Category Archives: Military Analytics

Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Special Operations Forces (SOF) / Special Mission Units (SMUs) Analytics

The Evolution, Doctrine, and Armament of the Spanish Mando de Operaciones Especiales

The origins of Spain’s elite special operations forces are deeply rooted in the nation’s unique military history and the geopolitical realities of the Cold War. While Spain possesses a long and storied tradition of irregular warfare, dating back to the guerrilleros of the Peninsular War against Napoleon, the modern incarnation of its special forces was conceived in the mid-20th century. The formal proposal to create dedicated special operations units emerged in 1956, a decision influenced by the global proliferation of guerrilla conflicts and the examples set by established Western special forces, notably the United States Army’s Green Berets and the British Special Air Service (SAS).1

This initiative took concrete form in 1957 with the establishment of the first experimental “Aptitud para el Mando de Unidades Guerrilleras” (Aptitude for Command of Guerrilla Units) course at the prestigious Escuela Militar de Montaña (Military Mountain School – EMM) in Jaca.1 This venue was not incidental; it forged an inextricable link between high-altitude mountain warfare and special operations that would define the character of Spain’s elite soldiers for decades.

The First “Boinas Verdes”: From UOE to COE

By the end of 1961, the EMM had graduated a sufficient cadre of specialized officers and non-commissioned officers to form the first operational units. On an experimental basis, the Ministry of Defense ordered the creation of two Unidades de Operaciones Especiales (Special Operations Units – UOEs): UOE No. 71, based in Oviedo, and UOE No. 81, in Orense. These units were mandated to be fully organized by March 1, 1962.1 From their inception, these units were composed exclusively of volunteers who had to pass a stringent selection process. Their initial armament was the standard infantry issue of the day: the robust 7.62x51mm CETME assault rifle, a service pistol, and a combat knife.1 In December 1962, UOE No. 71 formally adopted the green beret (boina verde), which would become the iconic symbol of Spanish special forces.3

The success of these two experimental UOEs prompted a significant expansion. Between 1966 and 1969, the Spanish Army established a nationwide network of Compañías de Operaciones Especiales (Special Operations Companies – COEs). These company-sized formations were attached to the various Regiments of the Brigadas de Defensa Operativa del Territorio (Territorial Operational Defense Brigades – BRIDOT), a structure that firmly embedded their primary mission within a doctrine of national territorial defense against a potential Warsaw Pact invasion.3 At their peak in 1981, there were 25 distinct COEs spread across Spain’s military regions, each with a unique numerical designation and often a historical sobriquet honoring a famous Spanish guerrilla leader.3

Doctrine, Training, and the “Guerrillero Spirit”

The foundational doctrine of the COEs was guerrilla and counter-guerrilla warfare. Their personnel were universally known as guerrilleros, a title they embraced with pride.4 The training regimen was exceptionally arduous and designed to produce soldiers of unparalleled physical and mental resilience. The curriculum was remarkably comprehensive for its era, encompassing a wide array of skills essential for operating behind enemy lines in small, autonomous teams. Subjects included advanced topography and land navigation, demolitions and explosives, instinctive and combat shooting, survival and evasion techniques, rock climbing and rappelling, specialized winter and mountain warfare including skiing, and extensive waterborne operations such as river crossings and coastal reconnaissance.4

The culmination of this grueling training was the infamous prueba de la boina (beret test). This was a continuous, multi-day field exercise that pushed candidates to their absolute limits through sleep deprivation, constant physical exertion, and a series of high-stress tests, including live-fire exercises simulating movement under enemy fire and resistance to interrogation.4 Only those who successfully completed this ordeal earned the right to wear the green beret. This process cultivated a unique ethos—the “guerrillero spirit”—a mindset characterized by extreme self-sufficiency, unwavering determination, and the conviction that no obstacle was insurmountable.4

A crucial distinction must be made, however, between the development of the mainland COEs and the special operations units of the Spanish Legion. While the COEs were training for a hypothetical, future conflict, the Legion’s Secciones de Operaciones Especiales (SOEs) were being forged in the crucible of active combat. During the 1970s, these Legion SOEs were formed to conduct counter-insurgency operations in the Spanish Sahara, specifically heliborne patrols and ambushes to control the movements of the Polisario Front and Moroccan irregulars.1 The historical record is clear that these Legion units were the only Spanish special operations forces of the era to engage in sustained combat operations and suffer casualties in action.1 This created two distinct but convergent streams of experience within Spanish SOF: the COEs, whose culture was defined by surviving one of the toughest training regimes in the world, and the Legion SOEs, whose culture was hardened by the realities of a protracted, low-intensity war. This injection of combat-proven experience would later prove invaluable to the unified command.

The armament of these early units reflected their mission. The primary individual weapon was the Spanish-designed CETME assault rifle, initially the Model B, which was replaced by the improved Model C in 1971.1 The standard sidearm evolved from the Astra 400 to the Star Model B pistol.5 For close-quarters work, the reliable Star Z-70/B submachine gun was available.11 Support weapons included the formidable MG-42/58 (a post-war variant of the German MG 42 chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO) and the Spanish-made Instalaza C90 disposable rocket launcher.1

II. Transformation and Professionalization: The GOE Era and NATO Integration (1979-1997)

The late 1970s and 1980s marked a period of profound transformation for Spain and its armed forces. The transition to democracy and the strategic decision to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1982 acted as a powerful catalyst for military modernization. This geopolitical shift rendered the foundational doctrine of the COEs—territorial defense against a conventional invasion—effectively obsolete.3 The new strategic imperative was interoperability and the ability to deploy professional, expeditionary forces capable of operating seamlessly alongside NATO allies.

This new reality was the primary forcing function behind a complete reorganization of Spanish special operations forces. The alliance’s operational standards and doctrinal frameworks demanded a move away from a singular focus on guerrilla warfare toward a more versatile and internationally recognized mission set. This necessitated a top-down revolution in the structure, training, and purpose of Spain’s boinas verdes.3

From Companies to Groups (COE to GOE)

The organizational solution to this new doctrinal requirement was the consolidation of the disparate, company-sized COEs into larger, more capable, battalion-sized formations known as Grupos de Operaciones Especiales (Special Operations Groups – GOEs). This process began in May 1979 with the establishment of the first such unit, GOE I “Órdenes Militares,” in Colmenar Viejo, which integrated the former COE 11 and COE 12.1

Over the next decade, this consolidation continued systematically. Throughout the mid-1980s, new GOEs were formed by merging existing COEs, while others were disbanded:

  • 1984: GOE III “Valencia” was formed from COE 31 and 32.1
  • 1985: GOE II “Santa Fé” was formed in Granada, and the Legion’s special operations unit in Ronda was formally established as the Bandera de Operaciones Especiales de la Legión (BOEL) XIX, absorbing personnel and material from the dissolved COEs 21, 22, 91, and 92.1
  • 1986: GOE V “San Marcial” was created in Burgos from COE 61 and 62.1
  • 1987: GOE IV “Almogávares” was formed in Barcelona from COE 41 and 42.1
  • 1988: GOE VI “La Victoria” was established in La Coruña, incorporating the remaining COEs 71, 72, 81, and 82.1

This structural evolution from company to group provided significant advantages. It centralized command under higher-ranking officers (lieutenant colonels), streamlined logistical support, and greatly enhanced the capacity for independent operational planning and execution.1 The GOEs were structured into specialized operational teams, mirroring the organization of their NATO counterparts and facilitating easier integration into multinational command structures.6

The most fundamental change was doctrinal. The singular focus on guerrilla and counter-guerrilla tactics gave way to the standardized NATO SOF mission triad:

  • Direct Action (DA): Short-duration strikes and other small-scale offensive actions.
  • Special Reconnaissance (SR): Acquiring information concerning the capabilities, intentions, and activities of an enemy.
  • Military Assistance (MA): Training, advising, and otherwise assisting foreign military and paramilitary forces.

This doctrinal shift marked the birth of modern Spanish special operations forces, representing a deliberate and necessary break from the legacy of the territorial guerrilleros to create a professional, expeditionary force aligned with its new alliance commitments.6

Evolving Arsenal

This period of professionalization was also reflected in the force’s weaponry. While the Spanish-made CETME rifle remained in service, it underwent its own evolution with the adoption of the 5.56x45mm NATO caliber CETME Model L in the 1980s, replacing the older 7.62x51mm versions.15 More significantly, the GOEs began to acquire specialized weapon systems that were becoming the global standard for elite units. The most prominent of these was the Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun, particularly its suppressed variants, which offered unparalleled performance in close-quarters and counter-terrorism roles.1 The focus on NATO interoperability drove the adoption of standardized calibers and equipment interfaces, laying the groundwork for the highly advanced and modular arsenal that would be fielded in the 21st century.

III. A Unified Command: The Modern MOE (1997-Present)

The creation of the GOEs was a critical step in professionalizing Spain’s special operations capabilities, but a final piece of the command structure was needed to fully integrate these assets into the joint operational planning of the Spanish Armed Forces. To achieve this, the Mando de Operaciones Especiales (Special Operations Command – MOE) was officially created in October 1997 and became fully operational in July 1998.1

Establishment and Structure

The establishment of the MOE consolidated the remaining GOEs and the Legion’s elite BOEL under a single, unified command led by a Brigadier General. After an initial period headquartered in Jaca, the command was permanently established at the Alférez Rojas Navarrete barracks in Alicante.1 A further reorganization in 1996 had streamlined the force, dissolving GOEs I, II, V, and VI, leaving a core of highly professional units to form the new command.6

The modern structure of the MOE is lean and mission-focused, comprising:

  • Headquarters Group: Responsible for command, control, planning, and intelligence.
  • Grupo de Operaciones Especiales “Valencia” III (GOE III).
  • Grupo de Operaciones Especiales “Tercio del Ampurdán” IV (GOE IV).
  • Bandera de Operaciones Especiales “C. L. Maderal Oleaga” XIX (GOE XIX): The heir to the Legion’s combat-proven BOEL.
  • Logistics Unit: Provides dedicated logistical and maintenance support to the operational groups.3

The Modern Mission Set

The MOE fully embodies the modern, multi-faceted role of a top-tier NATO special operations force. While retaining the toughness and self-reliance of its guerrillero predecessors, its missions have evolved to meet the complex demands of contemporary conflict.20 The core tasks remain Direct Action, Special Reconnaissance, and Military Assistance, executed with surgical precision by small, highly trained operational teams.3

The MOE’s Direct Action capability was demonstrated most publicly in July 2002 during Operation Romeo-Sierra. In response to the occupation of the disputed Perejil Island by Moroccan forces, 23 operators from GOE III were inserted by helicopter, swiftly securing the island without a single shot fired and restoring Spanish sovereignty.3 This operation showcased the command’s ability to execute a high-stakes, politically sensitive mission with speed and precision.

Operational History in the Asymmetric Era

Since its formation, the MOE has been one of Spain’s most consistently deployed military assets, participating in nearly every major international mission undertaken by the Spanish Armed Forces. Operators have served in peacekeeping, stabilization, and counter-terrorism operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and across the Sahel region of Africa.1

This extensive operational experience, particularly in the post-2003 asymmetric battlefields of Iraq and the Sahel, has shaped the command’s modern identity. While proficient in Direct Action, the MOE has cultivated a deep expertise in the “indirect approach” of Military Assistance. This “by, with, and through” methodology, where indigenous forces are trained and enabled to secure their own territory, has become a hallmark of modern Western SOF strategy.

In Iraq, as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the MOE’s primary mission has been the training, advising, and assisting of the elite Iraqi Counter-Terrorism Service (CTS).23 Deployed to locations like Baghdad and Erbil, Spanish operators embed with CTS units, providing expert instruction and acting as a critical command-and-control link to the wider coalition. During CTS-led operations against Daesh remnants, the MOE’s Special Operations Task Group (SOTG) coordinates vital coalition support, including airpower, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets, and medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) capabilities.23 The depth of this partnership is exemplified by the fact that Iraqi K9 handlers have been trained to give their dogs commands in Spanish.23

Similarly, in the vast and unstable Sahel region, MOE teams have been instrumental in European Union and multinational training missions in countries like Mali, Mauritania, and the Central African Republic.1 In these austere environments, they work to build the capacity of local militaries to combat the spread of violent extremist organizations.25

This evolution reveals the MOE’s maturation into a sophisticated and strategically vital force. Its value to Spain and its allies is now defined as much by its ability to teach, advise, and build partner capacity as by its ability to conduct unilateral raids. This shift has profound implications for operator selection, training, and equipment, demanding skills in languages, cultural intelligence, and instruction alongside the traditional martial virtues of the commando.

IV. The Operator’s Toolkit: Contemporary Small Arms and Equipment of the MOE

The small arms inventory of the Mando de Operaciones Especiales reflects a procurement philosophy that is both pragmatic and aligned with the highest standards of modern special operations forces. The arsenal is characterized by its emphasis on proven reliability, logistical commonality with the broader Spanish Army where feasible, and complete interoperability with key NATO partners. This approach prioritizes performance and operator mastery over the adoption of unproven or niche systems. The result is a comprehensive toolkit of high-quality weapons sourced from premier European and American manufacturers, allowing MOE teams to configure their loadouts precisely for any given mission.

Sidearms

  • Heckler & Koch USP-SD: The standard-issue sidearm for the MOE is the Heckler & Koch Universelle Selbstladepistole (Universal Self-loading Pistol) in its “SD” configuration, chambered in 9x19mm Parabellum.1 This robust, polymer-framed pistol operates on a short-recoil, locked-breech principle and features a traditional double-action/single-action (DA/SA) trigger mechanism.28 The “SD” designation indicates that the barrel is extended and threaded, allowing for the direct attachment of a sound suppressor, a critical capability for clandestine operations.1 Renowned for its durability and reliability in harsh environments, the USP has served the command well for many years.

Submachine Guns & Personal Defense Weapons

  • Heckler & Koch MP5SD: For missions requiring maximum acoustic signature reduction, the MOE retains the legendary Heckler & Koch MP5SD.27 This variant of the MP5 family features an integral suppressor that is highly effective even with standard velocity 9x19mm ammunition. Its roller-delayed blowback action makes it an exceptionally smooth-shooting and accurate platform, ideal for stealthy close-quarters engagements, sentry elimination, and operations where discretion is paramount.1
  • Heckler & Koch MP7A1: A more recent addition to the inventory is the HK MP7A1 Personal Defense Weapon (PDW).1 Chambered for the high-velocity, armor-piercing 4.6x30mm cartridge, the MP7 bridges the gap between a traditional submachine gun and a carbine. Its compact, lightweight design and ability to defeat modern body armor make it an excellent choice for personal security details, vehicle crews, and close-quarters battle (CQB) scenarios where the over-penetration of a rifle round could be a liability.29

Assault Rifles & Carbines

  • Heckler & Koch G36 (K/C Variants): The primary individual weapon for most MOE operators is a variant of the Heckler & Koch G36, the standard-issue rifle of the Spanish Army.1 The MOE favors the shorter, more maneuverable G36K (Kurz/Short) and G36C (Compact) versions.1 These rifles are heavily customized to meet special operations requirements, featuring extensive MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny or similar rail systems (such as the HKey Slim Line handguard) to accommodate a full suite of mission-essential accessories, including advanced optics, laser aiming modules, and tactical lights.1 This commonality with the main army provides a significant logistical advantage, simplifying the supply of spare parts and ammunition during deployments.
  • Heckler & Koch HK416: The MOE also employs the HK416 assault rifle.1 This platform, which has become a benchmark for elite Western SOF, utilizes a short-stroke gas piston operating system. This system prevents hot propellant gases from entering the receiver, resulting in a cleaner, cooler-running weapon with enhanced reliability, particularly during suppressed fire or in austere environments like deserts or maritime settings. Its adoption ensures seamless interoperability with the most advanced NATO special operations units.

Battle Rifles & Designated Marksman Rifles (DMR)

  • Heckler & Koch G28: To provide operational teams with precision fire capability beyond the effective range of 5.56mm carbines, the MOE fields the Heckler & Koch G28.1 Based on the HK417 battle rifle, the G28 is a highly accurate semi-automatic platform chambered in the powerful 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge. It functions as a Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR), enabling a skilled shooter to rapidly engage targets out to 800 meters.31 The G28 is frequently equipped with high-magnification variable-power optics, such as the Schmidt & Bender 3-20×50 PMII, and has been documented in use as an aerial platform weapon, fired from the side doors of Spanish Army NH90 helicopters to provide precision overwatch.31

Sniper & Anti-Materiel Rifles

  • Accuracy International AXMC: For long-range anti-personnel engagements, the MOE’s primary precision weapon is the Accuracy International AXMC (AX Multi Caliber) bolt-action sniper rifle, chambered in.338 Lapua Magnum.1 This cartridge offers exceptional ballistic performance, allowing operators to accurately engage targets well beyond 1,500 meters.32 The AXMC is built on AI’s legendary chassis system, renowned for its accuracy, ruggedness, and modularity. It is typically paired with a world-class optic, such as the Schmidt & Bender 5-25×56 PMII, to maximize its extreme-range potential.1
  • Barrett M95 / M107A1: When the mission requires the engagement of hard targets, the MOE turns to the Barrett anti-materiel rifle, chambered in the formidable 12.7x99mm NATO (.50 BMG) cartridge.27 Both the bolt-action M95 and the semi-automatic M107A1 are in service.33 The role of this weapon is not anti-personnel, but rather the destruction of high-value enemy equipment, including light-skinned vehicles, communications arrays, radar installations, and ordnance, at ranges approaching 2,000 meters.33

Machine Guns

  • FN Minimi: For squad-level suppressive fire, the MOE utilizes the Belgian-designed FN Minimi light machine gun, chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.35 This belt-fed weapon provides a high volume of fire in a relatively lightweight and portable package, allowing a small team to effectively suppress enemy positions.
  • Heckler & Koch MG5: The command is in the process of replacing its aging inventory of MG3 machine guns with the modern Heckler & Koch MG5.1 The MG5 is a general-purpose machine gun chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO. It offers significant advantages over its predecessor, including a more controllable, user-selectable rate of fire (640-800 rounds per minute), superior ergonomics, and an integrated Picatinny rail on the receiver cover for the mounting of modern optics, which greatly enhances its accuracy.36
  • Browning M2HB: For heavy, vehicle-mounted fire support, the MOE relies on the timeless Browning M2HB heavy machine gun. Chambered in.50 BMG, the M2 provides devastating firepower against both personnel and light materiel targets.1

Summary of Contemporary MOE Small Arms

Weapon SystemTypeOriginCaliberWeight (Unloaded)Length (Overall)Feed SystemPrimary Role / Remarks
Heckler & Koch USP-SDSemi-Automatic PistolGermany9x19mm0.72 kg 27194 mm 2715-round magazine 27Standard issue sidearm; threaded barrel for suppressors.
Heckler & Koch MP5SDSubmachine GunGermany9x19mm3.4 kg 27610 mm 2730-round magazine 27Integrally suppressed for clandestine CQB operations.
Heckler & Koch MP7A1Personal Defense WeaponGermany4.6x30mm< 2.0 kg 29415 mm (stock collapsed)20/30/40-round magazine 29Armor-piercing capability in a compact platform.
Heckler & Koch G36KAssault CarbineGermany5.56x45mm3.40 kg 27860 mm (stock extended) 3030-round magazine 27Primary individual weapon; shortened barrel for mobility.
Heckler & Koch HK416Assault RifleGermany5.56x45mm~3.12 kg~881 mm (14.5″ barrel)30-round STANAG magazinePiston-operated system for enhanced reliability; NATO SOF standard.
Heckler & Koch G28Designated Marksman RifleGermany7.62x51mm~5.8 kg965 mm 3110/20-round magazinePrecision semi-automatic fire to 800 meters.
FN MinimiLight Machine GunBelgium5.56x45mm~7.1 kg 351,040 mm 35Belt-fed / STANAG magazineSquad-level suppressive fire.
Heckler & Koch MG5General-Purpose Machine GunGermany7.62x51mm~11.2 kg 361,160 mm 37Belt-fed (M13 links)Replacing the MG3; controllable rate of fire and optics-ready.
Accuracy Int’l AXMCSniper RifleUnited Kingdom.338 Lapua Magnum~6.8 kg~1,250 mm10-round magazine 1Primary long-range anti-personnel system (>1500m).
Barrett M95 / M107A1Anti-Materiel RifleUSA12.7x99mm (.50 BMG)10.7 kg (M95) 341,143 mm (M95) 345/10-round magazineEngagement of hard targets (vehicles, equipment) to 2000m.
Browning M2HBHeavy Machine GunUSA12.7x99mm (.50 BMG)~38 kg~1,654 mmBelt-fed (M2/M9 links)Vehicle-mounted heavy fire support.

V. The Future Commando: MOE 2035 and Beyond

As the character of global conflict continues to evolve, the Spanish Mando de Operaciones Especiales is proactively shaping its future force structure, capabilities, and technology to maintain its edge. The command’s strategic vision is encapsulated in the “MOE-35” initiative, a comprehensive plan designed to ensure the unit is fully adapted to the multi-domain, technologically saturated battlefields of the coming decades.39

The “MOE-35” Initiative

Launched in 2020, MOE-35 is more than a simple modernization program; it is a fundamental rethinking of what a special operator is and what the command provides to the Spanish state. The plan calls for a significant expansion of the force, increasing its ranks from approximately 900 to 1,300 personnel by 2035.3 However, the core of the initiative is not merely quantitative growth but a qualitative evolution of its “human capital”.39

Recognizing that future conflicts will be won not just by kinetic force but also by influence and information, MOE-35 places a heavy emphasis on recruiting and developing operators with specialized non-kinetic skills. This includes creating teams of experts in communications, negotiation, and regional studies, possessing deep knowledge of the cultures, customs, and languages of potential operational areas.39 This focus is a direct lesson learned from the command’s extensive experience in Military Assistance missions in Iraq and the Sahel, where understanding the human terrain is as critical as mastering the physical terrain.

The Networked Operator and Future Technology

The future MOE operator will function as a fully integrated node within a networked battlespace. A key enabler of this vision is the Spanish Army’s “Future Soldier System” (SISCAP) program. This initiative aims to equip individual operators with a suite of advanced technologies, including a helmet-mounted vision system with augmented reality overlays. This will allow the operator to see real-time tactical data, the positions of friendly forces, and identified threats without looking down at a separate device.41

Furthermore, the system will integrate personal and weapon-mounted cameras (both visible and thermal), allowing an operator to share their perspective with the team and command elements. This also enables non-line-of-sight engagement, where an operator can point their weapon around a corner and use their helmet display to aim, minimizing their exposure to enemy fire.41 This constant flow of data transforms the operator from a simple combatant into a mobile sensor platform, contributing to a common operational picture shared across the force.

The integration of unmanned systems will also deepen. The command will expand its use of small, tactical Remotely Piloted Air Systems (RPAS) for organic, team-level intelligence and reconnaissance, as well as enhancing its cinology (military working dog) capabilities.21 Crucially, the MOE is developing its capacity to operate in the non-physical domains of conflict, integrating cyber and electronic warfare techniques to protect its own communications and disrupt those of its adversaries.18

Speculative Armament Evolution

While the MOE’s current arsenal is formidable, it will continue to evolve in line with technological advancements and emerging threats.

  • Sidearms: The venerable HK USP-SD, while reliable, lacks the features of more modern pistols. A future transition to a striker-fired, polymer-framed pistol with a modular optics system is highly probable. Platforms like the Glock 17 Gen5 MOS, which are becoming a de facto standard among many Western SOF units, offer superior ergonomics, trigger characteristics, and the ability to easily mount miniature red dot sights for faster target acquisition.42
  • Carbines: The 5.56x45mm cartridge, while effective, has known limitations in barrier penetration and performance against modern body armor. The MOE, along with other NATO SOF, will be closely observing the long-term results of the U.S. Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW) program and its adoption of the 6.8mm cartridge.45 While a complete caliber change represents a massive logistical challenge, a future adoption of a more powerful intermediate caliber for special operations use is a distinct possibility to ensure overmatch against peer adversaries.
  • Precision Weapons: The evolution in this domain will be driven by advancements in sensor and data processing technology. The integration of “smart scopes” with onboard ballistic computers, laser rangefinders, and atmospheric sensors will become standard, dramatically increasing the first-round hit probability at extreme ranges and reducing the cognitive load on the sniper.

