Q&A: Thomas W. O’Connell
SOF Proponent
Ensuring SOF Community Receives Support at the Highest Levels
Thomas W. O’Connell
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
Thomas W. O’Connell was confirmed as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict on July 23, 2003.
Prior to his confirmation, O’Connell served as a Senior Manager for Raytheon Company’s Intelligence and Information Systems, often serving as a frequent Task Force member of the president’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee.
A 1968 Distinguished Military Graduate of the University of Rhode Island with a B.A. in Economics, O’Connell began his career as an infantry officer in Germany. He served in Southeast Asia as a field advisor to Vietnamese forces including duties with the PHOENIX Program. O’Connell was assigned as an instructor in combat intelligence at the Army’s Intelligence Center and School at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., prior to spending three years in the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C., as an intelligence officer at battalion, brigade and division levels. During attendance at the Army’s Command and General Staff College, he earned an M.A. in Management from Central Michigan University.
O’Connell then spent two years on exchange duty with the British Army at the Joint Intelligence Centre in England, where he commanded the Foreign Armed Services Branch. From 1980 to 1983, he was the senior intelligence officer for a U.S. Army special mission unit. He then commanded the 313th Military Intelligence Battalion of the 82nd Airborne Division for two years, followed by attendance at the Naval War College, graduating with highest distinction and completing a master’s degree in International Relations.
He returned to Fort Bragg as the Director of Intelligence (J2), Joint Special Operations Command, and continued in the special operations intelligence field as a brigade commander for two and a half years.
After a brief assignment in the U.S. Special Operations Command’s Washington Office, he served three years at the Central Intelligence Agency as Deputy for Command Support, retiring in October 1995. O’Connell’s career included participation in four conflict arenas (Vietnam, Grenada, Panama and Southwest Asia) and various assignments in 33 countries. He holds a Master Parachutist rating and received numerous awards, including the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit, Bronze Star for Valor, Purple Heart and Air Medal.
Interviewed by Jeffrey McKaughan, SOTECH editor
Q: Last year, in testimony to the House Armed Services Committee regarding the fiscal year 2006 budget, you mentioned five areas of focus—my words, not yours—that the budget would allow SOCOM to concentrate on. Have those five areas changed since last year? What would those five look like this year?
A: The five critical areas I testified to for fiscal year 2006 are still very much relevant. We must continue to transform special operations forces through robust investment in our ability to find, fix, fight, follow and finish the global terrorist network and individuals. Our continued research and development in existing, emerging and new technologies will improve upon our previous advancements.
The exact nature of our programs may look somewhat different five years from now, but the fundamental requirements for SOF will remain constant. In the next five years we will achieve real returns on our investments. We will provide a significantly increased capability for the SOF operators to conduct missions in challenging terrain, uncertain environments and under adverse weather conditions, with a responsive command and control system to direct those worldwide operations. SOCOM has taken positive steps to provide new capabilities for persistent surveillance from sources on the ground to overhead platforms.
Moreover, SOF have taken the lead in developing their own battlefield intelligence and quickly exploiting it to maximum effect. The blend of technological advances and human ingenuity is creating new opportunities every day.
Q: The ramp-up to fight the global war on terror is over and the system is now adjusting to a high and steady OPTEMPO. Has this changed the way your office supports SOF in the execution of its mission?
A: Several things have changed since we adjusted to the demands of the war. First, the persistently high OPTEMPO has taken its toll on our equipment. Maintaining needed readiness levels for some of our systems has proven increasingly challenging.
This high OPTEMPO has not only resulted in multiple rotations at the unit level, but has also increased the numbers and locations of SOF warriors working globally. This has increased the influence of SOF around the world in a way that reflects the increased role SOCOM is playing in the war, but it has also further strained our personnel resources. Here in SO/LIC [Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict] we have been involved more broadly and more frequently in a host of policy discussions both within the Pentagon and around Washington. We are busier than ever, but we remain focused on our main missions involving SOF issues.
Q: Have you been receiving any feedback as to the benefits or drawbacks to the increase in personnel allotments for some areas of SOF? Have any of the new operators reached the operational tip of the spear yet, and have you heard any suggestions to further grow from where the numbers are now?
A: In FY2005 a record number of students successfully completed the Special Forces Qualification Course and are now assigned to operational units. We increased the staff [instructors] at both Army Special Forces training and Navy SEAL initial training which has improved the capability to produce new operators. The 18X program which recruits Special Forces candidates directly into the Army has proven to be very successful. The Naval Special Warfare Center is working closely with the Navy recruiters to enhance the screening of recruits to increase graduates from the SEAL qualification course— Basic Underwater Demolition. Of all our forces, building up the SEAL community will likely prove the most difficult challenge. The Department is currently engaged in the Quadrennial Defense Review and the potential requirement for additional special operations forces is being reviewed and discussed. It is too early at this point to have specifics, but certainly something we are analyzing. It does appear that we will be authorized to add to our Special Forces, SEAL and Ranger populations. We will likely lose many Reserve civil affairs positions in a shift back to the Army Reserve command, but increase our active civil affairs population.
