes, securing access and influence in regions critical to U.S. national security. Furthermore, they had to master the art of influence operations, ensuring that the United States and its allies would no longer cede the information space to adversaries engaged in disinformation campaigns.
Share Compound Security, Unlocked
JSOU NEXT and the Trump Doctrine 2.0: A Realignment of American Power—Likely Futures
As the second administration of Donald J. Trump progresses, a new era of American strategic recalibration is already taking shape.
Under this administration, U.S. foreign policy will continue shifting away from traditional alliances and multilateral security commitments, favoring instead a realpolitik approach grounded in unilateral action, economic power projection, and military leverage as a tool of economic coercion.
The foundations of collective security—cornerstones of American strategy since World War II—will likely erode further, giving way to a more transactional and competitive global order.
For the Special Operations Forces (SOF) community, these shifts are expected to introduce profound and possibly irreversible challenges, reshaping the future of SOF’s use, utility, and identity.
As diplomacy and development continue to be deprioritized, SOF will likely be tasked with missions that extend beyond their traditional purview—supporting economic statecraft, enforcing trade restrictions, and disrupting adversarial economic networks.
This transformation will not be without consequences, both operationally and ethically, as SOF becomes further entangled in a world where military force is wielded as an economic instrument rather than a strategic stabilizer.
SOF’s Future in an Era of Unilateralism and Economic Warfare
The post-globalist, transactional nature of U.S. foreign policy under Trump Doctrine 2.0 will likely force SOF into an increasingly constrained operational environment, where traditional allies are expected to carry greater burdens without the diplomatic or developmental support mechanisms that once enabled effective joint operations.
The elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)—should it proceed as planned—will leave a strategic vacuum in conflict zones where SOF has long relied on stabilization efforts to achieve sustainable security outcomes.
In regions like West Africa, SOF teams will likely continue counterterrorism efforts, but without USAID’s support, their ability to stem the underlying drivers of extremism—poverty, weak governance, and economic instability—will be severely limited. Instead of engaging in comprehensive counterinsurgency operations that blend military action with nation-building, SOF operators may find themselves engaged in an endless cycle of whack-a-mole counterterrorism, targeting insurgent leaders without addressing the conditions that allow such movements to regenerate.
The Indo-Pacific region will likely become another testing ground for SOF’s evolving role in economic coercion. As the U.S. seeks to counter China’s economic expansion, SOF will likely be tasked with more direct involvement in maritime interdiction operations, targeting illegal, unregulated, and unreported (IUU) fishing operations run by Chinese maritime militias. While such efforts may temporarily curb Beijing’s economic predation, they will also increase the risk of direct military confrontations in already contested waters, potentially drawing SOF into more overt military engagements rather than the shadow operations it has historically specialized in.
A Likely Future of SOF Downsizing and Overreach
As part of Washington’s broader effort to prioritize “cost-effective” defense spending, the Trump administration is likely to continue advocating for a major downsizing of SOF personnel and capabilities. The rationale behind this will center on shifting military resources toward conventional deterrence, arguing that SOF has become too large, too expensive, and too focused on counterterrorism at a time when great-power competition requires large-scale force projection.
However, this downsizing will likely have serious unintended consequences. With fewer SOF teams deployed in forward-operating environments, U.S. strategic influence in key global regions may steadily decline, allowing adversaries to fill the vacuum left behind. In the Middle East, reduced SOF presence will likely embolden Iranian-backed militias, accelerating their efforts to reshape Iraq and Syria into Iranian spheres of influence.
In Eastern Europe, fewer SOF missions could weaken deterrence against Russian hybrid warfare, exposing NATO’s eastern flank to greater risks of cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and proxy insurgencies.
Simultaneously, as SOF forces shrink in number, their remaining units will likely be stretched thinner across multiple non-traditional missions, particularly those focused on economic statecraft and coercion. The risk of over-extension—both operationally and ethically—will increase, as SOF is drawn into roles that may not align with its core competencies or its traditional mandate as a force of strategic deterrence and asymmetric warfare.
The Future of SOF Identity: From Quiet Professionals to Political Instruments?
If current trends continue, SOF’s role as the “quiet professionals” will likely be increasingly eroded, replaced by a new operational paradigm where Special Operations become a more visible, politicized tool of economic and military coercion. Instead of focusing on discreet, high-impact missions that shape global security environments from the shadows, SOF may be directed toward high-profile economic disruption campaigns, enforcement of unilateral sanctions, and overt shows of force in strategic economic zones.
This shift will likely create deep tensions within the SOF community itself. Operators who joined to conduct precision raids, counterterrorism, and influence operations in complex environments may now find themselves enforcing trade restrictions, disrupting economic networks, and playing an active role in economic warfare. Morale could suffer as career operators question whether their missions are still aligned with the core values and strategic principles of U.S. Special Operations.
Additionally, the increasing militarization of economic competition may have long-term consequences for SOF’s global partnerships. Nations that have historically cooperated with U.S. Special Operations may grow wary of engaging too closely with a force that is now perceived as an enforcer of economic coercion rather than a strategic ally. This could complicate future coalition operations, limiting SOF’s ability to effectively conduct joint missions in regions where trust and discretion are paramount.
A Force at a Crossroads
Looking ahead, SOF must be prepared for an increasingly uncertain future, where the nature of global security is being reshaped not just by military threats, but by economic power struggles, the erosion of multilateral institutions, and the rise of transactional alliances. The challenge will be to adapt without losing sight of SOF’s core identity and strategic value.
Will SOF successfully redefine its role within this shifting strategic landscape, finding new ways to leverage its unique capabilities while maintaining its traditional strengths? Or will it become a tool of economic warfare, caught in an identity crisis that undermines its long-term effectiveness?
If current trends hold, the future of American Special Operations may be defined less by its past successes in counterterrorism and asymmetric warfare, and more by its ability—or failure—to navigate an era where U.S. military power is wielded not just to protect, but to extract, enforce, and coerce.
Conclusion: The Future of SOF Education and Warfare
The ultimate success of JSOU NEXT had not been measured in years, but in its ability to position SOF for proactive rather than reactive engagement in an era of rapid geopolitical transformation. By integrating anticipatory research, modular education, and operationally relevant learning pathways, JSOU NEXT had ensured that SOF would emerge as a force capable of thinking, adapting, and acting faster than America’s adversaries.
As the world hurtles deeper into an era of compounded threats and great-power rivalries, the real test of SOF’s evolution will be whether JSOU NEXT truly equips its operators for the fights left of conflict, left of crisis, and left of war.
Because in the Fourth Age of Special Operations, the battle is already won before it even begins.
WANT TO KNOW MORE? READ THE BOOKS!
Thanks for reading Compound Security, Unlocked! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
1 Dr. Isaiah Wilson III served as Professor and President of the JSOU and the Education Executive for the Commander, United States Special Operations Command, from May 2020 to September 2023.