Ultimately, the MOE-35 initiative and its associated technological programs point toward a future where the special operator is a hybrid warrior. This individual will be a master of the kinetic fight but also a sensor, a communicator, and a non-kinetic effector. They will be capable of processing vast amounts of data from the network, controlling multiple unmanned assets, and applying a precise effect—be it a rifle shot, an electronic warfare pulse, or a targeted influence message—to achieve strategic objectives. This vision ensures that the legacy of the adaptable and resilient guerrillero will continue to evolve, keeping the Mando de Operaciones Especiales at the cutting edge of modern warfare.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. Grupos de Operaciones Especiales (España) – Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre, accessed September 6, 2025, https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grupos_de_Operaciones_Especiales_(Espa%C3%B1a)
  2. Spanish Special Forces – Prov Tildic – Prezi, accessed September 6, 2025, https://prezi.com/p/ra0jpywseqas/spanish-special-forces/
  3. Mando de Operaciones Especiales (MOE): SPAIN’S ARMY SOF – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/mando-de-operaciones-especiales-moe-spains-army-sof/
  4. Boinas Verdes españoles: de las COE al MOE – Veteranos … – VetPac, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.vetpac.es/boinas-verdes-espanoles-de-las-coe-al-moe/
  5. Compañía de Operaciones Especiales 101-7, accessed September 6, 2025, https://coebaleares.com/
  6. La evolución de las unidades de operaciones especiales …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://militaresescritores.es/noticias/la-evolucion-de-las-unidades-de-operaciones-especiales/
  7. E.T. – C.O.E.S. COMPAÑÍAS DE OPERACIONES ESPECIALES – COLECCIONISMO MILITAR, accessed September 6, 2025, http://www.coleccionismomilitar.com/2013/07/et-companias-de-operaciones-especiales.html
  8. SÍNTESIS HISTÓRICA COE 52 1967/1986 – Federación de Asociaciones de Veteranos Boinas Verdes de España, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fedavbve.com/sintesis-historica-coe-52-1967-1986/
  9. Historia y vida de la COE 61 – Federación de Asociaciones de Veteranos Boinas Verdes de España, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fedavbve.com/historia-y-vida-de-la-coe-61/
  10. BOEL: Spanish Legion’s Elite – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/boel-spanish-legions-elite/
  11. Star Z-70 Submachine Gun Review – Firearms News, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.firearmsnews.com/editorial/star-z70-submachine-gun-review/374989
  12. SPAIN REVISITED: THE MARINES – Small Arms Review, accessed September 6, 2025, https://smallarmsreview.com/spain-revisited-the-marines/
  13. Spanish Armed Forces – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armed_Forces
  14. Spanish Joint Special Operations Command – NRDC Italy – NATO, accessed September 6, 2025, https://nrdc-ita.nato.int/operations/allied-reaction-force/spanish-special-operations-command
  15. CETME Model L – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CETME_Model_L
  16. CETME L – Green – GEN 2 – MarColMar Firearms, accessed September 6, 2025, https://marcolmarfirearms.com/shop/cetme/green-cetme-l
  17. Special Operations Command (Spain) – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Command_(Spain)
  18. Mando de Operaciones Especiales (MOE) – Ejercito de Tierra – Blog Prefortex, accessed September 6, 2025, https://blog.prefortex.es/mando-de-operaciones-especiales-moe-ejercito-tierra/
  19. Special Operations Groups (Spain) – Wikiwand, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Special_Operations_Groups_(Spain)
  20. MOE, así son los “guerrilleros”, la temible fuerza de élite del Ejército y una de las más preparadas del mundo – La Razón, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.larazon.es/espana/moe-asi-son-guerrillleros-temible-fuerza-elite-ejercito-mas-preparadas-mundo_202305046453f3f622859d00017f1ea0.html
  21. UNIDADES ESPECIALES: Mando de Operaciones Especiales (MOE) – Davinci, accessed September 6, 2025, https://tropaymarineria.es/unidades-especiales-mando-de-operaciones-especiales-moe/
  22. FGNE, EZAPAC y MOE, estas son las tres grandes unidades de élite de las fuerzas armadas españolas: quiénes son y qué hacen – La Razón, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.larazon.es/espana/defensa/fgne-ezapac-moe-estas-son-tres-grandes-unidades-elite-fuerzas-armadas-espanolas-quienes-son-que-hacen_2023072967091c98596dfb00012a7b83.html
  23. Special Operations collaborate with Iraqi units in consolidating …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://emad.defensa.gob.es/en/operaciones/operaciones-en-el-exterior/10-Operacion_Inherent_Resolve/noticias/listado/250829-sotgxii-operaciones.html?__locale=en
  24. For the past ten years, members of the Spanish Special Operations …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://emad.defensa.gob.es/en/operaciones/operaciones-en-el-exterior/10-Operacion_Inherent_Resolve/noticias/listado/250113-ni-irak-aniversario-sotg.html
  25. To improve its Sahel policy, the US must update four assumptions – Atlantic Council, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/africasource/to-improve-its-sahel-policy-the-us-must-update-four-assumptions/
  26. Violent Extremism in the Sahel | Global Conflict Tracker – Council on Foreign Relations, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/violent-extremism-sahel
  27. Mando de Operaciones Especiales – Contenido – Ejército de tierra, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ejercito.defensa.gob.es/unidades/Alicante/cg_moe/Organizacion/materiales/index.html
  28. Heckler & Koch USP – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_USP
  29. Munición y accesorios para el arma más exótica del Mando de Operaciones Especiales del Ejército de Tierra – Defensa.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.defensa.com/espana/municion-accesorios-para-arma-mas-exotica-mando-operaciones
  30. G36 – Heckler & Koch, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.heckler-koch.com/en/Products/Military%20and%20Law%20Enforcement/Assault%20rifles/G36
  31. Los rifles de precisión G28 están ya operativos en el MOE – Noticias …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.defensa.com/espana/tiradores-mando-operaciones-especiales-disparan-desde-nh90-g28
  32. Accuracy International AWM – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_International_AWM
  33. MOE RECIBE POTENTES FUSILES SEMIAUTOMÁTICOS DE PRECISIÓN BARRET M107, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU7nZwJ9AE0
  34. Barrett M95 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_M95
  35. FN Minimi – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Minimi
  36. Nuevas ametralladoras MG5 fuerzas especiales Ejército de Tierra …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.defensa.com/espana/nueva-ametralladora-mg5-mando-operaciones-especiales-ejercito
  37. Heckler & Koch MG5 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MG5
  38. MG5 – HK USA, accessed September 6, 2025, https://hk-usa.com/product/mg5/
  39. Los comandos del 2035 – Ministerio de Defensa de España, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.defensa.gob.es/comun/slider/2020/03/040320-moe-2035.html
  40. Boinas verdes 4.0: así será en el futuro la unidad de élite del Ejército de Tierra – La Razón, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.larazon.es/espana/20200122/wmplylgw7ja4zmmfoul75ib4k4.html
  41. The Spanish Army tests the Future Soldier System developed by Indra and GMV to enhance soldiers’ capabilities with cutting-edge technologies, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.indracompany.com/en/noticia/spanish-army-tests-future-soldier-system-developed-indra-gmv-enhance-soldiers-capabilities
  42. G17 Gen5 MOS – Simplified mounting of optical sights – Glock, accessed September 6, 2025, https://us.glock.com/en/pistols/g17-gen5-mos-fs
  43. G17 Gen5 MOS – Simplified mounting of optical sights – GLOCK Perfection, accessed September 6, 2025, https://eu.glock.com/en/products/pistols/g17-gen5-mos
  44. G17 Gen5 – GLOCK Perfection, accessed September 6, 2025, https://eu.glock.com/en/products/pistols/g17-gen5
  45. Small Arms Market – Industry Research & Share | 2025 – 2030 – Mordor Intelligence, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/small-arms-market
  46. NATO and the Next Generation Squad Weapon- NGSW – Wavell Room, accessed September 6, 2025, https://wavellroom.com/2024/09/17/nato-and-the-next-generation-squad-weapon-ngsw/
Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Special Operations Forces (SOF) / Special Mission Units (SMUs) Analytics

The White Tigers: An Analytical History and Future Assessment of the ROK 707th Special Mission Group

The creation of the Republic of Korea’s (ROK) 707th Special Mission Group, known unofficially as the “White Tigers,” was the product of a confluence of global and domestic pressures. Its origins lie in the international recognition of a new form of warfare—modern terrorism—and the volatile political landscape of South Korea during a period of authoritarian military rule. This dual impetus forged a unit designed from its inception to be both a national security instrument for external threats and a highly responsive asset for the state’s internal security concerns.

1.1 The Global Catalyst: The Munich Massacre and the Dawn of Modern Counter-Terrorism

The attack on the Israeli Olympic team at the 1972 Munich Games was a watershed moment in the history of special operations. The event, broadcast globally, demonstrated a new vulnerability for modern states and exposed the inadequacy of conventional police forces in responding to determined, well-armed terrorists.1 The botched rescue attempt by West German police, who lacked the specialized training, equipment, and doctrine for such a high-stakes hostage crisis, served as a stark lesson for governments worldwide.1

This failure created what analysts term a “critical juncture,” a pivotal event that fundamentally alters institutional development.1 For Western nations and their allies, Munich fused the concepts of counter-terrorism (CT) and military special operations forces (SOF), establishing a new “path dependency” in security doctrine.1 The emerging consensus was that such threats were not merely criminal matters but constituted a form of warfare requiring a military response characterized by surgical precision, advanced marksmanship, and sophisticated infiltration techniques. In the months and years following the massacre, numerous countries established elite military or gendarmerie units specifically for counter-terrorism and hostage rescue (HR) missions.1

For the South Korean government, this global shift in threat perception was particularly acute. With Seoul slated to host the 1986 Asian Games and, more importantly, the 1988 Summer Olympics, the possibility of a Munich-style attack on its own soil became a primary national security concern.4 The government recognized the urgent need to create a dedicated, world-class counter-terrorism unit capable of preventing or responding to such an incident, as well as countering the persistent threat of infiltration by North Korean special forces.4 This imperative, born directly from the tragedy in Munich, was the public and strategic rationale for the formation of the 707th.5

1.2 The Domestic Crucible: South Korea’s Political Instability and the Requirement for an Elite Presidential Asset

While the Munich Massacre provided the international impetus, the domestic political environment of South Korea provided a powerful, parallel motivation for the 707th’s creation. The unit was officially established by presidential executive order on April 17, 1981, a period of profound political upheaval.5 In October 1979, authoritarian President Park Chung Hee was assassinated, plunging the nation into a political vacuum.9 This was swiftly filled by Major General Chun Doo-hwan, head of the Defense Security Command, who seized control of the military in the Coup d’état of December 12, 1979.9

Chun consolidated his power with a second coup on May 17, 1980, extending martial law across the nation and suppressing political dissent.9 This act triggered the Gwangju Uprising, a pro-democracy movement that was violently crushed by ROK Army Special Warfare Command (ROK-SWC) paratroopers, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths.10 This brutal event cemented the military’s control but also highlighted the role of special forces as instruments of state power. Within this context, the creation of a new, elite special forces unit directly under the ROK-SWC—a command whose leaders, including Chun himself, had proven political ambitions—carried significant internal implications.13

The 707th was structured from its inception to be the nation’s primary quick reaction force (QRF), noted for being the “fastest rapid response unit” and uniquely within the President’s immediate reach.5 This structure suggests a dual-purpose design. Publicly, it was the nation’s shield against terrorism for the upcoming Olympics. Internally, however, it was also a highly trained, politically reliable force available to the executive during a period of fragile authoritarian rule. This underlying purpose was starkly demonstrated decades later, on December 3, 2024, when President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law and deployed the 707th to the National Assembly to prevent lawmakers from overturning his decree.4 This event serves as a historical confirmation of the unit’s potential for political employment, a characteristic seemingly embedded in its organizational DNA from its founding during a military dictatorship.

1.3 Formation and Foundational Doctrine

The 707th Special Mission Battalion was officially activated under the ROK Army Special Warfare Command, an organization with its own deep history of U.S. Army Special Forces influence dating back to the Korean War and its formal establishment in 1969.4 The battalion’s initial, clearly defined missions were to provide security for the 1986 Asian Games and the 1988 Seoul Olympics, addressing the direct threat highlighted by the Munich massacre.4

The unit’s early tactical development was not conducted in isolation. A pivotal event occurred in 1984 when B Squadron of the U.S. Army’s 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (Delta Force) traveled to South Korea to conduct training directly with the 707th.5 This engagement was more than a routine joint exercise; it represented a direct transference of doctrine and TTPs from the West’s most advanced and secretive special mission unit of the era. Delta Force had been established in the late 1970s, heavily influenced by the British Special Air Service (SAS), to provide the United States with a dedicated CT/HR capability.16

This direct mentorship from Delta Force was instrumental in shaping the 707th’s foundational doctrine. It is highly probable that this training covered the full spectrum of counter-terrorism operations, including advanced close-quarters battle (CQB) techniques, explosive breaching, sniper/observer employment, and hostage rescue planning methodologies. This established a doctrinal lineage that aligned the 707th with its U.S. counterpart from its earliest days, setting it on a developmental path to mirror the structure, standards, and operational philosophy of a Western Tier 1 unit. This foundational relationship explains why, decades later, the 707th is still frequently compared to the U.S. Army’s Combat Applications Group (the modern designation for Delta Force) and maintains its closest international ties with U.S. SOF.4

Section 2: Evolution into a Multi-Spectrum Force (1989-2018)

Following its successful role in securing the 1988 Seoul Olympics, the 707th Special Mission Battalion entered a period of significant evolution. The post-Cold War security environment presented new and diverse challenges, prompting the unit to expand its capabilities far beyond its original counter-terrorism mandate. This era saw the 707th mature from a single-mission domestic guardian into a versatile, multi-spectrum special operations force capable of operating globally, a transformation reflected in its mission set, organizational structure, and armament.

2.1 Expanding Mission Parameters Beyond Hostage Rescue

While counter-terrorism and hostage rescue remained a core competency, the 707th “morphed into a multipurpose unit capable of unconventional warfare and direct action” in both overt and covert capacities.4 The unit’s responsibilities grew to encompass the full range of special operations, including direct action raids against high-value targets, special reconnaissance, black operations, and serving as the ROK Army’s primary Quick Reaction Force for national-level emergencies.5

This expansion of the mission set was a natural development that mirrored a global trend among elite special mission units. The exceptional selection standards, intensive training, and advanced equipment required for high-stakes hostage rescue create a force with the inherent skills for other complex and dangerous operations. As the ROK government faced new security challenges—from threats to its nationals abroad to the need for a surgical strike capability against North Korean strategic assets—it logically turned to its most capable and trusted force.

The battalion’s internal structure reflected this diversification. Prior to its 2019 reorganization, the unit was organized into specialized teams, including not only a Counter-Terrorism Team but also a Maritime-Operations Team and an Air-Assault Team.5 The existence of these specialized elements is clear evidence of a mission set that had grown far beyond urban CT. A dedicated maritime team indicates a capability to conduct operations at sea, such as vessel takedowns (Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure – VBSS), while an air-assault team points to a focus on helicopter-borne infiltration for direct action raids, capabilities not strictly required for a purely domestic HR unit but essential for a multi-domain special mission force.

2.2 From Domestic Guardian to Global Trainer: The ‘Akh Unit’

A defining moment in the 707th’s evolution was its first major, long-term overseas deployment. Since 2011, the unit has maintained a continuous rotational presence in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as a core component of the ROK Special Forces contingent known as the ‘Akh Unit’ (meaning ‘Brother’ in Arabic).5 The primary mission of this deployment is to train local UAE special forces, building partner capacity and strengthening the strategic relationship between the two nations.5

The Akh Unit deployment represents a significant maturation in South Korea’s use of its military as an instrument of foreign policy and defense diplomacy. It marks a strategic shift from using a Tier 1 SOF unit solely for kinetic operations to employing it for persistent, long-term engagement to achieve national objectives abroad. This “by, with, and through” approach, a cornerstone of U.S. SOF doctrine, allows South Korea to project influence, build strong alliances in a strategically vital region, and protect its economic interests, such as the security of commercial vessels navigating the Persian Gulf.4

Furthermore, the deployment provides the 707th with invaluable operational experience in a desert environment, a stark contrast to the mountainous and temperate climate of the Korean Peninsula. This long-term exposure to different operational conditions, cultures, and partner forces enhances the unit’s adaptability and global readiness, transforming it from a force focused solely on the Korean theater into one with proven expeditionary capabilities.

2.3 Organizational and Armament Shifts

The unit’s internal structure and equipment also evolved during this period to reflect its changing roles. An early, unique feature of the 707th was an all-female company, tasked with low-visibility operations and providing close protection for dignitaries.5 This company was deactivated in 2014, a move that suggests a doctrinal shift towards a more conventional SOF structure focused on standardized male-only direct action teams, aligning the unit more closely with its Western counterparts like Delta Force and the SAS.5

This period also marked the beginning of a critical divergence between the armament of the 707th and that of the conventional ROK Army. In its early years, the unit was armed with domestically produced Daewoo Precision Industries firearms, such as the K1A carbine (adopted in 1981) and the K2 assault rifle (adopted in 1985).20 These were robust and reliable weapons designed for a large conscript army, prioritizing ease of mass production and general-purpose utility.

However, as the 707th’s focus on specialized missions like CQB intensified, the limitations of these general-issue rifles became apparent. The unit began to procure foreign weapon systems better suited to its specific requirements. The Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun, with its controllable roller-delayed blowback action and compact size, became the global standard for CT units and was adopted by the 707th.23 This move signaled a fundamental recognition within the ROK defense establishment: the needs of a Tier 1 special mission unit are distinct from those of the general army, justifying the procurement of specialized, often foreign-made, equipment to ensure maximum operational effectiveness. This philosophy of prioritizing capability over domestic industrial preference would come to define the unit’s modern arsenal.

Section 3: The Modern 707th Special Mission Group (2019-Present)

The contemporary era for the 707th is defined by its elevation to a group-level command and an expansion of its strategic importance. This period has seen the unit solidify its role as a multi-purpose, Tier 1 asset central to South Korea’s national defense strategy. This enhanced status was underscored by its controversial involvement in the 2024 martial law crisis, an event that tested the unit’s professional identity and highlighted its unique position within the ROK’s power structure.

3.1 The 2019 Reorganization: A Strategic Expansion

On March 18, 2019, the 707th Special Mission Battalion was officially reorganized and expanded into the 707th Special Mission Group.4 This was a significant structural change, not merely an administrative redesignation. The Ministry of National Defence stated the reorganization was necessary to expand the unit’s manpower and capabilities in response to emerging threats.4 The expansion included additional personnel and equipment to ensure a higher state of readiness, and, critically, the unit’s command was elevated from a Lieutenant Colonel to a full Colonel.4

This upgrade from a battalion to a group signifies a fundamental shift in the unit’s role from a primarily tactical entity to a strategic national asset. In most military hierarchies, a battalion is a tactical formation, whereas a group or regiment often holds broader operational or strategic responsibilities. The promotion of the commander to Colonel grants the unit’s leader greater authority and influence, placing them on a more equal footing with commanders of conventional brigades and senior staff officers within the ROK-SWC and the Ministry of National Defence.

This formal expansion provided the necessary institutional framework to support the 707th’s diverse and demanding mission set, which had outgrown the capacity of its original 200-person battalion structure.5 The group structure is better suited to manage the complex requirements of maintaining readiness for counter-terrorism, direct action, overseas partner training via the Akh Unit, and its role in South Korea’s strategic deterrence plans, including potential “decapitation missions” against the North Korean leadership.10

3.2 Case Study: The 2024 Martial Law Incident

The 707th’s most prominent and controversial public appearance occurred on December 3, 2024. Following President Yoon Suk Yeol’s surprise declaration of martial law, he mobilized the 707th SMG to secure the National Assembly building in Seoul.4 The stated objective was to physically prevent lawmakers from convening to vote on a motion to overturn the martial law decree.4

Operators from the unit inserted by UH-60P Black Hawk helicopters and attempted to force their way into the main hall, leading to scuffles with legislators, their staff, and protestors who blocked their entry.4 A critical detail observed during the confrontation was that at least some of the operators were carrying rifles loaded with non-lethal simunition rounds rather than live ammunition.5 Ultimately, the National Assembly was able to convene and voted overwhelmingly to nullify the martial law decree. Following the vote, the 707th personnel withdrew from the premises, with some soldiers reportedly apologizing to citizens as they left.26 The unit’s commander, Colonel Kim Hyun-Tae, publicly assumed full responsibility for his unit’s actions.4

This incident placed the 707th at the center of a national constitutional crisis, forcing its operators into a mission for which they were never intended: the coercion of their own country’s democratic institutions. The deployment of a “surgical scalpel” of national security as a blunt instrument of political will represented a profound misapplication of the unit’s purpose.14 The decision by the chain of command to issue simunitions was pivotal; it suggests a desire to intimidate and obstruct without causing mass casualties, but it may also indicate a reluctance at some level—perhaps within the unit’s own leadership—to use lethal force against unarmed civilians and politicians. This internal conflict between following a legally dubious order and upholding democratic principles appears to be reflected in the soldiers’ reported apologies upon withdrawal. The 2024 incident has undoubtedly triggered a deep re-evaluation of the legal and ethical guardrails governing the domestic deployment of such an elite unit, with lasting implications for civil-military relations in South Korea.

3.3 Current Training Doctrine and Interoperability

To maintain its status as a Tier 1 force, the 707th employs one of the most demanding selection and training pipelines in any military. The initial selection process is exceptionally rigorous, with a 10-day evaluation that eliminates approximately 90% of all applicants.5 Candidates are drawn from volunteers across all branches of the ROK Armed Forces, with some being handpicked by their superiors for their potential.4

Those who pass selection undergo a grueling training regimen. All members must become qualified in both airborne operations (including advanced High Altitude, Low Opening [HALO] jumps) and combat diving (SCUBA), skills which are mandatory for a multi-domain SOF unit.4 The training is legendary for its difficulty, reportedly including daily calisthenics in snow and sub-zero temperatures and swimming in frozen lakes without thermal protection to build extreme physical and mental resilience.5

Crucially, the 707th’s doctrine is continuously refined through close relationships and interoperability drills with its most advanced allied counterparts. The unit maintains its strongest ties with U.S. SOF, particularly Delta Force and the 1st Special Forces Group (Airborne), but also trains with elite units like the Australian SASR and Singapore’s STAR.4 The 707th is a regular participant in large-scale combined ROK-U.S. exercises such as the annual Freedom Shield series, where its teams hone skills in direct action, special reconnaissance, and countering weapons of mass destruction alongside U.S. special operators.27 This constant, high-level engagement is not merely for diplomatic purposes; it is essential for ensuring that the 707th’s TTPs, communications protocols, and operational standards remain aligned with its most likely coalition partners in any future regional contingency, representing a critical force multiplier for the ROK-U.S. alliance.

Section 4: Technical Analysis of Current Small Arms Arsenal

The small arms inventory of the 707th Special Mission Group reflects a mature procurement philosophy that prioritizes mission-specific capability over logistical uniformity. The unit has largely eschewed standard-issue domestic firearms in favor of a diverse and highly specialized arsenal of best-in-class weapon systems sourced from premier international manufacturers. This approach is a hallmark of a well-funded, top-tier special mission unit with the autonomy to select the precise tools required to maintain a tactical edge.

4.1 Primary Carbines: A Trifecta of Western Excellence

The 707th’s primary individual weapon is the assault carbine, and the unit has been observed employing a trio of elite, foreign-made systems. This diverse inventory allows for continuous evaluation and fielding of the most advanced platforms available.

  • FN SCAR-L: For over a decade, the Belgian-made FN SCAR-L has been the dominant carbine within the unit.23 Chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, its key feature is a short-stroke gas piston operating system. This mechanism prevents hot propellant gases from entering the receiver, resulting in a cleaner, cooler, and theoretically more reliable action under sustained fire compared to direct impingement systems. This high degree of reliability was a major factor in its adoption by USSOCOM and subsequently by many allied SOF units, including the 707th.31
  • Knight’s Armament Company (KAC) KS-3: A more recent and limited acquisition, the KAC KS-3 represents the pinnacle of the direct impingement AR-15/M4 platform.27 Manufactured in the United States, its standout feature is the proprietary E3.2 bolt. This advanced bolt design incorporates radiused lugs to reduce stress fractures, dual ejectors for more reliable ejection with short barrels and suppressors, and an improved extractor design, all of which significantly enhance durability and lifespan over a standard Mil-Spec bolt.33 The KS-3 offers exceptional ergonomics, accuracy, and modularity in a lightweight package.34
  • Noveske N4: Also seen in use is the Noveske N4, another high-end American AR-15 variant.4 Noveske Rifleworks is renowned in the industry for the quality and accuracy of its barrels, which are often considered among the best available. The N4 provides operators with a highly reliable and exceptionally accurate carbine, particularly in short-barreled configurations suited for CQB and vehicle operations.35

The concurrent use of these three distinct systems demonstrates a procurement strategy focused on capability above all else. It allows the unit to leverage the unique strengths of each platform while continuously evaluating the state-of-the-art in carbine technology, ensuring its operators are never at a material disadvantage.

4.2 Close Quarters Battle (CQB) Weaponry: Compact and Specialized

For operations in confined spaces where a carbine may be too cumbersome, the 707th employs a range of submachine guns (SMGs) and personal defense weapons (PDWs).

  • Brügger & Thomet (B&T) MP9 and APC9K Pro: The Swiss-made B&T MP9 is an extremely compact and lightweight machine pistol, weighing only 1.4 kg.23 Its small size makes it ideal for concealed carry in low-visibility roles or for use within vehicles. In 2023, the unit also adopted the B&T APC9K Pro, a slightly larger but still very compact SMG that has been selected by the U.S. Army for its Sub Compact Weapon program.38 This adoption demonstrates the unit’s commitment to continuous modernization of its CQB arsenal.
  • Heckler & Koch (H&K) MP7A1: The German H&K MP7 offers a unique capability. It fires a proprietary high-velocity, small-caliber 4.6x30mm cartridge designed to defeat modern body armor at close ranges—a task for which traditional 9mm SMGs are ill-suited.4 This makes the MP7 a critical tool for engaging near-peer adversaries who are likely to be equipped with personal armor.
  • Heckler & Koch MP5: While a legacy design, the H&K MP5 remains in the 707th’s inventory.4 Its roller-delayed blowback operating system is famously smooth, producing very little recoil and allowing for highly accurate and controllable fire, particularly in semi-automatic or short bursts.24 It continues to be a viable and effective tool for precision CQB engagements.

4.3 Sidearms: A Diverse Toolkit

The 707th employs a wide variety of 9x19mm Parabellum sidearms, suggesting a mix of legacy systems, mission-specific selections, and a degree of operator preference.

  • Striker-Fired: The Austrian Glock 17 is a primary sidearm, reflecting its global dominance as a reliable, simple, and effective striker-fired pistol.4
  • Hammer-Fired (DA/SA): A significant number of operators use traditional double-action/single-action (DA/SA) pistols. The German/Swiss SIG Sauer P226 is a legendary combat handgun, renowned for its accuracy, reliability, and adoption by units like the U.S. Navy SEALs.4 The German H&K USP is another robust, service-proven design known for its durability.4 Italian pistols, including the iconic Beretta 92FS (the former U.S. M9) and the more modern, polymer-framed Beretta Px4 Storm with its rotating barrel action, are also in use.4 The Israeli IWI Jericho 941, a design based on the venerable CZ-75 system, rounds out the inventory.4

4.4 Precision Engagement Systems: Long-Range Dominance

To control the battlefield at extended ranges, 707th sniper teams are equipped with a modern, multi-caliber suite of precision rifles.

  • Knight’s Armament M110 SASS: For the semi-automatic sniper system (SASS) role, the unit uses the U.S.-made KAC M110.4 Chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO, this AR-10-based platform allows for rapid engagement of multiple targets at intermediate ranges (out to 800-1000 meters) and is often employed in a designated marksman or overwatch role.49
  • Accuracy International AWSM: For extreme long-range anti-personnel engagements, the 707th fields the British-made Accuracy International Arctic Warfare Super Magnum (AWSM).4 This bolt-action rifle is chambered in.338 Lapua Magnum, a specialized cartridge designed to provide accurate and effective fire on human-sized targets well beyond 1,500 meters.51
  • Barrett MRAD: The U.S.-made Barrett Multi-Role Adaptive Design (MRAD) rifle provides the unit with ultimate flexibility.4 This modern bolt-action platform features a user-changeable barrel system, allowing operators to quickly switch between various calibers (such as 7.62x51mm NATO,.300 Winchester Magnum, or.338 Lapua Magnum) in the field to best suit the mission requirements.53 This adaptability makes it an exceptionally versatile tool for a special mission unit.

Table 4.1: Current Small Arms of the 707th Special Mission Group

Weapon CategoryModel NameCountry of OriginCaliberActionKey Specifications (Weight / Barrel Length / Rate of Fire)
Assault CarbineFN SCAR-LBelgium5.56×45mm NATOShort-Stroke Gas Piston3.5 kg / 368 mm / 550-650 RPM 31
Assault CarbineKAC KS-3USA5.56×45mm NATODirect Impingement2.79 kg / 292 mm / ~700-900 RPM 33
Assault CarbineNoveske N4USA5.56×45mm NATODirect Impingement~2.7 kg / 267 mm / ~700-900 RPM 35
SMG / PDWB&T MP9Switzerland9×19mm ParabellumShort Recoil, Rotating Barrel1.4 kg / 130 mm / 900 RPM 36
SMG / PDWB&T APC9K ProSwitzerland9×19mm ParabellumStraight Blowback2.5 kg / 110 mm / 1080 RPM 38
SMG / PDWH&K MP7A1Germany4.6×30mmGas-Operated, Rotating Bolt1.5 kg / 180 mm / 950 RPM 39
SMGH&K MP5A5Germany9×19mm ParabellumRoller-Delayed Blowback2.88 kg / 225 mm / 800 RPM 24
SidearmGlock 17 Gen5Austria9×19mm ParabellumStriker-Fired630 g / 114 mm / N/A 42
SidearmSIG Sauer P226Germany/Switzerland9×19mm ParabellumDA/SA964 g / 112 mm / N/A 43
Sniper RifleAI AWSMUnited Kingdom.338 Lapua MagnumBolt-Action6.9 kg / 686 mm / N/A 51
SASSKAC M110USA7.62×51mm NATODirect Impingement6.23 kg / 508 mm / N/A 49
Sniper RifleBarrett MRADUSAMulti-CaliberBolt-Action~6.3 kg / 508-660 mm / N/A 53

Section 5: The Future of the White Tigers: A Speculative Forecast

The future trajectory of the 707th Special Mission Group will be shaped by three primary drivers: the rapid modernization of South Korea’s defense capabilities, the evolving nature of the threat posed by North Korea, and the technological and doctrinal shifts occurring within its key ally, the United States. The unit will continue to serve as the tip of the spear for the ROK military, adopting new technologies and refining its tactics to address the complex challenges of the 21st-century battlefield.

5.1 Armament for 2030 and Beyond: Domestic Innovation and Allied Influence

The next generation of the 707th’s primary carbine is already being determined. The ROK military has initiated the “Special Operations Submachinegun Type I” program to find a modern replacement for the aging Daewoo K1A carbines used by its wider special forces community.56 The main competitors are two domestic firms: Dasan Machineries with its AR-15-derived DSAR-15PQ, and S&T Motiv (the successor to Daewoo) with its K13 carbine (also known as the STC-16).56 While the 707th currently uses foreign carbines, the outcome of this program will influence its future procurement, as it may be directed to adopt the winning domestic platform.

However, a far more significant strategic question looms: the U.S. Army’s adoption of the Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW) system.58 This program introduces a new, high-pressure 6.8mm common cartridge designed to defeat modern body armor at extended ranges, a paradigm shift away from the 5.56mm NATO standard that has defined the alliance for decades.60 The ROK-U.S. military alliance is the cornerstone of South Korean defense, and interoperability is paramount. The prospect of U.S. and ROK infantry forces using different standard rifle ammunition in a major conflict on the peninsula presents a significant logistical challenge.

This creates a powerful “interoperability dilemma” for Seoul. In the short term, adopting a new 5.56mm carbine from the domestic competition is the simplest path. In the long term, however, the pressure to align with the new U.S. standard will be immense, especially for a Tier 1 unit like the 707th that works more closely with U.S. SOF than any other ROK unit. South Korean industry is already anticipating this shift, with S&T Motiv having displayed a prototype 6.8mm rifle.62 It is therefore highly probable that by the 2030s, the 707th will be testing, if not actively fielding, a 6.8mm platform to ensure seamless integration with its American counterparts in a future conflict.