There are other ways we can relieve stress on the force. One thing that General Brown and the theater special operations commands have done is to partner with foreign SOF to increase capacity to operate against a global network. Last year General Brown convened the first International SOF Conference in Tampa. Fifty-eight nations participated, including Iraq and Afghanistan. The leaders were told of their value to our global effort when Vice President Cheney addressed the group. He said “Special ops are the ones who hunt down, engage, kill and capture enemies—yet also set up hospitals, call in humanitarian aid, and help villages to become self sufficient . . .leaving behind men, women and children who feel gratitude for your kindness and good will for our country. Special ops, it’s been said, play every role from warrior to physician to diplomat to engineer. And at times, you have to switch from one role to another in the blink of an eye.”
Q: The responsibility and roles of acquisition and technology development for SO/LIC is unique. Can you explain your role and relationship to SOCOM and discuss other areas of technology development?
A: Overseeing SOCOM and supporting their acquisition activities is only one aspect of our involvement with technology development. As for SOCOM, SO/LIC is responsible for the overall supervision of the preparation and justification of SOF programs and budgets. We accomplish this task by closely teaming with SOCOM and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology on acquisition priorities and requirements for SO and LIC-related materiel and equipment.
In addition to teaming with SOCOM, moreover, SO/LIC has a number of other advanced technology programs for which we provide executive oversight and funding that incorporates a larger DoD and interagency effort. These programs focus on counter-narcoterrorism, explosive ordnance disposal [EOD] and combating terrorism.
Q: We learned that technology for counter-narcoterrorism is playing a key role in the GWOT, can you expand on this program?
A: The Department of the Navy is DoD’s executive agent for the department’s counter-narcoterrorism [CNT] research, development, testing, and evaluation program [DoD CN RDT&E]. The DoD Counter-Narcoterrorism Technology Program Office [CNTPO] at Dahlgren, Va. is the Navy’s executing agent for the DoD CN RDT&E program. CNTPO develops and deploys releasable and non-releasable capabilities and provide services and equipment to combatant commanders, law enforcement agencies, and foreign security forces that aid disrupting, deterring and denying the flow of drugs, people, information, money and weapons related to illegal drug trafficking.
Like many of our programs, CNTPO is an interagency effort that supports all our combatant commanders and law-enforcement. One significant ongoing effort is in Afghanistan, working closely with USCENTCOM. The CNTPO is executing a variety projects totaling over $160 million. These projects include inspection, communications and surveillance technologies. [More information is available at www.cntpo.com]. As we see the nexus between terrorism and drug dealing grow closer, we can leverage the significant flexibility of our CN authorities to contribute effectively to the GWOT. For all of our recent successes, however, we will continue to struggle until we find ways to reduce demand.
Q: There seems to be a number of programs directed at explosive ordnance, can you explain your program and its role?
A: We sponsor the explosive ordnance disposal/low-intensity conflict [EOD/LIC] advanced technology demonstration program. EOD/LIC technology is focused primarily upon detection, clearance and safe disposal of explosive threats including conventional ordnance, NBC munitions and improvised terrorist weapons.
The EOD/LIC program provides rapid prototyping and advanced technology development in response to the needs of military EOD, and SOF personnel as they face the challenges of force protection and the war on terrorism.
EOD/LIC technology developments are focused primarily on detection, access, identification and neutralization of conventional explosive ordnance and improvised explosive threats on land, sea, and underwater. The objectives of the program are to provide solutions that are usable, affordable and practical within 18 months, and to facilitate transition into an acquisition program or directly into production. Requirements are submitted by joint service EOD, SOF and other EOD-oriented users, and are prioritized and approved in the Pentagon’s Policy Office.
Q: Can you briefly expand on your role in the Combating Terror Technology Support [CTTS] Program? What are the program’s current priorities?
A: We provide executive direction, funding and programmatic oversight of this important program. DoD honors its commitment to the U.S. national, interagency combating terrorism research and development [R&D] program via the Technical Support Working Group [TSWG].
Under SO/LIC’s program management and technical oversight, and the policy direction of the Department of State Coordinator for CT, and with membership from organizations across the federal government, the TSWG pursues a diverse portfolio of advanced research and development projects in eleven functional areas across the four main pillars of combating terrorism: antiterrorism, counterterrorism, intelligence and consequence management.
The CTTS Program continues to focus on technology for use by our military forces and by federal agencies in support of national defense and homeland security. In addition to our traditional customers, we are engaged in support of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Task Force. In this capacity we are intimately involved in advanced technology development to both counter improvised explosive devices and our most important initiative, improve the protection of the warfighter. I recently met with retired General Monty Meigs who will head the Pentagon’s IED effort. His office will continue to leverage many of the TSWG programs.