5.2 Force Modernization: The “Warrior Platform” and “Defense Innovation 4.0”

The individual 707th operator will be a key beneficiary of South Korea’s ambitious force modernization plans. The “Defense Innovation 4.0” initiative is a national strategy to leverage advanced technology—including artificial intelligence, robotics, and big data—to create a smaller, smarter, and more lethal military capable of offsetting the country’s declining population and shrinking pool of conscripts.63

For the individual soldier, this translates into the “Warrior Platform” program, an effort to equip troops with integrated high-tech gear such as advanced ballistic helmets, next-generation night vision devices, and networked communication and targeting systems.64 For the 707th, this means the operator of the future will evolve from being simply a highly skilled shooter into a networked sensor and effector on the battlefield. Their small arms will become integrated weapon systems, likely equipped with sophisticated fire control optics similar to the U.S. Army’s XM157.61 These devices integrate a variable-power optic with a laser rangefinder, ballistic computer, and atmospheric sensors, providing the operator with a calculated aiming point that dramatically increases first-round hit probability at all ranges.

Furthermore, the unit’s tactics will increasingly incorporate manned-unmanned teaming. Operators will not just infiltrate an objective; they will orchestrate an array of effects, using networked devices to direct swarms of small reconnaissance drones, command robotic platforms for breaching or clearing rooms, and designate targets for loitering munitions, all while maintaining cognitive overmatch through AI-assisted decision-making tools.66

5.3 Evolving Threat Scenarios and Future Roles

While the 707th will retain its capabilities for a range of contingencies, its primary focus will continue to be sharpened by the evolving threat from North Korea. Pyongyang maintains one of the world’s largest special operations forces, estimated at up to 200,000 personnel, and is actively modernizing its own tactics based on lessons from modern conflicts like the war in Ukraine.67 Plausible future war scenarios involve not just a conventional attack across the DMZ, but a simultaneous, massive infiltration of North Korean SOF into the South’s rear areas via tunnels, semi-submersibles, and other covert means to create a “second front” designed to paralyze the ROK’s command and control and logistical networks.68

In this context, the 707th’s future role will likely pivot towards two critical, high-stakes missions that transcend traditional counter-terrorism:

  1. Counter-SOF Operations: The 707th will be the premier force tasked with hunting and neutralizing the most critical elements of a North Korean SOF incursion. This mission requires a higher level of skill, intelligence integration, and lethality than that of general-purpose forces, making the 707th the ideal tool to counter the most dangerous threats in the rear area.
  2. Strategic Deterrence and Retaliation: The unit is a key component of South Korea’s “Korea Massive Punishment and Retaliation” (KMPR) strategy, a core pillar of the ROK’s “three-axis” system designed to deter North Korean aggression.25 The KMPR doctrine relies on the credible threat of surgical strikes against the North Korean leadership and its key command-and-control facilities in the event of a major attack. Executing these “decapitation missions” is arguably the most demanding and highest-risk direct action scenario conceivable. The 707th is the only ROK unit with the specialized training, advanced equipment, and deep interoperability with U.S. assets required to plausibly execute such a mission.

Therefore, the future development of the White Tigers—their training, procurement, and doctrine—will be increasingly optimized for success in these two vital national security roles. The unit has evolved far beyond its origins as an Olympic security force into an indispensable strategic asset, central to South Korea’s ability to deter and, if necessary, prevail in a future conflict on the Korean Peninsula.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. Full article: The Munich massacre and the proliferation of counterterrorism special operation forces, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13537121.2022.2088134
  2. The Munich massacre and the proliferation of counterterrorism special operation forces, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13537121.2022.2088134
  3. Marshall Center counterterrorism students delve into ‘Munich Massacre’ lessons learned, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.army.mil/article/164020/marshall_center_counterterrorism_students_delve_into_munich_massacre_lessons_learned
  4. 707th Special Mission Group: The South Korean Delta Force – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/707th-special-mission-group-the-south-korean-delta-force/
  5. 707th Special Mission Group – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/707th_Special_Mission_Group
  6. 707th SMB – The Tom Clancy Wiki, accessed September 6, 2025, https://tomclancy.wiki.gg/wiki/707th_SMB
  7. Special Forces Brigades of the Republic of Korea Army – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Forces_Brigades_of_the_Republic_of_Korea_Army
  8. 707th Special Mission Group – Wikiwand, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/707th_Special_Mission_Group
  9. Coup d’état of May Seventeenth – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%A9tat_of_May_Seventeenth
  10. Republic of Korea Army Special Warfare Command – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Korea_Army_Special_Warfare_Command
  11. Gi-Wook Shin on Gwangju and South Korea’s Democracy | FSI, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fsi.stanford.edu/news/gi-wook-shin-gwangju-and-south-korea%E2%80%99s-democracy
  12. Politics and Protest in South Korea Timeline | East Asian Studies Center – The Ohio State University, accessed September 6, 2025, https://easc.osu.edu/resources/k-16/film-guides/taxi-driver/historical-context/timeline
  13. Special Forces Detachment 39 – ARSOF History, accessed September 6, 2025, https://arsof-history.org/articles/v2n1_detachment_39_page_1.html
  14. More footage of 707th SMG during the declared martial law : r/SpecOpsArchive – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/SpecOpsArchive/comments/1h6b5d1/more_footage_of_707th_smg_during_the_declared/
  15. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Korea_Army_Special_Warfare_Command#:~:text=The%20command%20includes%20six%20special,which%20was%20established%20in%201969.
  16. The U.S. Army’s Delta Force: How This Secret Group of Deadly Soldiers Came to Be, accessed September 6, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-armys-delta-force-how-secret-group-deadly-soldiers-came-be-55057
  17. 22 SAS influence on Delta Force in the 70s? : r/JSOCarchive – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/JSOCarchive/comments/riua6t/22_sas_influence_on_delta_force_in_the_70s/
  18. South Korean 707th Special Mission Group members inside an elevator [750 x 566] – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/10zurfc/south_korean_707th_special_mission_group_members/
  19. U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Considerations for Congress, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RS21048
  20. Weapons of the Republic of Korea Marine Corps – Small Arms Defense Journal, accessed September 6, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/weapons-of-the-republic-of-korea-marine-corps/
  21. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daewoo_Precision_Industries_K1
  22. Daewoo Precision Industries K2 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daewoo_Precision_Industries_K2
  23. List of equipment of the Republic of Korea Armed Forces – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Republic_of_Korea_Armed_Forces
  24. Heckler & Koch MP5 (& variants) – Small Arms Survey, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/SAS-weapons-sub-machine-guns-Heckler-Koch-MP5.pdf
  25. S. Korean commandos sharpen special operations capabilities amid NK threats, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/defense/20240623/s-korean-commandos-enhance-special-operations-amid-north-korean-threats
  26. Korean 707th Special Mission Group confronts a fire extinguisher during the protest. [708×497] : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/1h5tgc2/korean_707th_special_mission_group_confronts_a/
  27. 707th Special Mission Group training in Seoul, South Korea : r/tacticalgear – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/tacticalgear/comments/1b801av/707th_special_mission_group_training_in_seoul/
  28. U.S. and ROK special operations forces conduct routine combined training during exercise Freedom Shield 2025 – United States Forces Korea, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.usfk.mil/Media/Newsroom/News/Article/4127793/us-and-rok-special-operations-forces-conduct-routine-combined-training-during-e/
  29. South Korea’s Elite 707th Special Mission Group Counter-Terrorism Demonstration | June, 2019 – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFhULsbTn0k
  30. South Korean 707th Special Mission Group members armed with FN SCAR-L and KAC KS-3 carbines [1500 x 1000] : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/1b8029q/south_korean_707th_special_mission_group_members/
  31. FN SCAR® 16S | FN® Firearms, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fnamerica.com/products/discontinued-rifles/fn-scar-16s/
  32. FN SCAR – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_SCAR
  33. KAC Knight’s Armament Company KS-3 – NS Armory, accessed September 6, 2025, https://nsarmory.us/kac-knights-armament-company-ks-3/
  34. KS-3 – Knight’s Armament Company, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.knightarmco.com/28959/shop/military/ks/ks-3
  35. N4 SHORTY 10.5″ | Noveske Rifleworks, accessed September 6, 2025, https://noveske.com/products/10-5-gen-4-shorty-rifle/
  36. Brügger & Thomet MP9 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%BCgger_%26_Thomet_MP9
  37. MP9 – B&T USA, accessed September 6, 2025, https://bt-usa.com/products/mp9/
  38. Brügger & Thomet APC – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%BCgger_%26_Thomet_APC
  39. MP7 | Heckler & Koch, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.heckler-koch.com/en/Products/Military%20and%20Law%20Enforcement/Submachine%20guns/MP7
  40. Heckler & Kock HK MP7A1 Submachine Gun (Germany) 8 | PDF | Projectiles | Weapon Design – Scribd, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/191549851/Heckler-Kock-HK-MP7A1-Submachine-Gun-Germany-8
  41. MP5 9mm – Australian Army, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.army.gov.au/equipment/small-arms/mp5-9mm
  42. Glock 17 Gen 5 Review (SECOND Most Popular Glock Model) – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9uZk-LNQ9E
  43. SIG P226 Reviewed – Shooters Report, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.shootersreport.com/pistol/9mm-Shoot-Out-SIG-P226.htm
  44. SIG Sauer P226 Handgun – rdctd, accessed September 6, 2025, https://rdctd.pro/sig-sauer-p226-firearm-review/
  45. Before You Buy – Heckler & Koch USP – Falco Holsters, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.falcoholsters.com/blog/before-you-buy-heckler-koch-usp
  46. 92FS Inox – Beretta, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.beretta.com/en-us/product/92fs-inox-FA0173
  47. Beretta PX4 Storm Review: Unveil Its Full Potential | Craft Holsters, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.craftholsters.com/beretta-px4-storm-review-unveiling-range-performance-features
  48. IWI Jericho 941 Review : Quality, Reliability, and Performance – Gun University, accessed September 6, 2025, https://gununiversity.com/iwi-jericho-941-review/
  49. U.S. ARMY M110 SASS – Sniper Central, accessed September 6, 2025, https://snipercentral.com/u-s-army-m110-sass/
  50. M110 – Knight’s Armament, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.knightarmco.com/12016/shop/military/m110/m110
  51. Accuracy International AWM – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_International_AWM
  52. Accuracy International Super Magnum – Sniper Central, accessed September 6, 2025, https://snipercentral.com/pm_sm.htm
  53. MRAD® – Barrett Firearms, accessed September 6, 2025, https://barrett.net/products/firearms/mrad-standard/
  54. Barrett MRAD – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_MRAD
  55. FN HERSTAL SCAR L STD CAL. 5,56×45 – TR Equipement, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.tr-equipement.com/en/our-products/armement/armes/43-fn-herstal-scar-l-std-cal-556×45.html
  56. Dasan Shows Wares at Seoul ADEX 2023 – Small Arms Defense Journal, accessed September 6, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/dasan-shows-wares-at-seoul-adex-2023/
  57. Dasan Machineries DSAR-15 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasan_Machineries_DSAR-15
  58. Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) Program – PEO Soldier – Army.mil, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.peosoldier.army.mil/Equipment/Equipment-Portfolio/Project-Manager-Soldier-Lethality-Portfolio/Next-Generation-Squad-Weapons-Program/
  59. Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon – Combat Veterans, accessed September 6, 2025, https://combatvets.socialwork.msu.edu/armys-next-generation-squad-weapon
  60. NATO and the Next Generation Squad Weapon- NGSW – Wavell Room, accessed September 6, 2025, https://wavellroom.com/2024/09/17/nato-and-the-next-generation-squad-weapon-ngsw/
  61. Upcoming Changes to Military Small Arms – SilencerCo, accessed September 6, 2025, https://silencerco.com/blog/upcoming-changes-military-small-arms
  62. SNT Motiv From South Korea Working On 6.8mm Caliber Assault Rifle – CORE Survival, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.coresurvival.com/core-news/snt-motiv-from-south-korea-working-on-68mm-caliber-assault-rifle
  63. South Korea – Defense Industry Equipment – International Trade Administration, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/south-korea-defense-industry-equipment
  64. S. Korean Army launches futuristic demonstration combat team equipped with AI and drones, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOBxrb7enKo
  65. Small arms sights and fire control systems developments – European Security & Defence, accessed September 6, 2025, https://euro-sd.com/2025/02/articles/42724/small_arms_sights_and_fire_control_systems/
  66. The Future of the Battlefield – Office of the Director of National Intelligence – Global Trends, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.dni.gov/index.php/gt2040-home/gt2040-deeper-looks/future-of-the-battlefield
  67. The North Korean Special Purpose Forces an Assessment of the Threat. – DTIC, accessed September 6, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA297448.pdf
  68. Preparing for the Silent Surge: Countering North Korea’s Gambit in a Dual Contingency, accessed September 6, 2025, https://irregularwarfare.org/articles/north-korean-irregular-warfare-dual-contingency/
  69. South Korea’s Offensive Military Strategy and Its Dilemma – Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, accessed September 6, 2025, https://dkiapcss.edu/south-koreas-offensive-military-strategy-and-its-dilemma/
Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Uncategorized

The Dual Guardians: Iran’s Parallel Military Structure (Artesh vs. IRGC)

Iran’s dual-military structure, comprising the conventional Artesh (the regular army) and the ideological Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is not an accident of history or a sign of dysfunction. It is a deliberate, core feature of the Islamic Republic’s political architecture, designed to prioritize regime survival above all else. This system is a sophisticated “coup-proofing” strategy 1 that, by design, values ideological purity and asymmetric deterrence over conventional military efficiency.

This structure has created two fundamentally different organizations with asymmetric missions, power, and resources. The IRGC, the regime’s “praetorian guard” 2, has evolved into the state’s political, economic, and military center of gravity, with a constitutional mandate to protect the Revolution.3 In contrast, the Artesh is a “marginalized” 5 conventional force, constitutionally tasked with the traditional defense of Iran’s national sovereignty and borders.6

This report analyzes the architecture, function, and long-term viability of this split. It finds that while the dual structure is operationally inefficient and fosters resource-wasting competition 1, it is highly effective at its primary goals: insulating the Supreme Leader from internal military threats and providing a flexible, deniable, and potent asymmetric capability to project power abroad. The system is therefore highly sustainable. Analysis indicates the IRGC’s deep-state power ensures it will emerge as the undisputed “kingmaker” and primary guarantor of state continuity in any post-Khamenei succession scenario.9

Part 1: Architecture of a Divided Force: Origins and Command

To understand Iran’s military capabilities, one must first understand that its security apparatus was designed from its inception to serve two masters: the ideological Revolution and the territorial State. This duality is the central pillar of its defense doctrine.

1.1 Ideological Origins of the Split (1979 Revolution)

The dual-military system was born from the foundational mistrust of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.10 The revolutionary leadership, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, was deeply suspicious of the existing “Imperial Army,” which it viewed as a pillar of the toppled Shah’s regime and potentially loyal to the exiled monarch.10 Despite the Artesh’s February 11, 1979, declaration of neutrality, the new regime saw it as a potential counter-revolutionary threat.10

Consequently, the regime initiated brutal purges, executing and exiling senior military officials and experienced personnel.4 This “ravaged” the Artesh 5, draining its manpower by an estimated 40-60 percent and leaving it “ill equipped”.4 Simultaneously, Khomeini, fearing a future coup, created a parallel force.3 In May 1979, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was formally established, consolidating several Islamist militias loyal to the revolution.3

The IRGC’s purpose was explicitly political and ideological: to serve as a “counterweight” to the regular military 11, to thwart potential coups by the Artesh 3, and to act as an ideologically pure “praetorian guard” 2 loyal not to the nation, but to the revolution’s clerical leadership and the doctrine of Velayat-e-faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist).3 This foundational act baked institutional rivalry, resource competition, and doctrinal differences into the DNA of the Islamic Republic’s security apparatus.10 This rivalry was not a flaw; it was the central feature.

The 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War was not the cause of the split, but its crucible.13 The Iraqi invasion in 1980 exposed the weakness of the purged Artesh, which was unable to repel the invasion on its own.4 This military necessity forced the rapid professionalization of the IRGC.7 The war gave the IRGC a platform to prove its ideological zeal and military value, creating a powerful “sacred defense” narrative that the Artesh, as the Shah’s remnant, could never claim.14 This conflict cemented the IRGC’s status and entrenched its doctrinal focus on asymmetric warfare, proxy warfare, and ballistic missiles as tools of survival and deterrence.15

1.2 Constitutional Division of Labor: A Mandate for Asymmetry

The 1979 Constitution formally codifies the dual structure, creating a deliberate and profound asymmetry in mission.

  • Article 143 (Artesh): The Artesh, as the national armed forces, is tasked first and foremost with “defending Iran’s independence and sovereignty” and its territorial integrity.6 This is a classical, national defense mission focused on external borders.10
  • Article 150 (IRGC): The IRGC is tasked with the “guarding of the Revolution and its achievements”.3

This seemingly subtle distinction is, in practice, a vast chasm in mandate. The Artesh’s mission is finite, clear, and conventional (defend the borders). The IRGC’s mission is ambiguous, ideological, and borderless. This “seemingly more rewarding job” 6 is interpreted as an all-encompassing legal mandate for the IRGC to intervene in any sphere to “guard the revolution.” This includes preventing foreign interference 3, thwarting internal coups 3, crushing “deviant movements” 3 and domestic dissent 4, and exporting the revolution’s ideology.4 This constitutional ambiguity in Article 150 legally justifies the IRGC’s pervasive intervention in domestic politics, foreign policy, the economy, and internal security 2, far exceeding the mandate of a traditional military.

1.3 The Supreme Leader’s Command and Control (C2) Architecture

The command and control (C2) structure is the primary mechanism for the regime’s political control and coup-proofing.

  1. Supreme Leader as Commander-in-Chief: The Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) is the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces.7 He has the sole authority to declare war and peace and makes all final security policy decisions.7
  2. Sidelining the Elected Government: The elected government is deliberately excluded from the military chain of command. The President of Iran has “relatively few powers,” does not control any armed forces, and is not in the C2 chain.7 The Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL) is purely an administrative body for R&D, production, and procurement, not a policy or command institution.7
  3. Parallel Chains of Command: Both the Artesh and the IRGC report directly and separately to the Supreme Leader.7 This C2 architecture is designed for political loyalty, not operational efficiency. By having all military chains terminate only with him, the Supreme Leader ensures their primary loyalty is personal (to the Vali-ye Faqih) and not institutional.
  4. Coordinating Bodies: The Supreme Leader uses two primary bodies to coordinate—but explicitly not unify—the parallel forces:
  • Armed Forces General Staff (AFGS): The senior-most military body, setting policy and strategic guidance. Its chief (currently an IRGC officer) is tasked with overseeing and coordinating both forces.7
  • Khatemolanbia Central Headquarters (KCHQ): The top operational headquarters, responsible for operational C2 and coordinating joint military operations.7
  1. Bypassing the Structure: This formal structure is often subverted. The Supreme Leader frequently bypasses the AFGS and KCHQ to issue orders directly to lower-level commanders.7 Furthermore, high-priority branches, most notably the IRGC-Quds Force, have their own privileged, direct line of communication to the Supreme Leader.7

This C2 architecture is the central nervous system of the coup-proofing strategy.1 A successful coup would require the coordination of both the Artesh and the IRGC. The system is designed to make this impossible. With separate C2 chains 1, separate logistics networks 1, separate intelligence services 7, and pervasive counterintelligence bodies 17 loyal only to the Supreme Leader’s office, the two militaries are institutionally incapable of coordinating against him.

Table 1: The Artesh vs. IRGC: Foundational Comparison

MetricArtesh (Conventional Military)IRGC (Revolutionary Guard)
Constitutional MandateArticle 143: Defend national sovereignty & territorial integrity.6Article 150: “Guard the Revolution and its achievements”.3
Primary MissionNational Defense (external). Conventional border security.5Regime Security (internal & external). Internal suppression, border control (volatile areas), exporting revolution.3
Ideological Role“Apolitical,” national, professional.10 Loyal to the nation.Deeply ideological (Khomeinism, Shia Islamism).3 “Praetorian Guard”.2 Loyal to the Supreme Leader.
Political Influence“Marginalized”.5 “Forced to remain apolitical”.2 Wields “very little influence”.5“Immense”.12 A “central player in Iran’s domestic politics”.12 Former commanders populate parliament & government.10
Budgetary AccessSignificantly smaller official budget (e.g., 1/3 of IRGC in 2018).6 “Not as well-funded”.10Larger official budget.7 Direct access to foreign exchange reserves.10
Economic Role“Limited to several chain stores”.10 A “military-bonyad complex” entity but minor.19A “business empire”.3 Controls vast economic sectors via Khatam al-Anbiya 10 and illicit smuggling.21 Generates massive off-budget revenue.22

Part 2: Comparative Analysis: Doctrines and Capabilities

The divergent missions of the Artesh and IRGC manifest in a practical division of labor, equipment, and areas of responsibility. Both forces maintain complete, parallel ground, naval, and air components, but they are optimized for entirely different types of conflict.7

2.1 Naval Forces: Blue-Water Ambition vs. Asymmetric Swarm

The naval split is the clearest example of Iran’s hybrid doctrine. The two forces have overlapping functions but are “distinct” in training, equipment, and “how they fight”.3

  • Artesh Navy (IRIN): The IRIN is Iran’s “strategic force” 7, with a traditional, conventional doctrine.7 It is tasked with projecting “blue-water” power into the Gulf of Oman, the Caspian Sea, and the high seas of the Indian Ocean.7 It operates Iran’s largest, most conventional (though “aging” 16) platforms: larger surface combatants like the Jamaran-class frigate 10, corvettes, and the core submarine fleet, including Russian-built Kilo-class submarines and domestically produced midget subs.7
  • IRGC Navy (IRGCN): The IRGCN employs a “revolutionary” 24 asymmetric doctrine.7 It is a “guerrilla force at sea” 3 whose primary Area of Responsibility (AOR) is the “Persian Gulf” 7 and the critical chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz 25, which it is expected to control in a conflict.3 The IRGCN specializes in “hit-and-run” 3 and “swarming tactics” 27, maintaining a massive inventory of “hundreds” 7 of small, fast attack craft armed with guns, rockets, torpedoes, and missiles.3 It also controls large arsenals of coastal defense anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) and naval mines.3

This structure is a purpose-built, hybrid naval solution. The IRIN is for prestige and conventional state-on-state presence. The IRGCN is the actual war-fighting and deterrent force, designed to counter a technologically superior navy (i.e., the United States) in the “shallow and confined waterways” of the Strait of Hormuz.7 This doctrine was forged by failure; “a series of naval battles with the U.S. Navy in April 1988” during the Iran-Iraq War taught Iran that its “large naval vessels are vulnerable to air and missile attacks”.28 That experience directly “confirmed the efficacy of small boat operations” and “spurred interest in missile-armed fast-attack craft,” forming the foundation of the IRGCN’s swarming doctrine today.28

2.2 Air and Aerospace Forces: Conventional Atrophy vs. Strategic Strike

The split in the air domain highlights the regime’s strategic priorities: asymmetric strike over conventional air superiority.

  • Artesh Air Force (IRIAF): This is a conventional air force tasked with defensive roles, such as supporting the national integrated air defense system and providing combat support to ground forces.16 However, it is widely considered Iran’s “most critical weakness” 29 and a “key structural deficiency”.30 The IRIAF is a “badly dated service” 16 operating a “shrinking and unrenewable air fleet” 31 of aging 1970s/80s-era American (F-14, F-4) and Soviet/Russian (MiG-29, Su-24) airframes.16 It is “vastly inferior” to its adversaries and suffers from high accident rates and crippling budgetary disadvantages.16
  • IRGC Aerospace Force (IRGCASF): Renamed from “Air Force” in 2009 32, this move signaled its true mission: strategic deterrence.32 This force is the regime’s “crown jewel”.16 It does not compete with the IRIAF in conventional air-to-air combat. Instead, it controls all of Iran’s most important strategic strike assets:
  1. Ballistic Missiles: The IRGC-ASF is the “primary body responsible” 33 for Iran’s “formidable” 12 and “large” 7 ballistic missile arsenal, the largest in the Middle East.16 This program, born from the “war of the cities” with Iraq, is the “centerpiece” of Iran’s deterrence doctrine.15
  2. UAV (Drone) Program: The IRGC-ASF controls the lethal, “game-changer” 35 drone arsenal.16 This program, originating in the 1980s 35, has become a core strategic asset. Its R&D arm, the Self-Sufficiency Jihad Organization (SSJO), has reverse-engineered captured technology (like the U.S. RQ-170) to create the Shahed family of UAVs.36
  3. Space Program: The IRGC-ASF also runs Iran’s military space force and satellite-launch (SLV) program.7

The regime has made a conscious strategic and budgetary choice. It has allowed the IRIAF to atrophy 31 because it is not cost-effective against U.S. or Israeli airpower. Instead, it has built an “asymmetric air force” composed of ballistic missiles and swarms of attack drones.35 This force is cheaper, has a longer reach, is deniable when used by proxies, and provides the strategic deterrence 15 that the IRIAF’s aging fighters cannot. The IRGC-ASF’s total control of this portfolio makes it arguably the single most powerful military branch in Iran.

2.3 Ground Forces: Border Defense vs. Internal Security

The ground forces reveal the regime’s “geography of trust.”

  • Artesh Ground Force (IRIGF): This is the numerically larger force, with 350,000 personnel to the IRGC-GF’s 150,000.7 Its primary mission is conventional territorial defense against a state-level invasion.5 It is “avowedly apolitical” 18 and controls the “preponderance of heavy ground armor” (tanks).18 It is largely “sidelined” 5 from the regime’s core security concerns.
  • IRGC Ground Force (IRGCGF): This force is focused on regime security.
  1. Internal Security: Its primary role is acting as the regime’s “Praetorian Guard” 2 to suppress domestic dissent.3
  2. Volatile Border Control: The IRGC-GF has taken over primary security responsibility from the Artesh in the most “volatile border provinces,” such as Kurdistan, Sistan va Baluchestan, and West Azerbaijan, which face active insurgencies.5
  3. Expeditionary Role: The IRGC-GF has deployed to foreign theaters like Syria and Iraq to support Quds Force operations.6
  4. Basij Organization: The IRGC-GF also controls the Basij, a massive volunteer paramilitary militia with 90,000 active members and 300,000 reservists.3 The Basij is the primary tool for internal suppression, “policing morals,” and acting as a mass mobilization reserve.7

The deployment map reveals the regime’s priorities. The “unreliable” but conventional Artesh 10 is placed on the external borders to face external state enemies.38 The “loyal” IRGC 5 is deployed internally in cities and in the most sensitive, ethnically volatile border provinces 5 to protect the regime from its own citizens and separatist threats. The Artesh defends Iran; the IRGC defends the Islamic Republic.

While Artesh special forces (the 65th Airborne Brigade) have been deployed to Syria 6, this is not a sign of integration. They were deployed as “individual advisor-observers” 6 and, critically, “under the auspices of IRGC’s Qods Force”.6 This appears to be a token deployment by the Artesh to “ensure its continued relevance” 6 and prove its loyalty, rather than a genuine shift in mission. Distrust between the services remains “relatively strong,” and the Artesh continues to be the “subordinate force”.15

2.4 Air Defense: The One Domain of Integration

Air defense is the single, critical exception to the rule of parallel, rivalrous forces. A divided air defense is operationally suicidal, as it would lead to fratricide and catastrophic failure against a coordinated air and missile strike.

In 2008, the Artesh Air Defense Force (IRIADF) was split from the Air Force (IRIAF) to become its own separate, fourth branch, controlling the country’s military radar network.41 In 2019, the Supreme Leader established the Khatam ol Anbia Air Defense Headquarters (KADHQ).7

This KADHQ is a national command that oversees and integrates all air defense assets (radars, surface-to-air missiles, anti-aircraft artillery) from both the Artesh Air Defense Force (IRIADF) and the IRGC Aerospace Force (IRGCASF).16

Crucially, this KADHQ is “always commanded by a senior Artesh officer”.16 This is a significant, unspoken concession. The regime, prioritizing operational necessity over ideological purity in this single domain, places its trust in Artesh competence. The Artesh, as the legacy Imperial military, retained the institutional knowledge and “classical doctrine” 10 for running a complex, networked, conventional Integrated Air Defense System (IADS)—a core competency the asymmetrically-focused IRGC lacked.

2.5 Intelligence and Cyber Warfare: The New Asymmetric Domains

The dual-force concept extends into the non-kinetic domains. Iran has multiple, overlapping intelligence services, including the Ministry of Intelligence (MOIS), the IRGC Intelligence Organization (IRGC-IO), and the Artesh Directorate for Intelligence (J2).7 This “overlapping missions” structure “fuel[s] competition”.7 The IRGC-IO is described as the “foremost military intelligence service”.7

In cyber warfare, the IRGC is the dominant player.43 The IRGC, the Basij (managing tens of thousands of “cyberwar volunteers” 43), and the Passive Defense Organization (NPDO) are the three leading military organizations in cyber operations.43 Iran’s cyber capabilities originated from domestic needs: surveillance and control of its own population during the 2009 “Green Revolution”.43 These tools were then turned outward.

Iran sees cyberattacks as a key part of its asymmetric military capability.43 It is low-cost, high-impact, and deniable.45 The IRGC’s dominance here is a natural extension of its doctrine: just as it uses swarm boats and missiles to counter U.S. naval and air supremacy, it uses cyber to counter U.S. economic and military power. The intelligence rivalry, like the military rivalry, is a “coup-proofing” feature, not a bug. By having multiple agencies spying on each other 17 as much as on external foes, the regime prevents any one from becoming powerful enough to challenge the Supreme Leader.

Table 2: Comparative Capability Analysis by Domain

DomainArtesh (Conventional Force)IRGC (Revolutionary Force)
NavalArtesh Navy (IRIN)IRGC Navy (IRGCN)
Mission:Conventional coastal defense; “blue-water” power projection.7Asymmetric “guerilla” warfare; sea denial; chokepoint control.3
AOR:Gulf of Oman, Caspian Sea, Indian Ocean (High Seas).7Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz.7
Key Assets:Large surface ships (frigates, corvettes), Kilo-class submarines, midget subs.7Hundreds of small, fast attack craft; swarming boats; naval mines; coastal anti-ship missiles.3
Air / AerospaceArtesh Air Force (IRIAF)IRGC Aerospace Force (IRGCASF)
Mission:Defensive air-to-air, support for IADS, ground support.16Strategic deterrence; strategic strike.32
Key Assets:“Badly dated” 16 fleet of aging 1970s/80s US/Soviet fighter jets (F-14, F-4, MiG-29, Su-24).30Total control of Iran’s:
1. Ballistic Missile Arsenal 12
2. Strategic UAV (Drone) Program 16
3. Military Space Program.32
GroundArtesh Ground Force (IRIGF)IRGC Ground Force (IRGCGF)
Mission:Conventional territorial defense 6; “apolitical” national defense.18Internal regime security; counter-insurgency; rapid reaction; suppression of dissent.4
AOR:National borders.5Internal provinces; volatile border regions (Sistan, Kurdistan) 5; foreign expeditionary.6
Key Assets:Largest force by manpower (350k) 7; preponderance of heavy armor/tanks.18150k troops 7; Basij Organization (paramilitary militia) 3; light infantry; domestic surveillance tools.
Air DefenseArtesh Air Defense (IRIADF)IRGC Aerospace Force (IRGCASF)
Mission:Operates national radar network 41 and IADS components.16Operates its own air defense assets (SAMs, radars).16
Command:INTEGRATED: Both forces’ assets are integrated under the Khatam ol Anbia Air Defense HQ 16, which is commanded by an Artesh officer.16

Part 3: The IRGC as a “State Within a State”

The massive disparity in power between the Artesh and the IRGC cannot be explained by their military roles alone. The IRGC’s power transcends the purely military domain, making it the true center of gravity of the regime. It has become a “state within a state,” with dominant, independent roles in foreign policy, the economy, and domestic politics.

3.1 The Quds Force (IRGC-QF): Architect of the “Axis of Resistance”

The IRGC-Quds Force (IRGC-QF) is the “expeditionary arm” 12 and “clandestine external operations element” 7 of the IRGC, established in 1990.7 Its primary mission is to “export the revolution” 16 by managing and supporting Iran’s network of foreign proxies and partners, known as the “Axis of Resistance”.7

The Quds Force provides leadership, funding, training, intelligence, and materiel 7 to a myriad of non-state groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Shia militias in Iraq and Syria.12

The IRGC-QF is Iran’s primary and most effective foreign policy tool, representing its “comparative advantage” in statecraft.39 It uses an irregular 39 “network-building approach” 49 to project power, achieve strategic depth 50, and bog down adversaries 44 on a budget. This is a mission the conventional, “apolitical” Artesh 18 is ideologically and structurally incapable of performing. The Quds Force holds a “special place” 16 in the regime, with a separate line of communication to the Supreme Leader 7 that bypasses the regular C2 structure and even gives it more influence in some countries than Iran’s own Ministry of Foreign Affairs.7

3.2 The Economic Empire: Funding the Praetorians

The IRGC is not just a military, but a “business empire” 3 and “industrial empire with political clout”.3 Its economic power is vast, unaccountable, and controlled only by the Supreme Leader.13

  • Khatam al-Anbiya (KAA): This is the IRGC’s massive engineering and construction arm 10, established after the Iran-Iraq War to help rebuild the country.20 It has since grown into “the most notable financial institution of the IRGC”.20 It dominates huge sectors of the economy—oil and gas, road construction, housing, water management, and agriculture 10—and has been awarded tens of billions in no-bid contracts.10
  • Off-Budget Funding: The IRGC uses its political influence 22 to generate income 54 to fund its own operations.51 It has direct access to Iran’s foreign exchange reserve (from which the Artesh is barred) 10 and engages in large-scale illicit activities, including smuggling 10 and using front companies to circumvent international sanctions.12

In contrast, the Artesh is barred from these lucrative revenue streams.10 Its economic activities are “limited to several chain stores”.10 This is the fundamental difference: the Artesh is a traditional military—a pure cost center that drains the national budget. The IRGC is a hybrid military-conglomerate that generates its own revenue.

This economic autonomy makes the IRGC financially independent and “sanction-proof.” When international sanctions 55 cripple Iran’s official economy, the IRGC thrives by controlling the smuggling routes 21 and the black market. This perversely strengthens its relative power versus the Artesh 55 and the civilian government. This economic dominance is the engine of its political and military superiority.

3.3 Political and Social Dominance: The “Deep State”

The IRGC is “a central player in Iran’s domestic politics”.12 Supreme Leader Khamenei has appointed numerous former IRGC commanders to top political posts, and former guards in parliament advocate for hard-line policies.12 All parliamentarians with a military background are veterans of the IRGC or Basij.10 In contrast, the Artesh is “avowedly apolitical” 18, “forced to remain apolitical” 2, and has virtually no influence in the “regime’s political centers of power”.5

Socially, the IRGC (through the Basij) is the primary tool for suppressing domestic protests.3 It also controls its own media (Sepah News) 3 and a vast “ideological-political organization” (IPO) to ensure the indoctrination of its forces and the public.57 The regime’s “Sacred Defense Cinema” glorifies the IRGC as the victor of the Iran-Iraq War, while largely ignoring the Artesh’s sacrifices, thus cementing its own prestige while diminishing its rival’s.10

The Artesh is merely “hardware”—tanks and ships for a limited function. The IRGC is both the “hardware” (missiles, boats) and the “software” (ideology, politics, media) of the regime. The Artesh is an employee of the state; the IRGC is a shareholder and “kingmaker”.3

Part 4: Net Assessment: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Sustainability

This dual-military structure, while appearing inefficient from a conventional military perspective, is a rational and highly effective system when viewed through the lens of the regime’s unique strategic goals.

4.1 Strengths of the Dual System (From the Regime’s Perspective)

  1. Highly Effective “Coup-Proofing”: This is the system’s primary strength and purpose. By “counterbalancing” 1 the Artesh with the IRGC, the regime creates parallel forces with separate C2 chains 1, separate logistics 1, and institutionalized rivalry.10 This is reinforced by “pervasive surveillance” from independent counterintelligence organizations.17 This structure makes a coordinated military coup against the Supreme Leader a practical impossibility.
  2. Potent Asymmetric Deterrence: The system allows Iran to “employ a hybrid approach to warfare”.45 The IRGC’s focus on asymmetric capabilities—ballistic missiles, drones, proxies, and naval swarms 7—provides a potent, cost-effective, and deniable deterrent 15 against conventionally superior foes.
  3. Flexible, Deniable Power Projection: The IRGC-QF’s proxy network (“Axis of Resistance”) 16 allows Iran to “export its revolutionary ideology” 16 and wage “war by proxy” 15 across the Middle East 44, giving it strategic depth far from its borders.

This system is perfectly tailored to the regime’s two grand strategic goals: 1) Survive internally, and 2) Deter and resist externally.16 A single, unified, conventional military might be better at fighting a conventional war, but it would be worse at both of the regime’s core tasks. It would be a coup risk 3 and would lack the ideological zeal and asymmetric doctrine to run a global proxy network.

4.2 Weaknesses of the Dual System (From a Military Effectiveness Perspective)

  1. Gross Operational Inefficiency: The dual structure is explicitly listed by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency as a “Key Vulnerability”.7 The lack of coordination, separate C2, and rivalrous information-hoarding create massive conventional inefficiency and “informational compartmentalization”.1
  2. “Disastrous Results”: This inefficiency is not theoretical. During the Iran-Iraq War, the disjointed command led to “disastrous results” 1, including accounts of IRGC and Artesh soldiers firing on each other.1
  3. Resource Competition & Wasteful Duplication: The system creates “fierce rivalry” 10 for funding, recruits, and materiel 10, leading to an “ineffective use of resources” 8 and wasteful duplication (e.g., two navies, two air arms).
  4. Conventional Atrophy: The regime’s prioritization of the IRGC has “marginalized” 5 the Artesh. This has hollowed out Iran’s conventional capabilities, leaving it with a “deficit in advanced conventional weaponry” 29 and an air force that is “ill-prepared for modern combat”.16
  5. Systemic Corruption & Public Resentment: The IRGC’s unaccountable economic power 13 fosters massive corruption 53, which hollows out the civilian economy and breeds deep “discontent” 60 and resentment among the population 61, a long-term vulnerability.

The sum of these weaknesses is that Iran has a military structure that is not designed to win a conventional, state-on-state war against a peer or near-peer competitor. It is designed to survive, deter, and protract conflict through asymmetric means. The system sacrifices war-winning capability for regime-survival capability.

4.3 Assessment of Sustainability and Future Trajectory

The dual-military structure, despite its inefficiencies, is an “inherent feature” 15 of the regime and is highly sustainable. The rivalry is intentionally maintained by the leadership 10 precisely because it serves the regime’s primary goal: survival.45

The central challenge to this system’s stability is the eventual succession of the Supreme Leader.4 Supreme Leader Khamenei is the “unifying force” 4 who has a “mutually beneficial relationship” 12 with the IRGC. Any potential successor is seen as lacking Khamenei’s stature, popularity, and religious credentials.9

As a result, any new Supreme Leader “will have no choice but to rely on the IRGC”.9 In a post-Khamenei era, the new leader’s reliance on the IRGC will increase, while the IRGC’s dependence on the new leader will decrease.9

This dynamic will make the IRGC the “military-security guarantor” 9 and “kingmaker” 21 of the post-Khamenei regime. It will likely consolidate its power even further 9, transforming the state into a “military-theocratic order” 63 with the IRGC as the undisputed “center of gravity”.63 Khamenei, with his revolutionary authority, controls the IRGC; his successor, who will likely owe their position to the IRGC’s support, will be managed by it.

In this future, the Artesh’s marginalization 5 will only accelerate. The IRGC, as the “kingmaker,” will ensure its rival remains subordinate 15 and on the periphery.5 The dual system is sustainable, but not as a balance of rivals. It will sustain as an increasingly unequal partnership, with the IRGC effectively absorbing the state and the Artesh relegated to a hollow, ceremonial role as a “national” border guard. The system’s inefficiency is its sustainability, as it guarantees the survival of the ruling ideology, which is its one and only true purpose.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. (PDF) Relationship between Coup-proofing and Counterinsurgency …, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369082254_Relationship_between_Coup-proofing_and_Counterinsurgency_Insights_from_Iran
  2. The 2010s shifts between IRGC and Artesh: How false nationalism gave hope for an IRGC coup : r/NewIran – Reddit, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/15ax1pm/the_2010s_shifts_between_irgc_and_artesh_how/
  3. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – Wikipedia, accessed November 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_Corps
  4. IRGC History and Role in Iranian Statecraft – AHS – Alexander Hamilton Society, accessed November 14, 2025, https://alexanderhamiltonsociety.org/security-strategy/issue-one/irgc-history-and-role-in-iranian-statecraft/
  5. The Artesh: Iran’s Marginalized and Under-Armed Conventional …, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/artesh-irans-marginalized-and-under-armed-conventional-military
  6. Iran’s National Army Reorganizes | The Washington Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/irans-national-army-reorganizes
  7. Iran Military Power – Defense Intelligence Agency, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.dia.mil/portals/110/images/news/military_powers_publications/iran_military_power_lr.pdf
  8. Soviet, Russian, and Israeli Assessments of Iran’s Nuclear Strategic Culture – Executive Services Directorate, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Litigation_Release/Litigation%20Release%20-%20Soviet,%20Russian,%20and%20Israeli%20Assessments%20of%20Iran’s%20Nuclear%20Strategic%20Culture%20%20200909.pdf
  9. Moving to a post-Khamenei era: The role of the IRGC and the clergy …, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/moving-post-khamenei-era-role-irgc-and-clergy
  10. Eternal Rivals? The Artesh and the IRGC | American Enterprise Institute – AEI, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.aei.org/articles/eternal-rivals-the-artesh-and-the-irgc/
  11. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) | History, Growth, & Sanctions – Britannica, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Islamic-Revolutionary-Guard-Corps
  12. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – Council on Foreign Relations, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/irans-revolutionary-guards
  13. Khatam al-Anbyia – United Against Nuclear Iran, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/ideological-expansion/khatam-al-anbyia
  14. Guarding History – Joint Chiefs of Staff, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/History/Monographs/Iran_study_complete.pdf
  15. The Strategic Foundations of Iran’s Military Doctrine, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.iiss.org/globalassets/media-library—content–migration/images/comment/analysis/2017/december/2-mcinnis2125.pdf
  16. Explainer: The Iranian Armed Forces | American Enterprise Institute – AEI, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.aei.org/articles/explainer-the-iranian-armed-forces/
  17. THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC’S ART of SURVIVAL: – The Washington Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/3027
  18. The Politics of Iran’s Regular Army | Middle East Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/politics-irans-regular-army
  19. Beyond the IRGC: The rise of Iran’s military-bonyad complex | Clingendael, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.clingendael.org/publication/beyond-irgc-rise-irans-military-bonyad-complex
  20. The Khatam al-Anbiya company and the future of the IRGC empire – JNS.org, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.jns.org/the-khatam-al-anbiya-company-and-the-future-of-the-irgc-empire/
  21. The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from an Iraqi View – a Lost Role or a Bright Future? – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/iranian-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps-irgc-iraqi-view-lost-role-or-bright-future
  22. Decoding Iran’s defence spending: pitfalls and new pointers, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2018/11/decode-iran-defence-spending/
  23. The Iranian Maritime Challenge – DTIC, accessed November 14, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1200387.pdf
  24. Eternal Rivals? The Artesh and the IRGC – Middle East Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/eternal-rivals-artesh-and-irgc
  25. Iran 022217SP.pdf – ONI.Navy.mil, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.oni.navy.mil/Portals/12/Intel%20agencies/iran/Iran%20022217SP.pdf
  26. Iranian Naval Strategy: The Domestic Roots of Iran’s Asymmetric Warfare, accessed November 14, 2025, https://gulfif.org/iranian-naval-strategy-the-domestic-roots-of-irans-asymmetric-warfare/
  27. Iranian Naval “Swarming” Tactics – CNAS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.cnas.org/publications/blog/iranian-naval-swarming-tactics
  28. Iran’s Doctrine of Asymmetric Naval Warfare | The Washington Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/irans-doctrine-asymmetric-naval-warfare
  29. Iran’s Conventional Military Capabilities – New Lines Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://newlinesinstitute.org/strategic-competition/irans-conventional-military-capabilities/
  30. Iran’s Airpower Mirage: Why New Jets Won’t Fix a Broken System?, accessed November 14, 2025, https://researchcentre.trtworld.com/publications/analysis/irans-airpower-mirage-why-new-jets-wont-fix-a-broken-system/
  31. Iran’s Air Force Overshadowed by the IRGC – The Washington Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/irans-air-force-overshadowed-irgc
  32. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force – Wikipedia, accessed November 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_Corps_Aerospace_Force
  33. accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.aei.org/articles/explainer-the-iranian-armed-forces/#:~:text=The%20IRGC%20is%20the%20primary,Aerospace%20Force%2C%20and%20Quds%20Force.
  34. How IRGC Manages Iran’s Strategic Missiles | Defense.info, accessed November 14, 2025, https://defense.info/global-dynamics/2023/07/how-irgc-manages-irans-strategic-missiles/
  35. Iran’s low-cost drones have shifted regional balance, senior Guards commander says, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202511119726
  36. Iran’s Game of Drones | The Washington Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/irans-game-drones
  37. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force Self-Sufficiency Jihad Organization | Iran Watch, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.iranwatch.org/iranian-entities/islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps-irgc-aerospace-force-self-sufficiency-jihad-organization
  38. Iran’s Security Policy in the Post-Revolutionary Era – RAND, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1320/RAND_MR1320.pdf
  39. War by Proxy: Iran’s Growing Footprint in the Middle East – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/war-proxy-irans-growing-footprint-middle-east
  40. Iran after Sanctions: Military Procurement and Force-Structure Decisions – The International Institute for Strategic Studies, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.iiss.org/globalassets/media-library—content–migration/images/comment/analysis/2017/december/3-eisenstadt2125.pdf
  41. Islamic Republic of Iran Air Defense Force – Wikipedia, accessed November 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Air_Defense_Force
  42. Iran Ballistic Missile Procurement Advisory – Office of Foreign Assets Control, accessed November 14, 2025, https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/932206/download?inline
  43. Iran and Cyber Power – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/iran-and-cyber-power
  44. Strategic Competition With Iran: The Military Dimension – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/strategic-competition-iran-military-dimension
  45. Iran Military Power Report Statement – Department of War, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2021009/iran-military-power-report-statement/
  46. Forecasting Iranian Government Responses to Cyberattacks – Marine Corps University, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/MCU-Journal/JAMS-vol-13-no-1/Forecasting-Iranian-Government-Responses-to-Cyberattacks/
  47. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, the Al Quds Force, and Other Intelligence and Paramilitary Forces – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/irans-revolutionary-guards-al-quds-force-and-other-intelligence-and-paramilitary-forces
  48. The IRGC-Quds Force: Iran’s Secret Military Empire – YouTube, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu3i5FJ_iPM
  49. Iranian Networks in the Middle East – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/iranian-networks-middle-east
  50. Iran After the Battle | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, accessed November 14, 2025, https://carnegieendowment.org/middle-east/diwan/2025/07/iran-after-the-battle?lang=en
  51. Treasury Targets Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, accessed November 14, 2025, https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/tg539
  52. The Economic Empire of the Revolutionary Guards in Iran – Gulf International Forum, accessed November 14, 2025, https://gulfif.org/the-economic-empire-of-the-revolutionary-guards-in-iran/
  53. Economic activities of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps – Wikipedia, accessed November 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_activities_of_the_Iranian_Revolutionary_Guard_Corps
  54. A United States Marine’s View of the Artesh and IRGC | Middle East Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/united-states-marines-view-artesh-and-irgc
  55. Sanctioning Iran’s Military-Industrial Complex | Middle East Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.mei.edu/publications/sanctioning-irans-military-industrial-complex
  56. IRGC and Terrorism-Related Sanctions: Why They Fail, What They Achieve | Middle East Briefs | Publications – Brandeis University, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.brandeis.edu/crown/publications/middle-east-briefs/meb160.html
  57. Beyond Borders: the Expansionist Ideology of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, accessed November 14, 2025, https://institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/beyond-borders-expansionist-ideology-irans-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps
  58. Iran: Background and U.S. Policy – Congress.gov, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47321
  59. Iran: More War(s) In the Middle East? There Still May Be Options. – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/iran-more-wars-middle-east-there-still-may-be-options
  60. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps: Military and Political Influence in Today’s Iran, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/events/the-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps-military-and-political-influence-in-todays-iran/
  61. Iran’s foreign policy weaknesses, and opportunities to exploit them – Brookings Institution, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/irans-foreign-policy-weaknesses-and-opportunities-to-exploit-them/
  62. Adversaries and the Future of Competition – CSIS, accessed November 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/chapter-1-adversaries-and-future-competition
  63. THE DOSSIER – Post-Khamenei Iran: The Future of Evolutionary Regime Change – New Lines Institute, accessed November 14, 2025, https://newlinesinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/20240423-Dossier-Iran-Future-NLISAP-1-1.pdf
Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Uncategorized

An Analysis of the Evolution Iran’s 65th NOHED Brigade and IRGC-Quds Force

To comprehend the distinct roles and evolutionary trajectories of Iran’s elite special operations forces, one must first understand the unique and deliberately bifurcated structure of its national military apparatus. The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran are not a monolithic entity but are composed of two powerful, parallel, and often competing institutions: the Islamic Republic of Iran Army (the Artesh) and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (Sepah-e Pasdaran-e Enghelab-e Eslami, or IRGC). Both are subordinate to a single commander-in-chief, the Supreme Leader, a structure that bypasses the elected presidency and concentrates ultimate military authority within the clerical establishment.1 This dual-military system is the foundational context in which the Artesh’s 65th NOHED Airborne Special Forces Brigade and the IRGC’s Quds Force were born and have evolved.

The Artesh is Iran’s conventional military, the inheritor of the legacy of the pre-revolutionary Imperial Iranian Armed Forces. Its constitutional mandate is the defense of Iran’s territorial integrity and national borders against external aggression.3 The Artesh comprises traditional ground, naval, air, and air defense forces and operates the majority of Iran’s heavy conventional platforms, including tanks, major surface combatants, and fighter aircraft.1 However, decades of international sanctions have severely degraded its ability to maintain and modernize this arsenal.1 Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the new clerical leadership under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini viewed the Artesh, with its Western training and historical loyalty to the Shah, with deep suspicion.2

This distrust was the primary catalyst for the creation of the IRGC in April 1979. Established by Khomeini’s decree, the IRGC was conceived as a deeply ideological “people’s army” and a praetorian guard whose primary function was not to defend the borders, but to protect the Revolution itself from both internal and external threats.1 Its constitutional role is explicitly the preservation of the revolutionary system.4 Over the subsequent decades, the IRGC has evolved from a paramilitary militia into Iran’s dominant military, political, and economic institution, wielding immense influence across all sectors of the state.3 It is geared toward asymmetric warfare and is the primary custodian of Iran’s most critical strategic assets, including its ballistic missile and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) arsenals, and is responsible for managing Iran’s network of regional proxies through its expeditionary arm, the Quds Force.1

This structure is not an accident of history but a calculated strategy of institutionalized redundancy designed to ensure regime survival. By creating two powerful and parallel military organizations, each with its own command structure reporting directly to the Supreme Leader, the regime engineered a system of internal checks and balances. This arrangement effectively prevents any single military faction from accumulating sufficient power to challenge the clerical government, a lesson drawn from the 1953 coup that overthrew Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq and restored the Shah to power.2 This internal dynamic, characterized by competition for resources, influence, and the Supreme Leader’s favor, is a defining feature of Iran’s defense posture. The existence and divergent development of the Artesh’s 65th NOHED Brigade and the IRGC’s Quds Force are the direct manifestation of this dual-pillar strategy at the apex of Iran’s special operations capabilities.

II. The 65th NOHED Airborne Special Forces Brigade: The Artesh’s Elite Tip

The 65th NOHED Brigade represents the pinnacle of the Artesh’s special operations capabilities, a unit forged in the Western mold but tempered by decades of regional conflict and loyalty to the Islamic Republic. Its evolution from an Imperially-sponsored, US-trained commando force to a modern expeditionary unit is a testament to its institutional resilience and tactical adaptability.

Inception and Imperial Legacy: U.S. Special Forces Influence and Early Operations

The origins of the 65th NOHED Brigade are deeply rooted in the Western military tradition, a legacy that distinguishes it from its IRGC counterparts. The genesis of Iranian airborne forces began in 1953, when a contingent of ten Imperial Iranian Army officers was sent to France for parachute training.8 This led to the establishment of a formal Parachute Unit in 1955, which expanded into a Parachute Battalion by 1959.9

The pivotal year was 1959, with the establishment of the 23rd Special Forces Brigade, the direct parent unit of what would become the 65th.9 During the 1960s, this nascent force was shaped profoundly by American mentorship. Under the Shah’s pro-Western alignment, the United States dispatched advisors from the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center & School to train and structure Iran’s special forces.8 This American influence was not superficial; it was embedded in the unit’s DNA. The brigade adopted the iconic green beret of its American trainers, and its qualification badge was designed to be nearly identical to the US Army Special Forces’ “De oppresso liber” insignia, a clear visual marker of its doctrinal heritage.8

This Western-style training was soon put to the test. In the early 1970s, the brigade, then known as the 23rd Airborne Special Forces Brigade, received its baptism by fire in the Dhofar Rebellion in Oman.9 Deployed to assist the Sultan of Oman in combatting Marxist-Leninist guerrillas, the Iranian forces engaged in a classic counter-insurgency campaign, the very type of unconventional warfare for which their American advisors had prepared them.11 This early operational experience cemented the unit’s reputation as a capable and professional fighting force.

Post-Revolutionary Crucible: The Iran-Iraq War and the Forging of a Modern Identity

The 1979 Islamic Revolution placed the Western-trained 23rd Brigade in a precarious position. The new regime was inherently suspicious of any institution associated with the Shah and his American patrons. This distrust culminated in a call by then-parliament-member Hassan Rouhani to disband the unit following the 1980 Nojeh coup plot, in which some military elements were implicated.9 However, the unit was saved by the staunch opposition of Defense Minister Mostafa Chamran, who recognized its strategic value.9

The crucible that would reforge the unit’s identity and prove its loyalty to the new republic was the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988). As part of the 23rd Commando Division, the brigade was deployed extensively across all fronts of the brutal, eight-year conflict.8 The war demanded a broad spectrum of skills. The unit participated in large-scale conventional battles, such as the Breaking of the Siege of Abadan and Operation Beit ol-Moqaddas, where it functioned as elite light infantry.9 Simultaneously, it was tasked with missions that leveraged its specialized training. It engaged in grueling mountain warfare, successfully holding strategic positions like the Dopaza and Laklak mountains against repeated Iraqi assaults, which included the use of chemical weapons.9 Furthermore, a select cadre of its personnel was detached to conduct clandestine special operations under the direct command of Defense Minister Chamran’s Irregular Warfare Headquarters, showcasing its dual-capability in both conventional and unconventional domains.9

Evolving Missions in the Modern Era: From Counter-Insurgency to Hybrid Warfare

The post-war reorganization of the Iranian military led to the formal establishment of the Artesh’s premier special forces unit. In 1991, the 3rd Brigade was separated from the 23rd Division to form the 65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade, commonly known by its Persian acronym NOHED (Nīrūhāye Vīzheye Havābord, or Airborne Special Forces).9

Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, the 65th NOHED Brigade became the Artesh’s go-to force for complex domestic security challenges. It was consistently deployed for counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism missions, primarily in the restive border provinces. It engaged drug trafficking syndicates and insurgent groups in Sistan and Baluchestan province and conducted operations against Kurdish separatist groups like the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK) in the country’s northwest.9

A fundamental strategic shift occurred in April 2016, marking a new chapter in the brigade’s history. The Iranian government officially announced that “advisors” from the 65th NOHED Brigade were being deployed to Syria to support the government of Bashar al-Assad.8 This was a landmark event, representing the first official deployment of Artesh combat troops outside Iran’s borders since the 1979 revolution. For decades, extraterritorial operations had been the exclusive domain of the IRGC and its Quds Force. The deployment of NOHED to the Syrian battlefield was a clear signal from the Artesh leadership. Facing years of receiving less funding and political favor than the IRGC, the Artesh seized the opportunity to demonstrate its own expeditionary capabilities and relevance in modern hybrid conflicts.13 By proving its utility in a complex foreign theater, the Artesh could argue for a greater share of the defense budget and a more prominent role in national security strategy, directly challenging the IRGC’s monopoly. Furthermore, leveraging the more popular and less politicized national army for a controversial foreign intervention could provide a “patriotic” veneer to the policy, potentially bolstering domestic support.11

In Syria, NOHED personnel fulfilled “advisory” and intelligence-gathering roles, primarily around Aleppo, and sustained casualties in direct combat with jihadist factions, including the al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra.11

Current Doctrine, Training, and Capabilities

Today, the 65th NOHED Brigade is widely regarded as the most elite, best-trained, and best-equipped special forces unit within the Artesh.8 It is an all-professional, volunteer force, a rarity in Iran’s conscript-heavy military.13 Its unique background and continuous operational tempo have produced a force with a distinct set of capabilities.