We also look forward to concluding agreements this spring with both Singapore and Australia, who will be added to our roster of select nations with whom we conduct cooperative, bilateral R&D. These collaborative efforts allow the U.S. government to benefit from the experience, expertise, and resources of major NATO and non-NATO allies to combat terrorism across the globe. [More information is available at www.tswg.gov]
Q: What benefits do you glean from international collaboration?
A: In 1993, in order to build upon TSWG’s domestic successes, Congress tasked the DoD with conducting collaborative research and development in the areas of combating terrorism with selected NATO and major non-NATO allies. Commencing immediately with the Government of Israel, the TSWG International Program then added separate bilateral agreements with the United Kingdom and Canada in 1995, and will add Singapore and Australia in 2006.
The portfolio of collaboration extends across all eleven subgroups and totals over $30 million for FY 2005. This international cooperation allows the TSWG to leverage foreign experience, expertise and resources to develop capabilities for warriors and first responders. Each foreign partner brings unique perspectives that allow a broad exchange of views and skills not always identified in a single nations program. We look forward to strengthening these bonds and to developing relationships of similar productivity with Singapore and Australia over the next decade.
Q: I know it is just a little early to talk FY07 funding, but could you give us a glimpse of what you would like to see in next year’s budget?
A: The president has yet to submit his FY 2007 budget request to Congress. What I can say is that the president and Secretary Rumsfeld have provided unprecedented support for SOF in the past and I do not anticipate that to change.
We expect an increase in the FY 2007 budget for SOCOM. SOCOM and SO/LIC have put together a proposal that grows the force and continues to transform and improve SOF’s capability to plan and fight the global war on terrorism.
We will continue to focus on intelligence and C2 capabilities, and the force structure needed to continue the long-term GWOT fight. We will 1) expand SOCOM’s Center for Special Operations and the geographic combatant commander’s theater special operations commands needed to enable the geographic combatant commanders to better exercise their assigned GWOT synchronization responsibilities; 2) add a Marine Corps [MARSOC] component to SOCOM to provide additional operators and trainers; 3) increase the number of psychological operations and civil affairs units; 4) increase the number of combat aviation advisors needed to train indigenous Air Force personnel in GWOT-focused countries, and 5) Increase persistent surveillance capabilities to include the addition of UAV capabilities.
Q: Is there anything else you would like to add?
A: Yes. Thanks again for giving me the opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to our special operations forces. Our service members, like the ones before them, are performing admirably despite serving in very dangerous environments where the enemy is not easily identified and is using techniques that violate the rules of war. Our nation and allies truly thank them and their families for their sacrifice and valor. One way we can show our thanks is to make sure they are equipped with the best technology and training possible to deny, deter and defeat our enemies.
General Brown and his SOCOM staff and component commanders—ARSOC, AFSOC, NAVSPECWARCOM, and soon MARSOC—have worked tirelessly to fight both an ongoing war in support of General Abizaid and Central Command, and look to the future requirements of our SOF across the globe. I have the significant responsibility to sit with the SOCOM commander, his component commanders and my director of resources, Tim Morgan, on the SOCOM board of directors during the exhaustive deliberations on SOF structure and acquisition issues. We face an unprecedented OPTEMPO with little relief in sight, a transforming military with new opportunities to leverage their emerging capabilities— such as operating with high speed vessel prototypes and Littoral Combat Ships, intelligence and C3 advancements, tagging, tracking and locating technologies, and new aviation and undersea delivery platforms. SOCOM has received superb support from the service secretaries and chiefs as they respond to the initiatives of their own organizations, General Brown and those of the secretary and deputy secretary.
There are other important developments in the future. We’ve worked hard to gain additional authorities for SOCOM and forces in the field. Section 1208 of the Defense Appropriation/Authorization Bill gave the department authority to recruit and train surrogate forces with SOCOM drawing on their MFP funds, the secretary’s approval and Congressional notification. This authority can open enormous opportunities to grow a network and build partner capacity against a terrorist network that aims to destroy us. We have the personnel, skills, and determination to do just that. Moreover, we’ve worked with the deputy secretary and the Defense Science Board to develop a new DoD Directive on Stability Operations that will move the department to put Phase IV operations on a more equal footing with combat operations. SOCOM expertise can contribute greatly to that effort to build partner capacity and control ungoverned areas and defeat terrorist initiatives. It is critical that we help the State Department to succeed in their reconstruction initiatives.
Let me leave you with two thoughts. First, SOCOM has done its part to produce the world’s finest SOF warriors. Humans are more important than hardware. But we need every possible innovation from both industry and government technologists that can give us an edge in this war. The performance of SOCOM’s personnel has been extraordinarily superb as they have answered the call of OIF and OEF, the conflict in Colombia, in African operations and our efforts in PACOM’s AOR. Second, it is both a humbling and inspiring experience to serve among these quiet professionals. One of my highest honors is to be present at many of the funeral services of our SOF warriors at Arlington Cemetery. The families are inspiring; there is no quit in their eyes, and they’re so very proud of the service of their loved ones. They support the President and offer encouragement for the Administration to drive on. The entire special operations community constantly strives to honor that request. ♦