The unit’s Western-style professional ethos and skillset, a direct legacy of its American training, remain a key differentiator. This “Western SOF DNA” provides the Iranian regime with a unique strategic tool. Unlike the Quds Force, which specializes in organizing and leading irregular militias, NOHED brings a high-level tactical and training capability geared towards professional military standards. This allows Iran to engage in different forms of military assistance simultaneously, tailoring its support to the specific needs of its allies, whether they are state or non-state actors.

Training for the brigade, nicknamed “Powerful Ghosts” within the Iranian military, is exceptionally demanding.8 Operators must master parachute operations and demonstrate proficiency in a wide array of environments. Specialized training camps are maintained for this purpose: jungle warfare in the forests of Kelardasht, snow and mountain warfare at the Emamzadeh Hashem ski resort, desert warfare near Qom, and amphibious operations at the Karaj Dam.8 The curriculum also includes espionage, reconnaissance, telecommunications, and irregular warfare, providing a robust guerrilla warfare capability.8

The brigade’s structure mirrors that of many Western special operations forces, with specialized sub-units dedicated to specific mission sets. These include a Hostage Rescue Unit (Unit-110), a psychological operations company, a support battalion, and irregular warfare teams.8 This organization grants the 65th NOHED Brigade a comprehensive skill set spanning direct action, special reconnaissance, counter-terrorism, hostage rescue, and unconventional warfare.9

III. The IRGC-Quds Force: Instrument of Extraterritorial Influence

The IRGC-Quds Force is a fundamentally different entity from the 65th NOHED Brigade. It is not a conventional special forces unit but a unique hybrid organization that blends intelligence, covert action, and unconventional warfare to function as the primary instrument of Iranian foreign policy and power projection. Its evolution has been driven by the ideological imperative to export the 1979 revolution and to build a regional security architecture favorable to Tehran’s interests.

Origins in Irregular Warfare and Formal Establishment

The Quds Force is a specialized branch of the IRGC, focused on extraterritorial operations, military intelligence, and unconventional warfare.13 It is often mischaracterized as a “commando” unit; its role is far more strategic and intelligence-driven.13 Its genesis lies in the irregular warfare directorates established during the Iran-Iraq War. Precursors included a special intelligence unit known as ‘Department 900’ and a headquarters dedicated to managing irregular operations with allied Iraqi Kurdish and Shia Arab militias fighting against Saddam Hussein’s regime.13

Following the end of the war in 1988, the IRGC underwent a significant reorganization. The various external operations and intelligence bodies were consolidated and formally established as an independent service branch: the Quds Force.13 Its name, which translates to “Jerusalem Force,” reflects its official, ideologically charged mission: the “liberation of Muslim land,” with a particular focus on Jerusalem.16 Its personnel, estimated to number between 5,000 and 20,000, are handpicked from the broader IRGC for their skill and ideological commitment.13

The Doctrine of Proxy Warfare: Cultivating the “Axis of Resistance”

The central pillar of Quds Force doctrine and strategy is the cultivation and command of a network of non-state partners and proxy forces across the Middle East. This network, which Tehran refers to as the “Axis of Resistance,” is the primary vehicle through which Iran projects power.1 The Quds Force’s core mission is to organize, train, fund, arm, and provide operational guidance to these groups.2

This strategy of proxy warfare offers several key advantages to Iran. It allows Tehran to challenge and bog down more powerful adversaries, such as the United States and Israel, in costly asymmetric conflicts. It creates a strategic buffer, enabling Iran to engage in hostilities far from its own borders. Crucially, it provides a layer of plausible deniability, allowing Iran to advance its interests while shielding the homeland from direct retaliation.18 Under the command of the late Major General Qassem Soleimani, who led the force from 1998 until his death in 2020, this doctrine was refined and perfected. Soleimani’s vision was to create a transnational movement of Shia militancy and to build proxy “deep states” in allied countries—paramilitary forces that would eventually become better armed and more organized than the host nation’s official military, while remaining loyal to Tehran.17

Operational Evolution Across Key Theaters

The Quds Force has systematically applied and evolved its proxy warfare model across numerous conflict zones over four decades.

  • Lebanon (1982-Present): The Quds Force’s first and most successful application of its doctrine came in Lebanon. Following the 1982 Israeli invasion, Quds Force operatives were deployed to the Bekaa Valley, where they were instrumental in organizing, training, and funding the nascent Shia militia that would become Hezbollah.5 Hezbollah became the template for the Quds Force’s proxy model: a highly capable, ideologically aligned force that serves as a powerful deterrent against Israel and a key node in Iran’s regional network.
  • Afghanistan (1990s): Demonstrating strategic pragmatism, the Quds Force shifted its attention to Iran’s eastern border in the 1990s. It provided support to the predominantly Sunni Northern Alliance in its fight against the Taliban, who were backed by Iran’s regional rivals, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.5 This operation showed the Quds Force’s willingness to partner with non-Shia groups to counter a more immediate strategic threat.
  • Iraq (2003-Present): The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 created a fertile environment for Quds Force operations. It moved quickly to organize, arm, and direct a multitude of Shia militias to wage an insurgency against Coalition forces.5 The Quds Force is widely credited by US military intelligence with flooding the Iraqi theater with sophisticated weaponry, most notably Explosively Formed Projectiles (EFPs). These advanced improvised explosive devices (IEDs) were capable of penetrating armored vehicles and were responsible for a significant percentage of American combat fatalities in Iraq.2
  • Syria (2011-Present): The Syrian Civil War represents the largest and most complex intervention in the Quds Force’s history. To prevent the collapse of its key regional ally, Bashar al-Assad, the Quds Force executed a massive and multifaceted campaign. It deployed its own officers as frontline advisors and commanders, but its main effort was to build a local proxy army from the ground up.2 By one estimate from a senior Iranian general, the IRGC created 82 distinct fighting units in Syria, totaling some 70,000 armed combatants.22 These forces, along with deployed Hezbollah militants and Shia fighters recruited from Afghanistan and Pakistan, fought alongside the Syrian Arab Army to turn the tide of the war.2

A Multi-faceted Approach: Integrating Hard and Soft Power

The operational methodology of the Quds Force demonstrates that it is far more than a simple military unit; it is a comprehensive instrument of statecraft. Its structure is divided into functional branches covering not only special operations and sabotage but also intelligence, finance, politics, and foreign languages.16 This allows it to pursue a holistic strategy that integrates hard military power with sophisticated “soft power” initiatives designed to win the “hearts and minds” of local populations and embed Iranian influence deep within the social fabric of target nations.22

This approach has been on full display in Syria. In the aftermath of the devastating February 2023 earthquake, Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani personally visited Aleppo to oversee the delivery of Iranian humanitarian aid.24 Simultaneously, these aid convoys were reportedly used as cover to move military reinforcements into the area.24 The Quds Force has funded the restoration of hundreds of Syrian schools, established networks of Islamic libraries, and provided digital training, all aimed at cultivating a new generation with a pro-Iranian, Shia-centric worldview.24 Following a model inspired by Iran’s own Basij militia, Quds Force operatives organize the purchase of houses, shops, and farmland, which are then given to pro-Iranian fighters and their families. This tactic embeds them within the local community rather than isolating them in barracks, fostering human links and long-term loyalty.22 This fusion of military, economic, social, and ideological tools makes the Quds Force a uniquely effective—and uniquely challenging—actor on the international stage.

IV. Comparative Analysis: Divergent Paths to Special Operations

The 65th NOHED Brigade and the IRGC-Quds Force, while both representing the elite of Iran’s military, are fundamentally dissimilar organizations. They are products of their parent institutions—the conventional Artesh and the ideological IRGC—and their differences in mission, methods, and strategic purpose are stark. They are parallel spears in Iran’s arsenal, but they are designed for entirely different targets.

Mission Sets: Tactical Direct Action vs. Strategic Covert Influence

The core distinction lies in their respective mission sets. The 65th NOHED Brigade is a tactical and operational asset. Its purpose is to execute discrete military missions with clear objectives: conducting special reconnaissance behind enemy lines, rescuing hostages, eliminating specific high-value targets, or training allied military forces.9 Its focus is on direct action and the application of specialized combat skills to achieve a battlefield effect.

The Quds Force, in contrast, is a strategic asset. Its missions are not typically single, time-bound operations but rather long-term, open-ended political-military campaigns. Its purpose is to alter the geopolitical landscape of a region by building, managing, and directing a network of foreign proxy forces.2 Its success is measured not in hills taken or targets destroyed, but in the degree of political influence and military control its proxies can exert within their host countries.

Operational Methods: The Commando vs. The Operative

This difference in mission dictates their operational methods. The 65th NOHED Brigade operates as a uniformed military unit. Its members are commandos, trained for direct combat and leveraging their superior training and equipment to overwhelm an enemy. Their value lies in their direct proficiency as warfighters and trainers.8

The Quds Force operates primarily in the shadows. Its members are operatives, working covertly, often under diplomatic or non-official cover. They function as advisors, intelligence officers, logisticians, and political organizers. Their primary method is not to fight battles themselves, but to enable others to fight on Iran’s behalf. Their value lies in their ability to act as a force multiplier, creating armies out of local militias and providing the strategic guidance and material support necessary for them to succeed, all while maintaining plausible deniability for Tehran.13

Relationship and Deconfliction in Shared Battlefields (e.g., Syria)

The deployment of both units to the Syrian theater highlights this functional divergence. They operate under separate command structures, one answering to the Artesh and the other to the IRGC.1 While they share the overarching national objective of preserving the Assad regime, their roles on the ground appear to be complementary rather than integrated. The Quds Force’s mission was to create and lead the vast network of local and foreign militias that formed the backbone of the pro-regime ground forces.22 The 65th NOHED Brigade’s official role was “advisory,” suggesting they were likely tasked with a different mission: training and mentoring conventional units of the Syrian Arab Army, a foreign internal defense role for which their professional military background is uniquely suited.8 This indicates a deliberate division of labor, allowing Iran to support both the state and non-state pillars of Assad’s military power simultaneously.

V. Small Arms and Equipment Assessment

The small arms and individual equipment of Iran’s special operations capable forces reflect the divergent doctrines, supply chains, and operational philosophies of the Artesh and the IRGC. The 65th NOHED Brigade shows a clear trend toward modernization and alignment with international SOF standards, while the Quds Force prioritizes robust, reliable, and easily proliferated weapon systems suitable for its own operators and its vast network of proxies.

Armament of the 65th NOHED Brigade: A Blend of Legacy and Modernization

The individual kit of the 65th NOHED Brigade operator is undergoing a visible transformation. Recent imagery shows the increasing adoption of modern, Western-style personal protective equipment, including MOLLE-compatible plate carriers and FAST-type ballistic helmets, indicating a focus on operator survivability and modularity.9

Their service weapons have evolved similarly. Historically, the unit was equipped with the Iranian-made Tondar (a clone of the Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun) and its predecessor, the Uzi.9 The East German Mpi Kms 72, a side-folding stock variant of the AKM, was also a primary weapon for Artesh commandos.25

Today, the brigade’s arsenal is more diverse and modern. The Russian-designed AK-103, chambered in 7.62x39mm, is now in common use.9 More significantly, the unit has embraced domestically produced AR-15 pattern rifles. This includes platforms like the Masaf, a direct clone of the Heckler & Koch HK416, which utilizes a short-stroke gas piston system.25 The adoption of these modular, optics-ready 5.56x45mm platforms represents a significant leap in capability, bringing the brigade’s primary weapon systems in line with those used by many NATO special operations forces. The standard issue sidearm is reported to be the Czech-designed CZ 75 pistol.9

The brigade has also demonstrated a capacity for battlefield acquisition. Following the collapse of the Afghan National Army in 2021, NOHED units were photographed with captured US-made small arms, including M4 carbines, M16A3/A4 rifles, and M249 light machine guns, which were evidently brought into Iran by fleeing Afghan soldiers.27

The Quds Force Arsenal: Equipping the Vanguard and its Proxies

The Quds Force arsenal is a reflection of its dual role as both an elite operational unit and the primary arms supplier for the Axis of Resistance. The weapons its operators carry are often the same ones it distributes to its partners, prioritizing ruggedness, reliability, and compatibility with regional supply chains.

The backbone of the IRGC’s, and by extension the Quds Force’s, long arms inventory is the Kalashnikov platform. This includes Iranian-produced versions of the AKM (designated KLS/KLF/KLT) and licensed or reverse-engineered copies of the more modern AK-103 (designated AK-133 or KL-133).25 These 7.62x39mm rifles are ubiquitous across Middle Eastern conflict zones, making them simple to supply and maintain.

For specialized applications, particularly for its proxy forces, the Quds Force makes extensive use of the Iranian-made AM-50 Sayyad anti-materiel rifle.25 This is an unlicensed copy of the Austrian Steyr HS.50 rifle, chambered in the powerful 12.7x99mm (.50 BMG) cartridge.28 The Sayyad provides a devastating capability against light armored vehicles, fortified positions, and enemy personnel at extended ranges. It has been widely proliferated by the Quds Force and has been documented in the hands of proxy militias in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and the Palestinian territories.28

Beyond small arms, the Quds Force is responsible for facilitating the transfer of a wide spectrum of advanced weaponry to its allies. This includes rockets, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), advanced IED components like EFPs, anti-aircraft weapons, and a growing arsenal of sophisticated unmanned aerial systems.7

The Role of Iran’s Domestic Defense Industry

Iran’s domestic Defense Industries Organization (DIO) is the critical enabler for arming its forces under a decades-long international sanctions regime. Unable to procure modern weapon systems from abroad, Iran has developed a robust capability for reverse-engineering and producing unlicensed copies of proven foreign designs.26

This strategy is evident across the entire small arms catalog. The PC-9 Zoaf pistol is a clone of the SIG Sauer P226.25 The Tondar SMG is a copy of the H&K MP5.25 The S-5.56 assault rifle is a copy of the Chinese Norinco CQ, which itself is a copy of the American M16A1.29 The Masaf rifle is a copy of the H&K HK416.25 This approach provides self-sufficiency but can result in inconsistent quality. The AM-50 Sayyad, for example, is noted to have a significantly worse fit and finish than the original Austrian rifle it copies.28

Not all domestic designs have been successful. The KH-2002 Khaybar, an ambitious bullpup assault rifle intended to replace the G3, proved to be a failure. During field trials in Syria, the rifle suffered from numerous jamming malfunctions and was ultimately rejected by potential foreign buyers. Production was reportedly discontinued in 2012.30 Similarly, the Fateh assault rifle, another AR-15-style platform developed by the IRGC, was introduced in 2014 but discontinued by 2016, failing to enter widespread service.32 These failures underscore the challenges Iran’s defense industry faces in moving from simple reverse-engineering to reliable, original design and mass production.

Table: Current Small Arms of Iranian Special Operations Capable Forces

Weapon TypeDesignation (Iranian)Original Design/PlatformCaliberOrigin/ProductionPrimary User(s) & Notes
PistolPC-9 ZoafSIG Sauer P2269×19mmIran (Unlicensed Copy)IRGC, Artesh. Widespread service pistol. 25
CZ 75CZ 759×19mmCzech Republic65th NOHED Brigade. 9
Submachine GunTondar (MPT-9)Heckler & Koch MP59×19mmIran (Licensed/Copy)65th NOHED (legacy), various units. 9
Assault RifleKLS/KLF/KLTAKM / Type 567.62×39mmIran (Domestic Variant)IRGC, Quds Force. Standard issue Kalashnikov variant. 25
AK-133 / KL-133AK-1037.62×39mmIran (Licensed/Copy)IRGC, Quds Force, 65th NOHED Brigade. Modernized AK platform. 9
MasafHeckler & Koch HK4165.56×45mmIran (Unlicensed Copy)65th NOHED Brigade, Artesh SOF. Represents modernization trend. 25
S-5.56Norinco CQ / M16A15.56×45mmIran (Copy of Chinese Copy)IRGC SOF units. Limited service. 25
M4 CarbineColt M45.56×45mmUnited States65th NOHED Brigade (captured from Afghan forces). 27
Battle RifleG3A6Heckler & Koch G37.62×51mmIran (Licensed)Artesh (legacy standard issue). 25
Masaf-2HK417 (platform)7.62×51mmIran (Domestic Variant)Artesh Rapid Reaction units. Intended G3 replacement. 25
Sniper / Anti-Materiel RifleAM-50 SayyadSteyr HS.5012.7×99mmIran (Unlicensed Copy)IRGC, Quds Force, and Proxies. Widely proliferated. 25
NakhjirSVD Dragunov (platform)7.62×54mmRIran (Domestic Design)Artesh, IRGC. Standard designated marksman rifle. 25
Machine GunMGA3Rheinmetall MG37.62×51mmIran (Licensed)Artesh, IRGC. Standard general-purpose machine gun. 25
PKM/PKTPKM7.62×54mmRIran (Copy)Artesh, IRGC. 25
M249FN Minimi5.56×45mmUnited States65th NOHED Brigade (captured from Afghan forces). 27

VI. Future Trajectory: Speculative Analysis

Based on established trends in doctrine, procurement, and operational employment, a speculative analysis of the future trajectories of both the 65th NOHED Brigade and the IRGC-Quds Force can be projected. Their paths will likely continue to diverge, shaped by the institutional priorities of the Artesh and the IRGC, even as they adapt to an evolving regional security landscape.

Projected Evolution of the 65th NOHED Brigade

The 65th NOHED Brigade is poised to continue its trajectory of professionalization and modernization, aiming to achieve tactical and equipment parity with other Tier 1 and Tier 2 international special operations forces. This will involve the continued adoption of modular small arms, advanced optics, encrypted communications systems, and night vision technology. The goal will be to solidify its status as a high-end direct-action and special reconnaissance force.

The experience gained in Syria is likely to have a lasting impact on the Artesh’s strategic thinking. The leadership will probably leverage NOHED’s successful deployment to advocate for a more permanent and institutionalized expeditionary role. This could see the brigade formally tasked with foreign internal defense (FID) missions, carving out a distinct niche for the Artesh in training and advising the conventional militaries of allied nations. This would complement, rather than compete with, the Quds Force’s focus on non-state actors and allow Iran to project influence through both conventional and unconventional military partnerships.

The Future of the Quds Force

The Quds Force will remain the centerpiece of Iran’s “forward defense” doctrine, which seeks to confront perceived threats far from Iran’s borders through a network of proxies.33 Its core mission of managing the Axis of Resistance will not change. However, its methods will continue to evolve. The future of Quds Force operations will see a deeper integration of technology into its proxy warfare model. This will include the continued proliferation of more advanced and precise UAVs and loitering munitions, the provision of cyber warfare capabilities to its partners, and the potential distribution of guided rockets and short-range ballistic missiles to key allies like Hezbollah.7

The primary challenge facing the Quds Force will be one of command and control. As its proxy groups mature and gain significant political and military power in their own right, they may begin to pursue local agendas that diverge from Tehran’s strategic interests.21 The long-term success of the Quds Force’s model will depend on its ability to maintain ideological alignment and operational control over an increasingly complex and geographically dispersed network of powerful non-state actors.

Potential for Inter-Service Cooperation, Competition, and Doctrinal Convergence

The future relationship between the 65th NOHED Brigade and the Quds Force will be a key barometer of the broader Artesh-IRGC dynamic. While the Supreme Leader could mandate closer cooperation in a future crisis, the more probable trajectory is one of continued institutional competition. The IRGC will likely view any expansion of the Artesh’s expeditionary role as an encroachment on its traditional domain and a threat to its primacy in foreign operations. This competition for missions, resources, and influence will continue to define their relationship.

Over time, a degree of doctrinal convergence is possible. The 65th NOHED Brigade, having been exposed to the realities of hybrid warfare in Syria, will undoubtedly incorporate lessons on operating in ambiguous, multi-actor environments into its training and doctrine. Conversely, the Quds Force may seek to instill greater professionalism and more conventional combined-arms capabilities into its most mature proxy forces, like Hezbollah, blurring the lines between irregular and conventional forces.

VII. Concluding Assessment

The Islamic Republic of Iran’s special operations capabilities are embodied by two distinct, parallel, and highly evolved instruments of national power: the Artesh’s 65th NOHED Airborne Special Forces Brigade and the IRGC’s Quds Force. They are the products of vastly different institutional cultures and historical circumstances. NOHED was born from a Western-mentored, professional military tradition and was re-forged as a loyal and capable tactical force in the fires of the Iran-Iraq War. The Quds Force was born from the ideological fervor of the 1979 revolution and the brutal necessities of irregular warfare, becoming the master of a unique and highly effective doctrine of political-military influence.

The 65th NOHED Brigade has evolved from its origins as a conventional commando unit into a modern, multi-role special operations force capable of direct action, counter-terrorism, and, as demonstrated in Syria, expeditionary advisory missions. It represents a tactical and operational spear, sharp and precise. The Quds Force has perfected a strategic methodology of proxy warfare, leveraging a network of allies and integrating the full spectrum of hard and soft power to achieve long-term geopolitical objectives far beyond Iran’s borders. It represents a strategic spear, long-reaching and patient.

Their separate evolutionary paths, distinct equipment philosophies, and divergent operational methods are a direct reflection of Iran’s dual-military structure. This system provides the Iranian regime with a flexible, resilient, and multi-layered toolkit for projecting power and ensuring its own security. Whether a mission requires the surgical precision of a commando raid or the patient cultivation of a foreign insurgency, Tehran possesses a specialized spear for the task.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sourcs Used

  1. Explainer: The Iranian Armed Forces | American Enterprise Institute …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.aei.org/articles/explainer-the-iranian-armed-forces/
  2. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – Council on Foreign Relations, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/irans-revolutionary-guards
  3. Strait of Hormuz – Iranian Military – The Strauss Center, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-iranian-military/
  4. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_Corps
  5. Quds Force | Iran, IRGC, Meaning, History, & Israel-Hamas War …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Quds-Force
  6. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) – Critical Threats, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/imce-imagesIRGC_CommandNetwork_context-1.pdf
  7. The 15 Deadly Weapons Of Iran – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu2t4APKFYQ
  8. NOHED Brigade: Iran’s Special Forces – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/nohed-irans-special-forces/
  9. 65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65th_Airborne_Special_Forces_Brigade
  10. 65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade – Wikiwand, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/65th_Airborne_Special_Forces_Brigade
  11. Iran’s Army Suffers Its First Casualties in Syria | The Washington Institute, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/irans-army-suffers-its-first-casualties-syria
  12. About: 65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade – DBpedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://dbpedia.org/page/65th_Airborne_Special_Forces_Brigade
  13. Iranian Special Forces – Центр анализа стратегий и технологий, accessed September 6, 2025, http://cast.ru/products/articles/iranian-special-forces.html
  14. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65th_Airborne_Special_Forces_Brigade#:~:text=After%20the%201979%20Revolution%20in,the%20Sistan%20and%20Baluchestan%20insurgency.
  15. Iran Military Power – Defense Intelligence Agency, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.dia.mil/portals/110/images/news/military_powers_publications/iran_military_power_lr.pdf
  16. Quds Force – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quds_Force
  17. The Quds Force – United Against Nuclear Iran | UANI, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/report/quds-force
  18. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – National Counterterrorism Center | Terrorist Groups, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.dni.gov/nctc/terrorist_groups/irgc.html
  19. What is Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Why is it Designated a Terror Group by the United States? – American Jewish Committee, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ajc.org/news/what-is-irans-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps
  20. Iran’s Regional Armed Network – Council on Foreign Relations, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/article/irans-regional-armed-network
  21. The Limits of Iran’s Proxy Strategy: How Soleimani’s Vision Failed in Recent Conflicts, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.meforum.org/mef-online/the-limits-of-irans-proxy-strategy-how-soleimanis-vision-failed-in-recent-conflicts
  22. The Quds Force in Syria: Combatants, Units, and Actions, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ctc.westpoint.edu/the-quds-force-in-syria-combatants-units-and-actions/
  23. Saberin Unit – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saberin_Unit
  24. The Quds Force in Syria – Combating Terrorism Center, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ctc.westpoint.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/CTC-SENTINEL-062023.pdf
  25. List of equipment of the Iranian Army – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Iranian_Army
  26. The new Iranian standard issue chambered in 7.62×51 nato of all things – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/1n8pd2h/the_new_iranian_standard_issue_chambered_in/
  27. Iranian 65th NOHED Rapid Reaction Brigade armed with US made M4,M16A3/A4 and M249 LMG which was confiscated from fleeing/surrendered Afghan National Army soldiers who fled to Iran after the fall of Kabul in 2021 : r/ForgottenWeapons – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/1i77o1j/iranian_65th_nohed_rapid_reaction_brigade_armed/
  28. Steyr HS .50 / HS .460 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steyr_HS_.50_/_HS_.460
  29. Khaybar: Iran’s 5.56mm Assault Rifle – Guns and Ammo, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/khaybar-irans-5-56mm-assault-rifle/248021
  30. KH-2002 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-2002
  31. KH2002 – IOP Wiki, accessed September 6, 2025, https://iopwiki.com/index.php?title=KH2002&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop
  32. Fateh rifle – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fateh_rifle
  33. Iran’s Forward Defense Doctrine and the Evolution of Its “Long Arm Strategy – İRAM Center, accessed September 6, 2025, https://iramcenter.org/en/irans-forward-defense-doctrine-and-the-evolution-of-its-long-arm-strategy_en-2600
  34. Iran’s Evolving Military: Complementing Asymmetric Doctrine with Conventional Capabilities, accessed September 6, 2025, https://bisi.org.uk/reports/irans-evolving-military-complementing-asymmetric-doctrine-with-conventional-capabilities
China Analytics, Country Analytics, Disaster Scenario Analytics, History and Socio-Political Analytics, Military Analytics, Russian & Soviet Analytics

Ronin’s Grips: Analyzing the Invisible Battlefield—Why Social Media Sentiment is the New Decisive Terrain

The character of conflict has irrevocably shifted. We are no longer operating in a world of episodic, declared wars, but in a condition of persistent, unending competition that actively exploits strategic ambiguity. For the national security community, this means the battlefield has expanded from physical territory to encompass critical infrastructure, financial systems, and, most crucially, the cognitive domain of public perception itself.

The Ronin’s Grips approach recognizes this shift and leverages sophisticated social media analysis to provide superior intelligence. We treat the global digital ecosystem not as noise, but as the primary center of gravity in modern, non-kinetic warfare.

Here is how our focus on social media sentiment and trends yields better analysis for military and national security decision-makers.

I. Decoding the Cognitive Battlefield

Adversaries, particularly major powers, prioritize achieving victory by disintegrating an adversary’s societal and military will to fight—the Sun Tzu ideal of “winning without fighting”. Social media is the primary vector for this attack, having fused completely with modern psychological operations (PSYOP).

Our analysis focuses on identifying large-scale, digitally-driven strategic trends:

  1. Mapping Systemic Stress and Vulnerability: We analyze social media and public discourse to identify Indicator 6: Loss of Social Cohesion & Legitimacy. Adversarial influence operations are explicitly designed to exacerbate existing social divisions and erode trust in democratic institutions. By tracking these narratives, we observe direct symptoms of internal decay, such as the alarming trend toward political polarization in the United States, where partisans view the opposing party as a “threat to the nation’s well-being”. The ultimate objective of AI-driven information warfare is the erosion of trust itself, leading to a state of “epistemic exhaustion” where coherent, collective decision-making becomes impossible.
  2. Tracking Adversary Doctrine in Real-Time: We monitor digital discourse to track the operationalization of doctrines like China’s “Three Warfares” (Public Opinion, Psychological, and Legal warfare). This doctrine uses AI and social platforms to seize control of the dominant narrative, legitimize China’s actions, and undermine alliances. Our analysis can track when a PLA commander is applying political warfare to achieve a victory before a major kinetic battle is fought, often targeting the political will of the U.S. and its allies.
  3. Predicting Disinformation Payloads: By analyzing platform architecture and psychological vulnerabilities, we identify how adversaries exploit human nature at scale. For instance, content that elicits strong, negative emotions like anger and outrage spreads faster and wider because social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement. The analysis identifies the use of deepfakes and generative AI to create hyper-realistic, fabricated content designed to exploit sensitivities like corruption or sow distrust. This is a direct assault on the integrity of democratic processes, as seen in unconventional conflict scenarios targeting the Philippines.

Understanding Social Media Sentiment for Decision Advantage

In the 21st century, strategic competition is defined by the speed and quality of decision-making, summarized by Colonel John Boyd’s OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act). Social media sentiment analysis significantly improves the crucial Observe and Orient phases:

  • Accelerating the PSYOP Cycle: Military Information Support Operations (MISO) planning, traditionally time-consuming, can be compressed dramatically by AI-powered analysis. Generative AI and LLMs can scrutinize massive, multilingual social media datasets in minutes to extract an adversary’s goals, tactics, and narrative frames. This instantly automates the most difficult phase—Target Audience Analysis—allowing MISO teams to generate hyper-personalized digital campaigns tailored to specific cultural or demographic sub-groups “at the speed of conflict”.
  • Targeting the Civilian Center of Gravity: The PLA employs a concept called “Social A2/AD” (Anti-Access/Area Denial), which uses non-military actions like fostering political divisions and economic dependencies to fracture American society. By analyzing sentiment and narratives, we can detect when these operations are attempting to degrade the capacity of a nation or alliance to respond effectively. For example, in the U.S.-Philippines alliance, the goal of information warfare is often to poison the perception of the alliance for years to come by eroding public trust. Ronin’s Grips tracks these vectors to provide warning.

II. Why Readers Should Value and Trust Ronin’s Grips Reports

Our primary value proposition is analytical rigor and candor in a contested information environment, setting our reports apart from simple data aggregation or biased sources.

1. Commitment to Asymmetric Insight

We reject “mirror-imaging”—the critical error of projecting U.S. strategic culture and assumptions onto adversaries like China. Instead, we use a structured analytical methodology designed to produce second- and third-order insights.

  • Beyond the Surface: We move beyond describing what an adversary is doing (e.g., “China is building a metaverse”) to analyzing the strategic implication (e.g., China’s military metaverse, or “battleverse,” is a core component of its Intelligentized Warfare, representing a priority to win future wars, potentially serving as strategic misdirection for external audiences).
  • Connecting the Dots: We connect tactical phenomena to grand strategic shifts. For instance, mapping the destruction of high-value Russian armor by low-cost Ukrainian FPV drones (a tactical observation) to its third-order implication: a systemic challenge to the Western military-industrial complex’s focus on producing exquisite, high-cost platforms (a strategic outcome).

2. Rigorous, Multi-Source Validation

Our analysis is not based on a single stream of information. We employ a multi-source collection strategy, systematically cross-referencing information from official doctrine, real-world battlefield reports, and expert third-party analysis.

  • Validation through Conflict: We rigorously cross-reference doctrine with operational efficacy. For example, a formal U.S. Army doctrine emphasizing the importance of targeting a drone’s Ground Control Station (GCS) is validated and given urgency by battlefield reports from Ukraine, confirming that drone operators are high-value targets for both sides.
  • Candor and Risk Assessment: Unlike institutions constrained by political narratives, our methodology demands a candid risk assessment. This means actively seeking out contradictions, documented failures, and technical vulnerabilities. For instance, while AI accelerates decision-making, we highlight its “brittleness”—the fact that AI models are only as good as their training data, and the enemy’s job is to create novel situations that cause models to fail in “bizarre” ways. We analyze the threat of adversarial AI attacks, such as data poisoning, which could teach predictive models to confidently orient commanders to a false reality.

3. Actionable Intelligence

Our final output is structured for utility. We synthesize complex data into clear, actionable recommendations. For military commanders operating in the hyper-lethal drone battlespace, this translates into definitive “Imperatives (Dos)” and “Prohibitions (Don’ts)” needed for survival and victory. This focus ensures that our analysis translates directly into cognitive force protection and improved decision-making capacity.

The Bottom Line: Social media is the nervous system of modern conflict, constantly broadcasting signals about political will, societal fracture, and adversarial intent. While traditional intelligence focuses on the movement of tanks and ships, Ronin’s Grips focuses on the movement of ideas and the degradation of trust. In an age where adversaries seek to win by paralyzing our C2, eroding our will, and exploiting our democratic debates, analyzing the sentiment and trends in the cognitive domain is an operational imperative. We provide the resilient, synthesized intelligence required to out-think, out-decide, and out-pace this new era of warfare.

Our reports provide the commander, policymaker, and informed citizen with the decisive edge to understand reality, not just react to noise. If the goal of the adversary is to destroy confidence in all information, our mission is to provide the validated analysis needed to restore that confidence and reinforce societal resilience.

Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Uncategorized

Directorate ‘V’ TsSN FSB: An Operational History and Materiel Analysis of the Vympel Group

Directorate ‘V’ of the Special Purpose Center (TsSN) of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), commonly known as Vympel Group, stands as one of the Russian Federation’s most elite and secretive special operations forces. Its history represents a unique and compelling evolution, tracing a path from its origins as a clandestine instrument of Soviet foreign policy, designed for sabotage and direct action deep within enemy territory, to its current role as a key component of the modern Russian security state’s counter-terrorism and special tasks apparatus. The trajectory of Vympel is one of radical adaptation, driven by the seismic geopolitical shifts of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Initially forged for a potential global conflict with NATO, the unit was forced to redefine its purpose after the Soviet collapse, transforming into a domestic counter-terror force. Today, it appears to be evolving once more, blending its Cold War-era clandestine skills with hard-won counter-terrorism experience to become a hybrid force adept at operating across the spectrum of conflict, from domestic security to the grey-zone battlefields of the contemporary era.

Section 1: Genesis – The KGB’s Clandestine Sword (1981-1991)

1.1. Forging the Pennant: Lineage and Establishment

The Special Operations Task Group Vympel (meaning “pennant”) was officially established on August 19, 1981, following a joint top-secret decision by the Politburo and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.1 From its inception, Vympel was an entity of the intelligence services, not the military. It was formed within the KGB’s First Chief Directorate (PGU), the arm responsible for all foreign intelligence and operations.3 Specifically, it was placed under the command of Department “S,” which managed the KGB’s overseas clandestine service, or “illegals” program, underscoring its intended role in deniable, deep-cover operations.2

The creation of Vympel was not a spontaneous decision but the culmination of lessons learned from the crucible of irregular warfare in Afghanistan. The unit was deliberately built upon the combat-experienced cadres of its precursor KGB special task groups: Zenyth, Kaskad, and Omega.1 These ad-hoc units had been active in Afghanistan since the late 1970s, with Kaskad making four operational tours between July 1980 and April 1983.1 Their experience, particularly in operations like “Storm-333″—the successful 1979 assault on the Tajbeg Palace and assassination of Afghan President Hafizullah Amin, in which KGB operators participated—demonstrated the need for a permanent, institutionalized force capable of executing such complex intelligence-led special operations.1 The formation of Vympel was a direct effort to retain the unique proficiency and tactical lessons acquired by these operators.2

The initiative was championed by Major General Yuri Ivanovich Drozdov, a senior figure in the PGU, and its founding commander was Captain 1st Rank Ewald Kozlov, a naval officer with service in the Northern and Caspian Fleets who had transferred to the KGB’s Department “S”.2 This leadership profile further distinguished Vympel from its army counterparts in the GRU (Main Intelligence Directorate).

1.2. Cold War Doctrine and Mandate: The “Special Period”

Vympel’s primary doctrine was tailored for the “special period” (особыйпериод)—the critical, pre-conflict phase when war between the Soviet Union and NATO was deemed unavoidable.2 Its mandate was unequivocally offensive and foreign-focused, designed to act as a strategic tool of state power to cripple an adversary’s ability to wage war before conventional hostilities had even begun.

The unit’s core tasks were a blend of special operations and clandestine intelligence work 1:

  • Deep Penetration and Special Reconnaissance: Infiltrating far behind enemy lines to gather critical intelligence on strategic targets.6
  • Sabotage: The destruction of strategic enemy infrastructure, with a unique and specific focus on nuclear facilities, power plants, command-and-control centers, and transportation hubs.2
  • Direct Action: Conducting assassinations of top enemy political and military leadership to decapitate the adversary’s command structure.2
  • Intelligence Operations: Conducting human intelligence (HUMINT) operations and activating pre-placed espionage cells in wartime.2
  • Ancillary Missions: Included the protection of Soviet embassies and institutions abroad and seizing enemy naval assets like surface vessels and submarines.1

This mission set placed Vympel in a distinct category from the GRU’s Spetsnaz. While GRU units were an instrument of military intelligence focused on tactical and operational disruption of enemy armed forces, Vympel was an asset of the KGB’s foreign intelligence arm, aimed at achieving strategic political and military effects by destabilizing the enemy state itself.9

1.3. The “Universal Soldier”: Selection and Training

To meet the demands of its complex mission, Vympel developed a training program of unparalleled rigor and breadth, designed to create a “universal soldier” (универсальныйсолдат).8 The process to fully train a single operative was exceptionally long and expensive, taking approximately five years and costing hundreds of thousands of dollars annually per candidate.8

The curriculum was exhaustive, intended to produce an operator who was simultaneously an elite commando, an intelligence officer, and a combat engineer. Training included 2:

  • Advanced Combat Skills: Intensive training in hand-to-hand combat, expert marksmanship with a wide array of both Soviet and foreign weapon systems, parachute training (including high-altitude techniques), diving and underwater combat, and alpine mountaineering and rope techniques.2
  • Intelligence Tradecraft: Operatives were schooled in clandestine operations, HUMINT collection, and were required to master two to three foreign languages to facilitate deep-cover operations in foreign countries.2
  • Specialized Technical Skills: A key differentiator was the advanced technical training in mining and blasting, the construction and use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and, most notably, the detailed study of the structure and vulnerabilities of nuclear power plants and other critical infrastructure.2

This comprehensive skill set made Vympel operatives uniquely capable of operating autonomously for extended periods deep inside hostile territory, executing missions of the highest strategic importance.

1.4. Arsenal of the Era: Tools for Clandestine Warfare

During the 1980s, Vympel’s arsenal was composed of the best available Soviet special-purpose weaponry, tailored for its clandestine mission set.

  • Primary Rifles: The standard-issue assault rifle was the AKS-74, chambered in 5.45x39mm. Its side-folding stock made it suitable for airborne operations and concealed carry.12 For extreme close-quarters work and vehicle-borne roles, the compact AKS-74U carbine was employed.13
  • Suppressed Weapon Systems: Given the emphasis on stealth, silenced weapons were critical. This included the PB suppressed pistol, based on the Makarov PM, and the PSS “Vul” silent pistol, which used a special captive-piston cartridge for nearly silent operation.13 The development of the AS Val integrally suppressed assault rifle and the VSS Vintorez suppressed sniper rifle in the late 1980s was a direct technological response to the operational needs of units like Vympel. Both platforms fired the heavy, subsonic 9x39mm armor-piercing cartridge, providing quiet lethality against protected targets.16
  • Support and Precision Weapons: The SVD Dragunov semi-automatic rifle provided designated marksman capability out to intermediate ranges.13 For squad-level fire support, the PKM general-purpose machine gun was utilized.13 Rifles were often fitted with under-barrel grenade launchers such as the BG-15.18

1.5. Global Operations: The Soviet Union’s Covert Hand

While the full operational record of Vympel during the Cold War remains highly classified, it is known that its operatives were deployed to key proxy battlegrounds around the globe. They continued the work of their predecessors in Afghanistan, conducting intelligence-reconnaissance-sabotage missions throughout the 1980s.6 Beyond Afghanistan, Vympel operators were active in advisory and potentially direct action roles in Angola, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Vietnam, and other Cold War hotspots, supporting Soviet-backed governments and revolutionary movements.8 In these theaters, their role was likely to train local special forces and execute sensitive operations that were beyond the capabilities of their allies.

Section 2: The Tumultuous Decade – Survival and Rebirth (1991-1999)

2.1. A Unit Adrift: Post-Soviet Chaos

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 was a cataclysmic event for Vympel. Its primary mission—waging clandestine war against NATO in the “special period”—became obsolete overnight. The unit was plunged into a period of profound uncertainty, subjected to “endless re-organisation and re-definition” as the monolithic KGB was fractured into competing successor agencies.2 Vympel was passed between these new entities, first subordinated to the short-lived Security Ministry and then transferred to the GUO (Main Protection Directorate), reflecting the chaotic and often politically motivated restructuring of the Russian security services under President Boris Yeltsin.1

2.2. The 1993 Constitutional Crisis and the “Vega” Period

The unit’s existential crisis came to a head in October 1993 during the Russian constitutional crisis. A violent political standoff erupted between President Yeltsin and the Russian parliament, which had barricaded itself inside the Supreme Council building, colloquially known as the “White House.” Vympel, along with its sister unit Alpha, received direct orders to storm the building.2

In a defining moment of principle, the commanders of both units refused to carry out the assault. This refusal was not an act of simple insubordination but a manifestation of the unit’s core ethos. Trained as elite intelligence operators for clandestine warfare against foreign adversaries, the men of Vympel did not see themselves as internal troops to be used against their own countrymen in a political dispute. The order represented a fundamental violation of their professional identity, and they feared the massive civilian casualties that a full-scale assault would inevitably cause.

This act of defiance had severe repercussions. As a punitive measure, Yeltsin summarily transferred Vympel from the GUO to the command of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD).1 For the elite operatives, subordination to the

militsiya (police) was a profound humiliation.2 The result was a mass exodus that nearly destroyed the unit. Of the 278 officers in Vympel at the time, only 57 consented to serve under the MVD.1 The decimated unit was stripped of its prestigious name and rebranded as “Vega”.1

2.3. Return to the Fold: Integration into the FSB TsSN

The near-destruction of Vympel was recognized as the loss of a critical national security asset. In August 1995, a presidential decree officially reinstated the unit.1 Later that year, it was removed from the MVD and integrated into the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary domestic successor to the KGB. The FSB established a new overarching command, the Center of Special Purpose (TsSN), to house its elite special operations capabilities. Vympel was placed within the TsSN as Directorate ‘V’, alongside its sister unit, Directorate ‘A’ (Alpha).2

This move was a lifeline for the unit. The FSB provided a stable command structure, a clear (if altered) mission set, and the prestige of serving within the state’s principal security organ. For the FSB, the integration of Vympel and Alpha consolidated Russia’s premier special operations forces under a single roof, preventing their further degradation and ensuring their capabilities were available to the new security service. This symbiotic relationship secured Vympel’s survival and set the stage for its transformation into a 21st-century special operations force.

Section 3: A New Paradigm – Counter-Terrorism and Special Tasks (2000-Present)

3.1. Mission Reforged: From Sabotage to Counter-Terrorism

Under the command of the FSB TsSN, Vympel’s official mandate underwent a radical transformation. The primary mission shifted from foreign sabotage to domestic special operations, driven by the pressing security challenges facing the new Russian Federation, particularly the rise of terrorism and separatism emanating from the North Caucasus.1

The unit’s new core missions became 1:

  • Counter-Terrorism (CT) and Hostage Rescue: Becoming a primary national-level response force for high-stakes terrorist incidents.
  • Protection of Strategic Sites: Safeguarding critical national infrastructure, with a particular emphasis on nuclear power plants and related facilities. This mission was a logical evolution of their original Cold War training in nuclear sabotage, repurposing offensive knowledge for defensive ends.
  • Suppression of Terrorist Acts: Conducting proactive operations to disrupt and neutralize terrorist plots targeting Russian citizens, both domestically and abroad.

This fundamental shift in purpose is reflected in the unit’s modern motto, ‘Служить и защищать’ (Sluzhit’ i zashchishchat’), meaning “Serve and Protect”—a clear departure from its aggressive, foreign-oriented origins.1 Accordingly, the unit’s training regimen was adapted, placing a much greater emphasis on Close-Quarters Battle (CQB), advanced hostage rescue tactics, and specialized skills in dealing with the threat of improvised explosive devices (IEDs).1

3.2. Trial by Fire: The Nord-Ost and Beslan Sieges

Two horrific mass-hostage crises in the early 2000s became the defining operations of Vympel’s new counter-terrorism role. While demonstrating the unit’s capabilities, they also exposed a brutal learning curve and tactical approaches that resulted in catastrophic loss of life among the hostages.

Nord-Ost Theater Siege (October 2002): Vympel, alongside Alpha and MVD SOBR, formed the assault force tasked with resolving the seizure of the Dubrovka Theater in Moscow, where 40 Chechen terrorists held over 850 hostages.7 The tactical challenge was immense: a complex building filled with civilians and rigged with numerous IEDs by attackers who included female suicide bombers.23 The chosen tactical solution was to pump an incapacitating chemical agent—a powerful fentanyl derivative such as carfentanil mixed with remifentanil—into the theater’s ventilation system to neutralize the terrorists before the assault began.23 While the subsequent storming of the building was tactically successful, resulting in the death of all 40 terrorists, the operation was a medical disaster. A catastrophic failure to coordinate with medical services, provide the necessary antidote (naloxone), or properly manage the evacuation of hundreds of unconscious hostages led to the deaths of at least 130 civilians, who succumbed to respiratory depression caused by the opioid agent.23

Beslan School Siege (September 2004): Vympel and Alpha were again the primary response units at the seizure of School Number One in Beslan, North Ossetia. A group of over 30 terrorists held more than 1,100 hostages, including 777 children, inside the school’s gymnasium, which they had heavily mined with IEDs.29 The three-day siege ended in chaos when a series of explosions in the gym—the cause of which remains disputed—triggered a spontaneous and poorly coordinated assault by security forces.30 The operation was marked by a near-total breakdown of incident command, with armed local civilians joining the firefight.31 In the ensuing battle, security forces employed a level of firepower unprecedented in a hostage rescue scenario, including tank cannons, RPO-A Shmel thermobaric rocket launchers, and heavy machine guns, against the school building.30 The outcome was horrific, with 334 hostages killed, 186 of them children.29 The event exposed profound failures in intelligence, negotiation strategy, and tactical discipline.31

These two events, while tragic, were formative. The willingness to employ indiscriminate, area-effect weapons like chemical agents and thermobaric rockets suggests a tactical mindset that prioritized the elimination of the terrorist threat above all else, a possible holdover from the unit’s more kinetic military and sabotage origins. These operations served as a brutal lesson in the unique requirements of domestic mass-hostage rescue, where the preservation of hostage life is the paramount objective.

3.3. Modern Operations: A Return to Hybridity

Throughout the 2000s, Vympel was heavily engaged in the Second Chechen War and the long-running counter-insurgency that followed across the North Caucasus. The unit specialized in high-risk direct action missions, such as the successful capture of Chechen militant leader Salman Raduyev in March 2000.2

More recently, Vympel’s operational scope has expanded significantly, indicating a return to a more hybrid role. The unit has been documented participating in the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, engaged in high-intensity urban combat in locations such as Mariupol.34 This marks a significant deployment in a conventional military conflict. Furthermore, investigative reporting has linked operatives from the FSB’s “Department V” to clandestine foreign operations, including the 2019 assassination of a Georgian national in Berlin.11 This suggests that Vympel has not simply replaced its original mission but has added the domestic CT role to its broader repertoire. The Russian state appears to be leveraging the unit’s original PGU lineage and clandestine skillset for deniable foreign special activities, creating a dual-purpose force for both internal security and external power projection.

Section 4: The Modern Vympel Arsenal – A Fusion of Domestic and Foreign Systems

The contemporary small arms inventory of Directorate ‘V’ reflects a pragmatic, performance-driven procurement strategy. While heavily reliant on advanced Russian-made systems, the unit does not hesitate to adopt foreign materiel when it offers a distinct capability advantage. This results in a hybridized arsenal tailored for a wide spectrum of special operations.

4.1. Primary Weapon Systems (Assault Rifles & Carbines)

  • AK-105: This 5.45x39mm carbine is a favored primary weapon. As a shortened variant of the full-size AK-74M, its 314 mm barrel provides a superior balance of compactness for CQB and vehicle operations while retaining better ballistic performance than the older, shorter AKS-74U.1 It is frequently seen heavily customized with modern accessories.
  • AK-74M: The modernized, full-length 5.45x39mm assault rifle remains a standard-issue weapon. Its reliability is legendary, and Vympel operators typically outfit them with advanced optics, lasers, and furniture to meet modern operational standards.36
  • AK-12 / AK-15: As part of the Russian military’s “Ratnik” future soldier program, the newest generation of Kalashnikov rifles are being adopted. The AK-12 (5.45x39mm) and its 7.62x39mm counterpart, the AK-15, feature significantly improved ergonomics, adjustable stocks, and integrated Picatinny rails, finally bringing the Kalashnikov platform into the 21st century in its factory configuration.1

4.2. Specialized Small Arms (Suppressed & CQB)

  • AS Val & VSS Vintorez: These iconic, integrally suppressed weapon systems remain indispensable for stealth operations. Chambered for the heavy, subsonic 9x39mm cartridge, they offer quiet operation combined with excellent performance against body armor at typical engagement ranges. The AS Val serves as the compact assault rifle, while the VSS Vintorez is employed as a suppressed designated marksman rifle.1
  • PP-19-01 Vityaz-SN: This 9x19mm Parabellum submachine gun is the unit’s standard SMG. Based on the Kalashnikov operating system, it offers familiar handling, reliability, and a high degree of parts commonality with the unit’s primary rifles. It is effective, compact, and easily suppressed for CQB environments.1
  • ShAK-12: A more recent and highly specialized addition, the ShAK-12 is a bullpup assault rifle chambered in the massive 12.7x55mm subsonic cartridge. It is designed for maximum stopping power in CQB, capable of neutralizing targets behind cover or wearing heavy body armor with a single shot.36

4.3. Sidearms

  • Glock 17: The adoption of the Austrian Glock 17 is one of the most significant indicators of the unit’s pragmatic approach to equipment. It is highly valued for its exceptional reliability, ergonomic design, and the wide availability of aftermarket accessories. Russian special forces are known to use both Austrian-manufactured models and unlicensed copies produced domestically by the Orsis arms company.36
  • MP-443 Grach: The standard-issue Russian military pistol in 9x19mm, the Grach serves as a common sidearm, replacing the venerable Makarov PM.15
  • SR-1M Vektor: A powerful domestic pistol chambered in the potent 9x21mm Gyurza cartridge. It is favored by Russian special forces for its ability to fire specialized armor-piercing ammunition, offering greater penetration than standard 9x19mm rounds.1

4.4. Sniper and Designated Marksman Systems

  • SV-98: A Russian-made, bolt-action sniper rifle that provides a significant leap in precision over the older SVD. Typically chambered in 7.62x54mmR, it is based on a successful sporting rifle design and serves as the unit’s standard precision bolt-action platform.15
  • Orsis T-5000: Representing the pinnacle of modern Russian sniper rifle technology, the T-5000 has been adopted by the FSB under the designation “Tochnost” (Precision). Chambered in high-performance, long-range calibers like.338 Lapua Magnum, its accuracy and performance are competitive with top-tier Western sniper systems.46
  • Heckler & Koch MR308 (HK417): The use of this German-made 7.62x51mm NATO semi-automatic rifle as a designated marksman rifle is a clear example of procuring the best tool for the job. The MR308/HK417 platform is renowned for its accuracy, reliability, and superior ergonomics compared to domestic counterparts.36

4.5. Foreign Materiel Adoption

The composition of Vympel’s arsenal reveals two critical realities about the unit and the Russian defense industry. First, there is a clear and persistent gap in Russia’s ability to produce high-performance optics, aiming devices, and ergonomic accessories. The near-universal presence of Western-made sights (such as EOTech and Aimpoint), laser modules (like the AN/PEQ-15), and advanced furniture on Russian-made rifles is a tacit admission that domestic products do not meet the standards required by a Tier 1 special operations unit.1 This reliance on foreign electronics and accessories creates a potential supply chain vulnerability that can be exploited by international sanctions.

Second, the unit’s procurement philosophy is driven by pragmatism over dogma. The willingness to field Austrian pistols, German rifles, and potentially American carbines (as used by its sister unit, Alpha) demonstrates that operational effectiveness is the primary consideration.36 If a foreign weapon offers a tangible advantage—be it the Glock’s legendary reliability, the H&K’s precision, or the ergonomics of a Western accessory—the unit has the autonomy and budget to acquire and field it. This creates a hybridized and highly capable arsenal specifically tailored to the demands of its missions.

4.6. Ancillary Equipment

Beyond small arms, Vympel employs a range of specialized equipment. This includes heavy ballistic shields like the Vant-VM, often equipped with powerful strobing lights to disorient targets during entry.1 For breaching and delivering specialized munitions, the unit uses weapons like the GM-94 pump-action grenade launcher.1 Operations in low-light conditions are enabled by modern night vision systems, such as the Dedal-NV Gen 3+ binocular goggles.1

Table: Contemporary Directorate ‘V’ Small Arms

Weapon SystemTypeCaliberCountry of OriginKey Characteristics / Role
AK-105Carbine5.45×39mmRussiaStandard-issue carbine; balance of compactness and ballistics.
AK-74MAssault Rifle5.45×39mmRussiaModernized full-size rifle, often heavily customized.
AK-12 / AK-15Assault Rifle5.45×39mm / 7.62×39mmRussiaNew generation rifle; improved ergonomics, integrated rails.
AS ValSuppressed Assault Rifle9×39mmRussiaIntegrally suppressed for clandestine CQB and stealth operations.
PP-19-01 VityazSubmachine Gun9×19mm ParabellumRussiaStandard SMG; AK-based ergonomics, reliable, easily suppressed.
ShAK-12Bullpup Assault Rifle12.7×55mmRussiaHeavy caliber CQB weapon for defeating hard cover and body armor.
Glock 17Pistol9×19mm ParabellumAustriaPrimary sidearm; valued for exceptional reliability and ergonomics.
SR-1M VektorPistol9×21mm GyurzaRussiaHigh-power pistol capable of firing armor-piercing ammunition.
VSS VintorezSuppressed DMR9×39mmRussiaIntegrally suppressed for clandestine precision fire.
SV-98Sniper Rifle7.62×54mmRRussiaStandard bolt-action precision rifle.
Orsis T-5000Sniper Rifle.338 Lapua Magnum, etc.RussiaHigh-precision, long-range anti-personnel/anti-materiel system.
H&K MR308Designated Marksman Rifle7.62×51mm NATOGermanySemi-automatic precision rifle; valued for accuracy and reliability.

Section 5: The Future of Directorate ‘V’

5.1. Lessons from the “Transparent Battlefield” of Ukraine

The high-intensity conflict in Ukraine has created a new paradigm of warfare, often described as the “transparent battlefield.” The ubiquitous presence of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), from small FPV quadcopters to larger reconnaissance drones, has made traditional special operations tactics exceptionally hazardous.51 The historical advantage of units like Vympel—the ability to infiltrate and operate unseen—is now fundamentally challenged. Future clandestine movement, whether for domestic counter-terrorism or foreign sabotage, will be nearly impossible without sophisticated countermeasures. This reality forces a significant tactical evolution, shifting the emphasis from purely physical stealth to achieving electronic stealth. Vympel’s future success will be contingent on its ability to master the electromagnetic spectrum—blinding enemy sensors with electronic warfare (EW) while effectively employing its own UAS for intelligence, targeting, and direct action.52

5.2. Evolving Threats and a Hybrid Future

Directorate ‘V’ is unlikely to relinquish its domestic counter-terrorism and strategic site protection roles, as these remain foundational responsibilities of the FSB. However, the current geopolitical climate, characterized by renewed great-power competition, suggests that the unit’s utility in foreign “grey-zone” conflicts will expand.51 The heavy attrition suffered by Russia’s more conventional elite forces, such as the VDV (Airborne Forces) and Naval Infantry, during the war in Ukraine may increase the Kremlin’s reliance on highly skilled, surgical units like Vympel for critical future missions.54

Vympel is uniquely positioned to be a premier tool of Russian hybrid warfare. It possesses a unique combination of skills accrued over its four-decade history: the clandestine tradecraft of its KGB origins, the brutal experience of urban counter-terrorism from the North Caucasus, and now, direct combat experience in a high-intensity conventional war.2 This layered expertise allows the unit to scale its operations across the entire spectrum of conflict, from a single covert operative conducting an assassination to a fully equipped assault team supporting conventional army operations.

5.3. Technological and Organizational Imperatives

To maintain its elite status, Vympel must continue to integrate emerging technologies. Beyond UAS and EW, this will likely include the use of artificial intelligence for processing intelligence and aiding in target acquisition.51 Organizationally, the unit may need to develop dedicated sub-units focused on non-kinetic effects, such as cyber warfare and information operations, to support its physical missions.

A significant long-term challenge will be the unit’s reliance on foreign-made components, particularly high-end optics and electronics. International sanctions will make the procurement and maintenance of this equipment increasingly difficult. Vympel’s future effectiveness may therefore hinge on two factors: the ability of the Russian defense industry to finally produce domestic equivalents of sufficient quality, or the state’s ability to establish clandestine supply chains to circumvent sanctions.56

Conclusion

The four-decade history of Directorate ‘V’ is a study in transformation and resilience. Born as the KGB’s clandestine sword for a hypothetical World War III, Vympel survived the collapse of its state and the obsolescence of its mission, only to be nearly destroyed by political turmoil. It was reborn within the FSB as a shield against a new and vicious wave of domestic terrorism, a role it learned through the brutal lessons of Moscow and Beslan. Today, the unit has evolved again, emerging as a mature, dual-natured special operations force. It retains the DNA of its covert PGU origins while being fully versed in the realities of modern counter-terrorism and high-intensity warfare. Vympel now stands as a uniquely versatile instrument of Russian state power, capable of operating across the full spectrum of conflict. Its future will be defined by its capacity to adapt to the technological realities of the transparent battlefield and to serve the Kremlin’s objectives in an increasingly unstable world.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. FSB Vympel: Russia’s Secretive Unit – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/fsb-vympel-russias-secretive-unit/
  2. Vympel – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vympel
  3. First Chief Directorate – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chief_Directorate
  4. KGB FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE ROLE – Russia / Soviet Intelligence Agencies, accessed September 6, 2025, https://irp.fas.org/world/russia/kgb/su0521.htm
  5. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vympel#:~:text=The%20unit%20was%20formed%20in,activation%20in%20case%20of%20war.
  6. Team from Group SpetsNaz “Vympel” of KGB in Afghanistan, during the 80s. “Vympel” was part of Foreign Intelligence Directorate (1st Main Directorate) of the KGB and its main missions were Intelligence-Reconnaissance-Sabotage operations [1280X841] – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/hiouno/team_from_group_spetsnaz_vympel_of_kgb_in/
  7. Russian Special Forces | What Are Spetsnaz? – SOFREP, accessed September 6, 2025, https://sofrep.com/news/russian-special-forces-what-are-spetsnaz/
  8. “Vimpel” super soldiers of KGB. Documentary Film. English Subtitles – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhSgKZY-YHw
  9. Spetsnaz GRU – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spetsnaz_GRU
  10. SPETsNAZ: A Soviet Sabotage Threat. – DTIC, accessed September 6, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA168375.pdf
  11. “V” For “Vympel”: FSB’s Secretive Department “V” Behind Assassination Of Georgian Asylum Seeker In Germany – bellingcat, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2020/02/17/v-like-vympel-fsbs-secretive-department-v-behind-assassination-of-zelimkhan-khangoshvili/
  12. What was the standard weapon of a Russian soldier in Afghanistan? – Quora, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-standard-weapon-of-a-Russian-soldier-in-Afghanistan
  13. List of equipment of the Soviet Ground Forces – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Soviet_Ground_Forces
  14. List of military equipment used by the mujahideen during the Soviet–Afghan War – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_equipment_used_by_the_mujahideen_during_the_Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War
  15. List of equipment of the Russian Ground Forces – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Russian_Ground_Forces
  16. What was the intended deign use of the VSS Vintorez & AS-Val & why has no one else done something similar? : r/WarCollege – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/qxwnbr/what_was_the_intended_deign_use_of_the_vss/
  17. AS Val and VSS Vintorez – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS_Val_and_VSS_Vintorez
  18. The War in Afghanistan (1979-1989) History, Tactics, Weapons, accessed September 6, 2025, http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/e001.htm
  19. Russian Spetsnaz Special Forces [RHS] – Steam Community, accessed September 6, 2025, https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?l=finnish&id=895826156
  20. Russian Vympel and Alpha group spetsnaz operators overlooking the white house building during the Russian constitutional crisis, October 4, 1993. [2048 × 1355] : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/1m3urhr/russian_vympel_and_alpha_group_spetsnaz_operators/
  21. Spetsnaz – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spetsnaz
  22. greydynamics.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/fsb-vympel-russias-secretive-unit/#:~:text=Originally%2C%20the%20unit%20prioritised%20covert,terrorism%20and%20enforcing%20nuclear%20safety.
  23. Moscow theater hostage crisis – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis
  24. The Moscow Theater Hostage Crisis: The Perpetrators, their Tactics, and the Russian Response – ResearchGate, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233509130_The_Moscow_Theater_Hostage_Crisis_The_Perpetrators_their_Tactics_and_the_Russian_Response
  25. Moscow Theater Hostage Crisis – Encyclopedia.pub, accessed September 6, 2025, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/33143
  26. Hostage crisis in Moscow theater | October 23, 2002 – History.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/october-23/hostage-crisis-in-moscow-theater
  27. Nord-Ost: Russia’s Medical Failure in the 2002 Crisis – ResearchGate, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376033725_Nord-Ost_Russia’s_Medical_Failure_in_the_2002_Crisis
  28. THE LONG SHADOW OF ―NORD OST‖ By David Satter, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/162079/Satter_-_Shadow_of_Nord_Ost.pdf
  29. Beslan school siege – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege
  30. Beslan school attack | Siege, Massacre, & Aftermath – Britannica, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Beslan-school-attack
  31. Beslan: Counter-terrorism Incident Command: Lessons Learned …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.hsaj.org/articles/162
  32. 20 years after Beslan ‘special operation,’ a legacy of violence, lies and dead children persists – VOA, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.voanews.com/a/years-after-beslan-special-operation-a-legacy-of-violence-lies-and-dead-children-persists/7773668.html
  33. TsSN FSB Management “V” (aka Vympel) SpetsNaz infront of a Grozny’s town sign. circa 2000. During Second Chechen Campaign. 19 August is Creation Date of Vympel within Foreign Intel Department of KGB 39 years ago. [1029X663] : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/iczm4o/tssn_fsb_management_v_aka_vympel_spetsnaz_infront/
  34. FSB TssN Vympel Combat Footage in Mariupol around 2022 : r/SpecOpsArchive – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/SpecOpsArchive/comments/1f39ip9/fsb_tssn_vympel_combat_footage_in_mariupol_around/
  35. What is the purpose of Russia’s FSB Vympel? – Quora, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-purpose-of-Russias-FSB-Vympel
  36. Weapons of the Russian Special Forces | Navy SEALs, accessed September 6, 2025, https://navyseals.com/5283/weapons-of-the-russian-special-forces/
  37. AK105 capabilities || Kalashnikov Media, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.kalashnikovgroup.ru/media/ttkh-2019/ttkh-ak-105
  38. AK-105 – Kalashnikov Group, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.kalashnikovgroup.ru/catalog/boevoe-strelkovoe-oruzhie/avtomaty/avtomat-kalashnikova-ak105
  39. AK-74M – Kalashnikov Group, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.kalashnikovgroup.ru/catalog/boevoe-strelkovoe-oruzhie/avtomaty/avtomat-kalashnikova-ak74m
  40. Kalashnikov AK-74M – Weaponsystems.net, accessed September 6, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/1036-Kalashnikov+AK-74M
  41. PP-19-01 Vityaz – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-19-01_Vityaz
  42. Russian FSB Operatives Love these Western Weapons – The National Interest, accessed September 6, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russian-fsb-operatives-love-these-western-weapons-199147
  43. SV-98 Russian 7.62mm Sniper Rifle – ODIN, accessed September 6, 2025, https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/4a1628052f94de01def7d289a1c661c7
  44. SV-98 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SV-98
  45. Russian SV-98 – Sniper Central, accessed September 6, 2025, https://snipercentral.com/sv98.htm
  46. The KSSO: Russia’s Special Operations Command – Grey Dynamics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://greydynamics.com/the-ksso-russias-special-operations-command/
  47. ORSIS T-5000 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orsis_T-5000
  48. ORSIS T-5000 – Weaponsystems.net, accessed September 6, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/700-AA05%20-%20T-5000
  49. ORSIS T-5000: New Name in Precision Rifles – Small Arms Defense Journal, accessed September 6, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/orsis-t-5000-new-name-in-precision-rifles/
  50. Operators from Directorate Alfa of the FSB Special Purpose Center, also known as Spetsgruppa Alfa, armed with AS Val assault rifles and MP-443 Grach sidearms during a hostage rescue exercise in 2009 [1513×1016] – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/1j7njb/operators_from_directorate_alfa_of_the_fsb/
  51. Russian Concepts of Future Warfare Based on Lessons from the Ukraine War | CNA, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.cna.org/analyses/2025/08/russian-concepts-of-future-warfare-based-on-lessons-from-the-ukraine-war
  52. Russian Drone Innovations are Likely Achieving Effects of Battlefield Air Interdiction in Ukraine | Institute for the Study of War, accessed September 6, 2025, https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-drone-innovations-are-likely-achieving-effects-battlefield-air-interdiction
  53. Lessons from the Ukraine Conflict: Modern Warfare in the Age of Autonomy, Information, and Resilience – CSIS, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/lessons-ukraine-conflict-modern-warfare-age-autonomy-information-and-resilience
  54. Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, September 1, 2025 | ISW, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-september-1-2025
  55. The West must study the success of Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces – Atlantic Council, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/the-west-must-study-the-success-of-ukraines-special-operations-forces/
  56. Russia’s struggle to modernize its military industry | Identifying the weaknesses in Russia’s military-industrial complex – Chatham House, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/07/russias-struggle-modernize-its-military-industry/identifying-weaknesses-russias-military
Analytics and Reports, China Analytics, Military Analytics, Uncategorized

Red Dragon, Blue Response: An Operational Assessment of PLAAF Air Combat Strategies and USAF Counter-Maneuvers

The strategic landscape of the Indo-Pacific is being fundamentally reshaped by the modernization of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). China’s military doctrine has undergone a profound evolution, shifting from a posture focused on “local wars” on its periphery to preparing for high-intensity, multi-domain conflict against a peer competitor. This transformation is driven by a central concept that redefines modern warfare: the PLA no longer views conflict as a contest between individual platforms but as a “systems confrontation” between opposing operational networks. At the heart of this doctrine is the goal of waging “systems destruction warfare,” a concept predicated on achieving victory not through the simple attrition of enemy forces, but by inducing the catastrophic collapse of an adversary’s ability to sense, communicate, command, and control its forces.

This doctrinal shift towards “informatized” and “intelligentized” warfare mandates the deep integration of cyber, space, information, and autonomous platforms into all PLA operations, with the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) positioned as a primary instrument for executing both kinetic and non-kinetic effects. The objective is to shape the battlespace and achieve a swift, decisive victory by paralyzing the enemy’s decision-making cycle.

In response, the United States has embarked on its own doctrinal revolution. The development of Agile Combat Employment (ACE) and Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) represents a fundamental redesign of the U.S. force posture and command architecture. ACE seeks to mitigate vulnerability through dispersal and maneuver, while JADC2 aims to create a resilient, decentralized network that can withstand and fight through a systems-destruction attack. This emerging strategic dynamic is therefore a clash of competing philosophies: China’s effort to find and destroy the centralized nodes of our system versus our effort to decentralize and make that system inherently resilient.

It is critical to recognize that the PLA is not blind to its own limitations. Internal PLA assessments acknowledge significant gaps in the complex integration and joint capabilities required to fully realize their system-of-systems concept. This self-awareness drives them to pursue asymmetric strategies designed to exploit perceived U.S. dependencies and vulnerabilities, rather than engaging in a symmetric, platform-for-platform fight. The following analysis identifies the five most probable and impactful air combat strategies a PLAAF commander will employ to execute this doctrine and outlines the corresponding USAF counter-maneuvers designed to defeat them.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Key 5th-Generation Air Combat Platforms

FeatureF-22 RaptorF-35 Lightning IIChengdu J-20 Mighty Dragon
Primary RoleAir Dominance / Offensive Counter-AirMultirole Strike Fighter / ISR & C2 NodeAir Superiority Interceptor / Forward Sensor & Strike Platform
Key Stealth FeaturesPlanform alignment, continuous curvature, internal weapons bays, advanced coatings, thrust-vectoring nozzles.Aligned edges, radar absorbent coating, internal weapons bays, reduced engine signature, embedded sensors.Blended fuselage, canard-delta configuration, diverterless supersonic inlets, internal weapons bays, serrated exhaust nozzles.
Avionics/Sensor SuiteAN/APG-77 AESA radar, advanced electronic warfare suite, sensor fusion. Modernization includes IRST pods and enhanced radar capabilities.AN/APG-81 AESA radar, Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), 360° Distributed Aperture System (DAS), advanced sensor fusion.KLJ-5 AESA radar, chin-mounted IRST, passive electro-optical detection system with 360° coverage, advanced sensor fusion.
Standard Internal A/A Armament6x AIM-120 AMRAAM, 2x AIM-9 Sidewinder.4x AIM-120 AMRAAM.4x PL-15 (long-range), 2x PL-10 (short-range).
Network Integration Role“Hunter-Killer” that receives data from the network to find and destroy high-end threats. Limited data-out capability compared to F-35.“Quarterback of the Skies.” Gathers, fuses, and distributes data across the joint force, acting as a forward, survivable C2 and ISR node.Forward battle manager and sensor node. Uses LPI data links to cue non-stealthy shooters. J-20S variant enhances UAS control and C2.

Section 1: Strategy I – Systems Destruction: The Decapitation Strike

Adversary TTPs

The purest expression of the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” doctrine is a multi-domain, synchronized decapitation strike executed in the opening moments of a conflict. The objective is not merely to inflict damage but to induce systemic paralysis by severing the command, control, and communications (C3) pathways that constitute the “brain and nervous system” of U.S. and allied forces. The PLAAF commander’s primary goal will be to collapse our ability to direct a coherent defense, creating chaos and decision-making paralysis that can be exploited by follow-on forces.

This attack will be meticulously planned and executed across multiple domains simultaneously. Kinetically, the PLA Rocket Force (PLARF) will launch waves of long-range precision-strike munitions, including theater ballistic and cruise missiles, against fixed, high-value C2 nodes such as Combined Air Operations Centers (CAOCs), major headquarters, and key satellite ground stations. Concurrently, the PLA’s Cyberspace Force (CSF) will unleash a barrage of offensive cyber operations designed to disrupt, degrade, and corrupt our command networks from within. This “information offense” is intended to destroy the integrity of our data and undermine trust in our own systems. In the electromagnetic spectrum, PLA electronic warfare (EW) assets will conduct widespread jamming of satellite communications and GPS signals, aiming to isolate deployed forces and sever their links to strategic command.

This physical and virtual assault will be augmented by operations in the space and cognitive domains. The PLA Aerospace Force (ASF) will likely employ a range of anti-satellite (ASAT) capabilities, from co-orbital kinetic kill vehicles to ground-based directed energy weapons, to blind our ISR satellites and degrade our PNT (positioning, navigation, and timing) constellations. Finally, a sophisticated cognitive warfare campaign will be launched, disseminating targeted disinformation to sow confusion among decision-makers and fracture the political will of the U.S. and its allies to respond effectively. This concept of “Social A2/AD” seeks to defeat a response before it can even be mounted by compromising the socio-political fabric of the target nation.

USAF Counter-Maneuver: The Resilient Network

The U.S. counter to a decapitation strategy is not to build thicker walls around our command centers but to eliminate them as single points of failure. The doctrinal response is rooted in the principles of decentralization and resilience, embodied by the Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) framework. JADC2 is designed to create a distributed, self-healing, and resilient network that can absorb an initial blow and continue to function effectively, moving both data and decision-making authority to the tactical edge. If a primary C2 node is destroyed, its functions are seamlessly transferred to subordinate or alternate nodes across the network, ensuring operational continuity.

In this construct, the F-35 Lightning II fleet becomes a pivotal asset. With its advanced sensor fusion capabilities and robust, low-probability-of-intercept data links, a flight of F-35s can function as a forward-deployed, airborne C2 and ISR node. These aircraft can collect, process, and disseminate a comprehensive battlespace picture to other assets in the theater, effectively acting as the “quarterback of the skies” even if their connection to rear-echelon command has been severed. They transform from being mere strike platforms into the distributed “brain” of the combat force.

This distributed C2 architecture will be supported by a multi-layered and redundant communications network, leveraging proliferated low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations, resilient line-of-sight data links, and emerging technologies designed to operate in a heavily contested electromagnetic environment. Critically, this technological resilience is matched by a philosophical shift in command: the empowerment of tactical leaders through the principle of “mission command.” A key enabler of Agile Combat Employment, mission command grants subordinate commanders the authority to make decisions based on their understanding of the higher commander’s intent, rather than waiting for explicit instructions from a centralized headquarters. This accelerates our decision-making cycle, allowing us to operate inside the adversary’s, and turns the PLA’s attack on our physical C2 infrastructure into a strike against a target that is no longer there.

Section 2: Strategy II – The Long-Range Attrition Campaign: Hunting the Enablers

Adversary TTPs

Recognizing that U.S. airpower in the vast Indo-Pacific theater is critically dependent on a logistical backbone of high-value airborne assets (HVAAs), a PLAAF commander will execute a long-range attrition campaign designed to cripple our operational endurance and reach. The primary targets of this campaign are not our frontline fighters, but the “enablers” that support them: aerial refueling tankers (KC-46, KC-135), ISR platforms (AWACS, Rivet Joint), and other specialized support aircraft. By destroying these assets, the PLA can effectively ground entire fighter wings and achieve area denial without needing to win a direct confrontation.

The key instrument for this strategy is the combination of the J-20 stealth fighter and the PL-15 very-long-range air-to-air missile (AAM). The PLAAF will employ J-20s to leverage their low-observable characteristics, allowing them to bypass our fighter screens and penetrate deep into what we consider “safe” airspace. Their mission is not to engage in dogfights with F-22s, but to achieve a firing solution on HVAAs operating hundreds of miles behind the main line of conflict.

The PL-15 missile, with its estimated operational range of 200-300 km and a dual-pulsed rocket motor that provides a terminal energy boost, is purpose-built for this task. The missile’s capability allows a J-20 to launch from well beyond the engagement range of our own fighters’ AAMs, creating a significant standoff threat. As demonstrated in the 2025 India-Pakistan conflict, the effective range of the PL-15 can be dangerously underestimated, providing adversary pilots with a false sense of security and leading to catastrophic losses. A salvo of PL-15s fired at a tanker formation forces a stark choice: abort the refueling mission and concede operational reach, or risk destruction. This targeting process will be enabled by a networked system of sensors, including over-the-horizon radars and satellites, which can provide cuing data to the J-20s, allowing them to remain passive and undetected for as long as possible.

USAF Counter-Maneuver: The Layered Shield

Countering this long-range threat requires extending our integrated air defense far beyond the immediate combat zone to protect the logistical and ISR assets that form the foundation of our air campaign. This cannot be a purely defensive posture; it must be a proactive, multi-layered shield designed to hunt the archer before he can release his arrow.

The F-22 Raptor is the centerpiece of this counter-maneuver. Its primary mission in this scenario is offensive counter-air, specifically to hunt and destroy the J-20s that threaten our HVAAs. With its superior stealth characteristics, supercruise capability, and powerful AN/APG-77 AESA radar, the F-22 is the asset best equipped to detect, track, and engage a J-20 before it can reach its PL-15 launch parameters. Continuous modernization of the F-22 fleet, including upgraded sensors, software, and potentially podded IRST systems, is therefore a strategic imperative to maintain this critical qualitative edge.

Operating in coordination with the F-22s, flights of F-35s will act as a forward “sanitizer” screen for the HVAAs. Using their powerful, networked sensors like the Distributed Aperture System (DAS) to passively scan vast volumes of airspace, the F-35s will serve as a persistent early warning layer. They can detect the faint signatures of inbound stealth threats and use their data links to vector F-22s for the intercept, creating a networked hunter-killer team. This layered defense will be augmented by dedicated fighter escorts for HVAAs, a departure from recent operational norms. Furthermore, we must accelerate the development of next-generation, low-observable tankers and unmanned ISR platforms that can operate with greater survivability in contested environments. Finally, HVAAs themselves must adopt more dynamic and unpredictable operational patterns, employing strict emissions control (EMCON) and randomized orbits to complicate the PLA’s targeting problem.

Section 3: Strategy III – The A2/AD Saturation Attack: Overwhelming the Bubble

Adversary TTPs

A central pillar of China’s military strategy is the creation of a formidable Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) capability designed to make it prohibitively costly for U.S. forces to operate within the First and Second Island Chains. In a conflict, a PLAAF commander will leverage this capability to execute a massive, synchronized, multi-domain saturation attack aimed at overwhelming the defensive capacity of a key operational hub, such as a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) or a major airbase like Kadena or Andersen.

The execution of this strategy will involve coordinated waves of aircraft designed to saturate defenses through sheer mass. J-20s, potentially operating in a “beast mode” configuration with externally mounted munitions, will sacrifice some stealth for overwhelming firepower to engage defending fighters and suppress air defenses. They will be followed by large formations of J-16 strike fighters and H-6 bombers launching salvos of advanced munitions, including the YJ-12 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile. These manned platforms will be augmented by swarms of unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) and smaller drones, which will be used to confuse and saturate defensive radars, act as decoys, conduct electronic jamming, and carry out their own kinetic strikes against critical defensive systems like radar arrays and missile launchers.

This aerial assault will occur simultaneously with a multi-axis missile barrage from other domains. The PLA Rocket Force will launch salvos of DF-21D and DF-26 “carrier killer” anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), while PLA Navy warships and coastal defense batteries contribute their own volleys of cruise missiles. The entire operation is designed to present a defending force with an insurmountable number of threats arriving from multiple vectors—high and low, supersonic and subsonic, stealthy and conventional—in an extremely compressed timeframe. This complex strike package is enabled and coordinated by a vast C4ISR network of satellites, over-the-horizon radars, and forward-deployed sensors that provide the real-time targeting data necessary to find, fix, and engage U.S. forces.

USAF Counter-Maneuver: Agile Combat Employment (ACE)

The doctrinal counter to a saturation attack is not to build an impenetrable shield, but to deny the adversary a concentrated target. Agile Combat Employment (ACE) is the USAF’s operational concept for maneuver and dispersal, designed to fundamentally break the adversary’s targeting model by complicating it to the point of failure. ACE shifts air operations from large, centralized, and vulnerable Main Operating Bases (MOBs) to a distributed network of smaller, dispersed locations.

Instead of concentrating combat power on a few well-known airfields, ACE prescribes the dispersal of forces into smaller, more agile packages across a wide array of locations, including allied military bases, smaller contingency airfields, and even civilian airports in a “hub-and-spoke” model. This forces the PLA to divide its limited inventory of high-end munitions against dozens of potential targets rather than a few, drastically diluting the effectiveness of a saturation strike. ACE, however, is not static dispersal; it is a “proactive and reactive operational scheme of maneuver”. Force packages will constantly shift between these dispersed locations based on threat assessments and operational needs, making it impossible for the PLA to predict where U.S. combat power will be generated from at any given time.

This operational concept is enabled by two key innovations: Multi-Capable Airmen (MCAs) and pre-positioned materiel. MCAs are personnel trained in multiple skill sets outside their primary specialty, such as aircraft refueling, re-arming, and basic security. This allows a small, lean team to deploy to an austere location, rapidly service and relaunch aircraft, and then redeploy, minimizing the logistical footprint and personnel vulnerability at any single site. To support these rapid “turn and burn” operations, the “posture” element of ACE requires the pre-positioning of fuel, munitions, and essential equipment at these dispersed locations. By transforming our airpower from a fixed, predictable target into a distributed, mobile, and resilient force, ACE imposes immense cost, complexity, and uncertainty onto the adversary’s targeting cycle.

Section 4: Strategy IV – The Stealth Quarterback: J-20 as a Forward Battle Manager

Adversary TTPs

Beyond its role as an interceptor, the PLAAF is developing sophisticated tactics to leverage the J-20’s stealth and advanced sensors as a forward battle manager, enabling strikes by a network of non-stealthy platforms. This represents a mature application of their “network-centric warfare” concept, mirroring some of the most advanced U.S. operational constructs. The objective is to use the J-20 as a survivable, forward-deployed sensor to create a high-fidelity targeting picture deep within contested airspace, which is then used to direct standoff attacks from “arsenal planes.”

In this scenario, a small element of J-20s would penetrate U.S. and allied air defenses, employing strict EMCON procedures. They would use their suite of passive and low-emission sensors—including their AESA radar in a low-probability-of-intercept mode, their chin-mounted IRST, and their 360-degree electro-optical systems—to build a detailed, real-time picture of our force disposition without emitting signals that would betray their own position.

Once high-value targets are identified and tracked, the J-20 acts as a “quarterback,” using a secure, LPI data link to transmit precise targeting information to shooters operating outside the range of our primary air defenses. These shooters could be J-16 strike fighters laden with long-range air-to-air or anti-ship missiles, or even PLA Navy surface combatants. The introduction of the twin-seat J-20S variant is a significant force multiplier for this tactic. It is not a trainer; it is a dedicated combat aircraft where the second crew member can act as a weapons systems officer and battle manager, focused on processing sensor data, controlling unmanned “loyal wingman” drones, and managing the flow of targeting data to the network. This frees the pilot to concentrate on the demanding tasks of flying and surviving in a high-threat environment and signals a clear commitment to advanced, “intelligentized” manned-unmanned teaming.

USAF Counter-Maneuver: Shattering the Network

Defeating the “stealth quarterback” strategy requires attacking the entire kill chain, not just the platform itself. The counter-maneuver must focus on both detecting the J-20 and, just as critically, severing the fragile data links that connect the forward sensor to its shooters.

Detecting a low-observable platform like the J-20 requires a multi-spectrum, networked approach to counter-stealth. No single sensor is likely to maintain a consistent track. Instead, a composite track file will be built by fusing intermittent data from a distributed network of sensors. This network includes the F-35’s 360-degree DAS, the F-22’s powerful AESA radar, space-based infrared warning systems, and naval assets like Aegis-equipped destroyers. Once the network establishes a probable track of a hostile stealth aircraft, the F-22 Raptor is vectored to prosecute the target. As the premier air dominance fighter, the F-22’s unique combination of stealth, speed, and advanced avionics makes it the most effective platform for the lethal end of the counter-stealth mission: hunting and destroying other stealth aircraft.

Simultaneously, U.S. electronic warfare assets, such as the EA-18G Growler, will focus on jamming and disrupting the specific LPI data links the J-20 relies on to communicate with its network of shooters. If this link can be broken, the J-20 is transformed from a potent battle manager into an isolated sensor, unable to guide weapons to their targets. This EW assault will be complemented by the use of sophisticated decoys and deception techniques. By feeding the J-20’s advanced sensors with false targets and conflicting information, we can sow confusion, cause it to misdirect its shooters, or force it to emit more powerful radar signals to verify the data, thereby revealing its own position. This creates a complex battle of stealthy networks, where victory belongs to the side that can best manage its own signature while detecting and disrupting the enemy’s.

Section 5: Strategy V – Vertical Envelopment: The Airfield Seizure

Adversary TTPs

In a potential conflict over Taiwan, a high-risk, high-reward strategy available to the PLA is a vertical envelopment operation using airborne forces to rapidly seize critical infrastructure. The objective would be to capture key airports or seaports, bypassing Taiwan’s heavily defended coastal landing zones. This would create a strategic lodgment for the rapid introduction of follow-on forces and supplies, potentially unhinging the island’s entire defense plan. This is a fundamentally joint operation in which the PLAAF serves as the critical enabler.

The execution would involve the PLAAF’s growing fleet of Y-20 strategic transport aircraft, tasked with airlifting elements of the PLAAF Airborne Corps. These airborne units are no longer lightly armed paratroopers; they have been modernized into combined-arms brigades equipped with their own light armored fighting vehicles, artillery, and drones. Furthermore, they have benefited from Russian training in advanced airborne command and control systems, enhancing their operational effectiveness.

Such an operation is only feasible if the PLAAF can establish and maintain a temporary bubble of local air superiority over the designated landing zones. This implies that the preceding strategies—the decapitation strike and A2/AD saturation attack—must have been at least partially successful in degrading or suppressing Taiwanese and U.S. air defense capabilities. The slow and vulnerable Y-20 transports would require a heavy fighter escort of J-20s, J-16s, and J-10s to fend off interceptors, along with dedicated Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) and EW aircraft to neutralize any remaining surface-to-air missile (SAM) threats.

USAF Counter-Maneuver: Interdicting the Assault

Countering a vertical envelopment presents a time-critical targeting problem. The transport aircraft must be engaged and destroyed before they can land and disgorge their troops and equipment. Failure to interdict this force in transit could dramatically and perhaps decisively alter the course of the ground campaign.

The first priority is to engage the transport force at the maximum possible range. U.S. stealth fighters, the F-22 and F-35, will be tasked with penetrating the Chinese fighter escort screen to target the high-value Y-20s. The transports themselves are large, non-maneuvering targets, making them ideal for long-range AAM engagements. The success of this interdiction mission hinges on our ability to win the preceding battle for air superiority, creating windows of opportunity for our fighters to strike.

This mission cannot be undertaken by the USAF alone; it demands seamless coordination with allied forces. The Republic of China Air Force (ROCAF) and the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) would form crucial layers of the defense, engaging the transport force as it approaches the island. Beyond air assets, U.S. Navy submarines can play a vital role by launching precision cruise missile strikes against the designated landing airfields on Taiwan. By cratering the runways, these strikes could prevent the Y-20s from landing even if they manage to penetrate the air defenses. Finally, if ISR capabilities permit, long-range strikes will be launched against the airfields on the mainland from which the airborne assault is being staged, aiming to destroy the transports on the ground before they can even take off. This brittle but powerful PLA operation represents a strategic center of gravity; its decisive defeat would have a disproportionate psychological and operational impact on the entire invasion effort.

Conclusion: Winning the Contest of Speed and Resilience

An air confrontation with the People’s Liberation Army Air Force will not be a simple contest of platform versus platform. It will be a dynamic and complex struggle between two highly capable, networked, and intelligent military systems, each guided by a distinct and coherent operational doctrine. The PLAAF’s strategies are not merely a collection of tactics; they are an integrated approach designed to execute a “systems destruction” campaign aimed at the core tenets of traditional American power projection: our centralized command, our logistical reach, and our forward-based posture.

Victory in this new era of air combat will not be determined by marginal advantages in aircraft performance or weapon range. It will be decided by which side can more effectively execute its core doctrine under the immense pressures of multi-domain conflict. The central questions are clear: Can the PLA successfully orchestrate the immense complexity of a synchronized, multi-domain “systems destruction” strike? And conversely, can the United States successfully execute a distributed, resilient, and agile “systems preservation” and counter-attack through the principles of ACE and JADC2?

The ultimate U.S. advantage in this contest lies not in any single piece of hardware, but in the synergistic combination of our advanced technology, our evolving doctrine, and our unmatched network of capable allies and partners. While the PLA has made enormous strides, it remains a force that would largely fight alone in a major conflict. In contrast, U.S. operational plans are deeply integrated with the formidable capabilities of allies such as Japan, Australia, and South Korea. This coalition creates a strategic dilemma for China that is exponentially more complex than a simple bilateral confrontation. The integrated power of this combined, networked, and resilient joint force remains our most potent and enduring advantage in the contest for air dominance.

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. Mapping the Recent Trends in China’s Military Modernisation – 2025, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.orfonline.org/research/mapping-the-recent-trends-in-china-s-military-modernisation-2025
  2. The Cognitive Crucible Episode #113 Jeff Engstrom on Chinese Systems Warfare, accessed October 3, 2025, https://information-professionals.org/episode/cognitive-crucible-episode-113/
  3. Gaining Victory in Systems Warfare: China’s Perspective on the U.S. …, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1535-1.html
  4. Gaining Victory in Systems Warfare (China’s Perspective on the U.S.-China Military Balance) – RAND Corp : r/CredibleDefense – Reddit, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/11s2fnv/gaining_victory_in_systems_warfare_chinas/
  5. Finding the Right Model: The Joint Force, the People’s Liberation Army, and Information Warfare – Air University, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/3371164/finding-the-right-model-the-joint-force-the-peoples-liberation-army-and-informa/
  6. Defense Primer: Agile Combat Employment (ACE) Concept – Congress.gov, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IF/PDF/IF12694/IF12694.4.pdf
  7. Joint All-Domain Command and Control – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_All-Domain_Command_and_Control
  8. Defense Primer: Agile Combat Employment (ACE) Concept – Congress.gov, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12694
  9. Summary of the Joint All-Domain Command and Control Strategy – DoD, accessed October 3, 2025, https://media.defense.gov/2022/Mar/17/2002958406/-1/-1/1/SUMMARY-OF-THE-JOINT-ALL-DOMAIN-COMMAND-AND-CONTROL-STRATEGY.pdf
  10. Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
  11. F-22 Raptor – Lockheed Martin, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-22.html
  12. About the F-35, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.f35.com/f35/about.html
  13. 5th Gen Capabilities – F-35 Lightning II, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.f35.com/f35/about/5th-gen-capabilities.html
  14. J-20 Mighty Dragon vs. the World: 5 Strengths That Make China’s Stealth Jet a Problem, accessed October 3, 2025, https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/j-20-mighty-dragon-vs-the-world-5-strengths-that-make-chinas-stealth-jet-a-problem/
  15. Chengdu J-20 – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20
  16. Lockheed Eyes Upgrades For Oldest F-22 Raptors – The War Zone, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.twz.com/air/lockheed-eyes-upgrades-for-oldest-f-22-raptors
  17. AIR COMBAT COMMAND – AF.mil, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.388fw.acc.af.mil/Portals/103/F35A_LightningII_ACC%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
  18. F-35A Lightning II > Air Force > Fact Sheet Display – AF.mil, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/478441/f-35a-lightning-ii/
  19. Does China’s J-20 Rival Other Stealth Fighters? | ChinaPower Project, accessed October 3, 2025, https://chinapower.csis.org/china-chengdu-j-20/
  20. F-35 Lightning II | Lockheed Martin, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-35.html
  21. PL-15 (Thunderbolt-15) Chinese Active Radar-Guided Very Long Range Air-to-Air Missile, accessed October 3, 2025, https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/PL-15_(Thunderbolt-15)_Chinese_Active_Radar-Guided_Very_Long_Range_Air-to-Air_Missile
  22. GAO-23-105495, BATTLE MANAGEMENT: DOD and Air Force Continue to Define Joint Command and Control Efforts, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-105495.pdf
  23. China’s J-20S Stealth Fighter Explained in 3 Words – The National Interest, accessed October 3, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/chinas-j-20s-stealth-fighter-explained-3-words-213676
  24. Anti-access/area denial – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-access/area_denial
  25. Chinese information operations and information warfare – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_information_operations_and_information_warfare
  26. The Challenge of Dis-Integrating A2/AD Zone: How Emerging Technologies Are Shifting the Balance Back to the Defense – NDU Press, accessed October 3, 2025, https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/2106488/the-challenge-of-dis-integrating-a2ad-zone-how-emerging-technologies-are-shifti/
  27. Social Antiaccess/Area-Denial (Social A2/AD) – Marine Corps University, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/MCU-Journal/JAMS-vol-12-no-1/Social-Antiaccess-Area-Denial-Social-A2-AD/
  28. Joint All-Domain Command and Control – JADC2 – SAIC, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.saic.com/what-we-do/mission-it/jadc2
  29. Pathways to Implementing Comprehensive and Collaborative JADC2 – CSIS, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/pathways-implementing-comprehensive-and-collaborative-jadc2
  30. AGILE COMBAT EMPLOYMENT – Air Force Doctrine, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.doctrine.af.mil/Portals/61/documents/AFDN_1-21/AFDN%201-21%20ACE.pdf
  31. PL-15 Abaddon Missile – CAT-UXO, accessed October 3, 2025, https://cat-uxo.com/explosive-hazards/missiles/pl-15-missile
  32. PL-15 – Wikipedia, accessed October 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-15
  33. India Paid the Price for Underestimating China’s PL-15 Missiles …, accessed October 3, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/india-paid-price-underestimating-chinas-pl-15-missiles-ps-080625
  34. We Know Why the Air Force is Pouring Money Into the F-22 Raptor, accessed October 3, 2025, https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/we-know-why-the-air-force-is-pouring-money-into-the-f-22-raptor/
  35. China’s A2/AD strategy – Fly a jet fighter, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.flyajetfighter.com/chinas-a2-ad-strategy/
  36. China’s Anti-Access/Area-Denial Strategy – TDHJ.org, accessed October 3, 2025, https://tdhj.org/blog/post/china-a2ad-strategy/
  37. China’s J-20 Flying in ‘Beast Mode’ Again with Eight Air-to-Air Missiles – The Aviationist, accessed October 3, 2025, https://theaviationist.com/2025/09/29/china-j-20-beast-mode-again/
  38. YJ-12 | Weaponsystems.net, accessed October 3, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/1221-YJ-12
  39. China builds smaller but more capable air force – Defence Blog, accessed October 3, 2025, https://defence-blog.com/china-builds-smaller-but-more-capable-air-force/
  40. Attaining All-domain Control: China’s Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) Capabilities in the South China Sea – Pacific Forum, accessed October 3, 2025, https://pacforum.org/publications/issues-insights-issues-and-insights-volume-25-wp-2-attaining-all-domain-control-chinas-anti-access-area-denial-a2-ad-capabilities-in-the-south-china-sea/
  41. Agile Combat Employment Interoperability and Integration – Air University, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Wild-Blue-Yonder/Articles/Article-Display/Article/4008841/agile-combat-employment-interoperability-and-integration/
  42. Agile Combat Employment – Joint Air Power Competence Centre, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.japcc.org/articles/agile-combat-employment/
  43. CSAF signs Agile Combat Employment doctrine note – Joint Base Charleston, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.jbcharleston.jb.mil/News/Article/2887386/csaf-signs-agile-combat-employment-doctrine-note/
  44. Russia quietly arming China’s paratroopers for Taiwan fight – Asia Times, accessed October 3, 2025, https://asiatimes.com/2025/10/russia-quietly-arming-chinas-paratroopers-for-taiwan-fight/

Russia is helping prepare China to attack Taiwan, documents suggest, accessed October 3, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/09/26/russia-china-weapons-sales-air-assault/

Analytics and Reports, Military Analytics, Special Operations Forces (SOF) / Special Mission Units (SMUs) Analytics

From Frogmen to Commandos: An Analytical History of the Philippine Naval Special Operations Command

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the Philippine Naval Special Operations Command (NAVSOCOM), documenting its evolution from a small, specialized unit into a command-level strategic asset for the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). The command’s history is a direct reflection of the Philippines’ shifting national security priorities, beginning with a focus on maritime law enforcement and internal security, maturing through decades of intense counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism campaigns, and now pivoting towards external territorial defense.

Established in 1956 as the Underwater Operations Team (UOT), the unit’s initial mandate was limited to traditional combat diver and underwater demolition tasks. However, driven by the operational demands of persistent internal conflicts, its mission set, organizational structure, and capabilities expanded significantly over the subsequent decades. This culminated in its elevation to a full command in 2020, granting it co-equal status with major AFP units and formally recognizing its strategic importance. Throughout its history, NAVSOCOM’s doctrine, training, and equipment have been profoundly influenced by its close relationship with United States Naval Special Warfare, resulting in a high degree of interoperability with its U.S. Navy SEAL counterparts.

Today, NAVSOCOM stands as a battle-hardened, multi-mission special operations force and a key component of the AFP’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). Its operators are equipped with a modern arsenal of specialized small arms, differentiating them from conventional forces. As the AFP implements its ambitious ‘Re-Horizon 3′ modernization program and the new Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept (CADC), NAVSOCOM is poised for another significant transformation. Its future role is projected to expand beyond direct action and counter-terrorism to become a critical enabler for the Philippines’ archipelagic defense strategy, undertaking missions such as special reconnaissance, support to subsurface warfare, and anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) operations in a complex maritime environment.

Section 1: Genesis and Organizational Evolution (1956-Present)

The organizational development of the Philippine Naval Special Operations Command is a direct barometer of the nation’s security challenges. Its progression from a small team focused on basic maritime tasks to a full-fledged command mirrors the Philippines’ journey from post-war maritime policing to fighting prolonged internal insurgencies and, more recently, confronting state-based threats in its maritime domain.

1.1 The Underwater Operations Team: Forging a Capability in the Post-War Navy (1956-1960s)

The conceptual origins of NAVSOCOM lie in the operational imperatives of the newly formed Philippine Navy in the mid-1950s. The unit was conceived by then-Lieutenant Ramon N. Baluyot during naval operations in the Sulu Sea Frontier, a region rife with dissidence and piracy.1 This context highlights that the requirement was born from a tangible internal security and maritime law enforcement need.

Based on Headquarters Philippine Navy (HPN) General Orders No. 17, the Underwater Operations Team (UOT) was officially activated on November 5, 1956.1 The initial force was modest, comprising just one officer and six enlisted personnel.1 From its inception, the unit’s doctrinal foundation was uniquely hybrid. It was patterned after both the United States Navy’s Underwater Demolition Teams (UDT), the direct predecessors to the SEALs specializing in hydrographic reconnaissance and demolition, and Italy’s famed

Decima Flottiglia MAS, renowned for unconventional warfare and sabotage against naval targets.1 This dual influence suggests a foundational vision that was more ambitious than a simple combat diver team, establishing a conceptual framework that embraced both conventional support and asymmetric warfare. This foresight facilitated its later, seamless transition into a full-spectrum special operations force.

The UOT’s initial mission set was clearly defined, focusing on underwater operations in support of the fleet, including underwater explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), mine countermeasures, salvage operations, and search and rescue.2 An early indicator of the Navy’s commitment to this specialized capability was the procurement in 1961-62 of three Italian-made Cosmos CE2F/X60 Swimmer Delivery Vehicles (SDVs), a sophisticated technology for the era.1

1.2 A Period of Growth and Redesignation (1970s-2000s)

As the AFP became more deeply embroiled in combating the communist insurgency led by the New People’s Army (NPA) and the Islamic separatist movements in Mindanao, the UOT’s role and structure evolved to meet these expanding threats. This period was characterized by a series of redesignations that reflected the unit’s growing size and broadening mission scope beyond purely underwater tasks.

The key organizational changes were 1:

  • Underwater Operations Unit (UOU): Redesignated in 1959, marking an expansion from a team to a formal unit.
  • Underwater Operations Group (UOG): Evolved into a group-level organization in the years following 1964.
  • Special Warfare Group (SWAG): Renamed in 1983, a significant shift in nomenclature indicating a formal expansion into unconventional warfare.
  • Naval Special Warfare Group (NSWG): Adopted in the 1990s, aligning its designation more closely with its U.S. counterpart, the Naval Special Warfare Command.
  • Naval Special Operations Group (NAVSOG): Redesignated on May 30, 2005.

This progression of names is not merely administrative; it tracks the doctrinal shift from a specialized support element to a dedicated special operations force capable of operating across the domains of sea, air, and land—the core tenet of a SEAL unit.

1.3 The Birth of a Command: NAVSOCOM (2020-Present)

The most significant organizational milestone occurred on July 7, 2020, when the unit was elevated to the Naval Special Operations Command (NAVSOCOM).2 This was a landmark event, separating NAVSOCOM from the administrative control of the Philippine Fleet and establishing it as a regular combat support command. This structural change formally recognized the unit as a strategic asset for the entire AFP, capable of independent planning and operations across the full spectrum of conflict.

The current command structure is headquartered at Naval Base Heracleo Alano, Sangley Point, Cavite, and comprises six functional Type Groups 2:

  • SEAL Group (SEALG)
  • Special Boat Group (SBG)
  • Naval Diving Group (NDG)
  • Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal Group (NEODG)
  • Combat Service Support Group (CSSG)
  • NAVSPECOPNS Training and Doctrine Center (NSOTDC)

Operationally, NAVSOCOM is a component of the AFP Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). This places it within a unified structure alongside the AFP’s other elite units, including the Philippine Army’s Light Reaction Regiment, Special Forces Regiment, and 1st Scout Ranger Regiment, and the Philippine Marine Corps’ Marine Special Operations Group (MARSOG).2 This integration ensures that NAVSOCOM’s unique maritime and riverine capabilities can be effectively synchronized with the land-based expertise of its sister services during joint operations.

Section 2: The Evolution of Doctrine, Tactics, and Operations

NAVSOCOM’s tactical and operational history has been forged in the crucible of real-world combat, evolving from a niche support element to a versatile and decisive special operations force. Its doctrinal development has been shaped by decades of counter-insurgency, high-intensity urban counter-terrorism, and a deep, continuous partnership with U.S. Naval Special Warfare.

2.1 Early Engagements: From Underwater Demolition to Counter-Insurgency Support (1960s-1980s)

In its early years as the UOU, the unit’s primary tactical function was to support larger conventional amphibious operations conducted by the Philippine Marine Corps. This role was demonstrated in two key operations in 1973 against Moro insurgents. During Operation Pamukpok (July 1973) and Operation Batikus (September 1973), UOU teams were attached to Marine landing forces, tasked with conducting pre-assault reconnaissance and clearing underwater obstacles, textbook UDT missions.1

However, the unit quickly demonstrated its capacity for more complex direct-action missions. A notable example occurred on March 5, 1975, during an amphibious landing in Tuburan, Basilan. A UOU team led by Ensign Renato A. Caspillo was tasked with a deep penetration and reconnaissance mission up the Kandiis River to locate and destroy an enemy arms cache. After successfully completing the mission, the team came under heavy fire during withdrawal. Ensign Caspillo was wounded but continued to provide covering fire, ordering the recovery boat to “Recover all Divers, never mind me.” His actions, which saved his team at the cost of his own life, exemplified the combat leadership and direct-action capability that would become hallmarks of the unit.1

2.2 The Counter-Terrorism Crucible: Zamboanga and Marawi (1990s-2017)

The battles for Zamboanga City in 2013 and Marawi City in 2017 served as tactical and doctrinal inflection points for the command. These prolonged, high-intensity urban conflicts forced NAVSOCOM (then NAVSOG) to rapidly evolve beyond its traditional maritime skill set and develop proficiency in sustained urban warfare.

  • Zamboanga Siege (2013): When hundreds of Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) fighters infiltrated and occupied coastal districts of Zamboanga City, NAVSOG was among the first elite units to respond. The initial engagement of the crisis was a sea encounter between rebels and operators from Naval Special Operations Unit Six (NAVSOU 6).7 Subsequently, four NAVSOG units were deployed to establish a naval blockade, preventing MNLF reinforcements from arriving by sea, and to engage in house-to-house fighting alongside the Army’s Light Reaction Battalion (LRB).7 Operating under the Joint Special Operations Group (JSOG), NAVSOG’s expertise in waterborne operations complemented the LRB’s premier close-quarters combat (CQC) skills, proving the value of joint SOF operations in a complex urban-littoral environment.9
  • Battle of Marawi (2017): The five-month siege of Marawi by thousands of ISIS-affiliated militants presented an even greater challenge. While Army and Marine units bore the brunt of the block-by-block clearing, NAVSOCOM provided a unique and strategically critical capability: control of Lake Lanao.2 Operators patrolled the lake, which bordered the main battle area, interdicting enemy fighters attempting to use the waterway to escape, resupply, or reinforce their positions.11 This proactive application of core maritime skills to solve a critical problem in a land-locked, urban campaign demonstrated remarkable adaptability. This experience created a valuable and rare doctrine for riverine and littoral control in support of large-scale urban combat, a capability few special operations forces in the world possess.

2.3 Modern Engagements: Maritime Security and Territorial Defense (2018-Present)

Following the conclusion of major combat operations in Marawi, NAVSOCOM’s focus began to pivot in alignment with the AFP’s broader shift from internal security to external territorial defense. This has led to the command’s employment in a new and strategically significant role: asserting Philippine sovereignty in the contested waters of the South China Sea.

This shift is most evident in the use of NAVSOCOM operators and their Rigid-Hulled Inflatable Boats (RHIBs) during resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, the Philippine outpost at Second Thomas Shoal (Ayungin Shoal).13 Historically, such missions were conducted by civilian or Philippine Coast Guard vessels. The deliberate inclusion of naval special forces marks a militarization of the Philippine response to gray zone coercion tactics. This new mission is not a traditional special operation; it is a high-visibility sovereignty patrol where the primary objective is presence and resolve. This places operators in a high-stakes environment where tactical actions have immediate geopolitical consequences, requiring a different mindset focused on rules of engagement, de-escalation, and operating under intense international scrutiny. The high physical and political risks of this new role were underscored in a June 2024 incident where a NAVSOCOM operator was severely injured during a confrontation with the China Coast Guard.2

Concurrently, the command continues to refine its tactics for littoral interdiction and the protection of critical maritime infrastructure, such as offshore gas and oil platforms, a key component of national economic security.13

2.4 The U.S. Influence: Joint Training and Interoperability

The evolution of NAVSOCOM’s doctrine and tactics cannot be understood without acknowledging the profound and continuous influence of its U.S. counterparts. The unit is officially described as being “heavily influenced by the United States Navy SEALs”.2 This relationship is maintained and strengthened through a consistent tempo of advanced, bilateral training exercises.

Annual exercises such as Balikatan and more specialized Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) events are critical for honing advanced skills and ensuring interoperability.14 These engagements provide NAVSOCOM operators with opportunities to train alongside U.S. Navy SEALs in complex scenarios, including maritime counter-terrorism, advanced CQC, small unit tactics in jungle and maritime settings, and specialized tasks like Gas and Oil Platform (GOPLAT) recovery.14 The result of this decades-long partnership is a high degree of shared tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), allowing for seamless integration during combined operations and ensuring that NAVSOCOM’s capabilities remain aligned with the highest international special operations standards.14

Section 3: Armament and Technology: From Frogman’s Kit to Tier 1 Arsenal

NAVSOCOM’s small arms inventory reflects its status as an elite special operations force, demonstrating a procurement philosophy that prioritizes best-in-class, specialized platforms over the standard-issue equipment of the wider AFP. This approach ensures a qualitative edge in high-risk operations and reflects the strong influence of its U.S. counterparts. The command’s arsenal has evolved from utilizing modified service rifles to fielding a suite of modern weapons comparable to those used by top-tier international SOF units.

3.1 Legacy Systems and the Shift to Modern Platforms

In its early days, the unit relied on specialized equipment like the Cosmos SDVs for clandestine underwater insertion.1 Its small arms were largely drawn from the standard AFP inventory, primarily the M16A1 rifle and the M14 battle rifle. A crucial early development, born out of operational need and fiscal constraints, was the creation of the Marine Scout Sniper Rifle (MSSR). This program took existing M16A1 receivers and heavily modified them with new barrels, triggers, and optics to create an effective 5.56mm designated marksman rifle, demonstrating an early drive for specialized precision firepower.17

3.2 Current Small Arms Inventory: A Detailed Analysis

NAVSOCOM’s current arsenal is a mix of high-end imported firearms and proven, indigenously adapted systems. This pragmatic approach provides operators with reliable, state-of-the-art tools tailored to their diverse mission set.

3.2.1 Primary Carbines

The command employs a two-tiered approach to its primary carbines. This allows it to field premier platforms for specialized tasks while maintaining logistical commonality with the broader AFP.

  • Heckler & Koch HK416: This is a primary assault rifle for NAVSOCOM SEAL teams.2 Manufactured in Germany, the HK416 is a 5.56x45mm NATO carbine that utilizes a short-stroke gas piston system, a design renowned for its high reliability, especially in maritime environments and when suppressed. Its adoption signifies a deliberate choice to align with premier SOF units like U.S. DEVGRU and Delta Force, which favor the platform. NAVSOCOM is known to use variants with both 11-inch and 14.5-inch barrels, allowing for optimization between maneuverability in CQC and effective range.19
  • Remington R4: This carbine, based on the M4A1 platform, is also in service with the unit.2 As a U.S.-made, direct impingement gas-operated rifle chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, the R4 (specifically the R4A3 model) was part of a major AFP-wide acquisition to replace aging M16 rifles.23 NAVSOCOM’s use of this platform ensures interoperability and shared logistics with conventional forces, though their carbines are typically outfitted with a higher grade of accessories, including advanced optics, aiming lasers, and illuminators.

3.2.2 Sidearms

  • Glock 17 Gen4: The standard sidearm for NAVSOCOM is the Glock 17 Gen4.19 This Austrian-made, striker-fired pistol chambered in 9x19mm Luger was adopted as part of a large-scale, AFP-wide pistol acquisition project that replaced the venerable M1911.25 Its selection of a polymer-framed, high-capacity, and exceptionally reliable pistol aligns with global military and law enforcement standards.26

3.2.3 Support Weapons

  • M60E4/E6 General Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG): For squad-level suppressive fire, NAVSOCOM utilizes modernized variants of the American M60 machine gun, chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO.2 The M60E4 and the more recent M60E6 are significant improvements over the Vietnam-era design, featuring enhanced reliability, reduced weight, improved ergonomics, and integrated Picatinny rails for mounting optics and other accessories.29 This weapon provides operators with a proven and powerful medium machine gun capability that is lighter than the M240, the standard GPMG in U.S. service.

3.2.4 Precision Rifles

NAVSOCOM’s inventory of precision rifles demonstrates a sophisticated, multi-platform approach to long-range engagement, blending a high-end semi-automatic system with a versatile, locally-developed rifle.

  • Knight’s Armament Company M110A2 SASS: The M110A2 Semi-Automatic Sniper System is a key precision weapon for the command.2 This U.S.-made rifle is chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO and provides the ability to engage multiple targets or deliver rapid follow-up shots, a critical advantage in both urban combat and maritime interdiction scenarios where targets may be fleeting. The A2 is an improved variant of the standard M110 SASS.32
  • Marine Scout Sniper Rifle (MSSR): NAVSOCOM continues to use a specialized variant of the indigenously developed MSSR.17 While based on a modified M16A1 receiver, the rifle is a purpose-built precision weapon. The variant developed for NAVSOCOM features a 20-inch barrel, shorter than the 24-inch barrel of the Marine Corps version, optimizing it for maneuverability.17 Chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, it provides a lightweight, cost-effective solution for designated marksman roles at intermediate ranges common in archipelagic and jungle environments. The
    Night Fighting Weapon System (NFWS), a derivative with an integral sound suppressor, was also developed for and issued to NAVSOCOM and Marine Force Recon units.18

3.3 Specialized Equipment: Enablers of Modern Naval Special Warfare

Beyond firearms, NAVSOCOM employs critical technology that acts as a force multiplier.

  • Night Vision Devices (NVDs): The ability to operate effectively at night is crucial. The command uses standard PVS-14 monoculars and PVS-31 binocular systems. Notably, some operators have been observed with advanced Elbit Systems XACT NVGs, indicating an effort to acquire and field cutting-edge night-fighting equipment.2
  • Watercraft: Mobility and insertion capability are provided by a fleet of specialized watercraft. The acquisition of 10 new fast boats in December 2020 significantly enhanced the capabilities of the Special Boat Group.2 These, along with RHIBs, are essential for missions ranging from coastal raids to the high-profile resupply operations in the South China Sea.13

Section 4: The Future of NAVSOCOM: Projections and Analysis

The Philippine Naval Special Operations Command is at a strategic crossroads. Driven by a fundamental shift in national defense policy and underwritten by the most ambitious military modernization program in the nation’s history, NAVSOCOM is poised to evolve from a force primarily focused on internal security to a critical instrument of external territorial defense. Its future roles, tactics, and technology will be shaped by the geopolitical realities of the Indo-Pacific and the specific requirements of safeguarding a vast archipelago.

4.1 The Impact of ‘Re-Horizon 3’ Modernization

In January 2024, the Philippine government approved “Re-Horizon 3,” a revamped and expanded 10-year modernization plan for the AFP with a budget of approximately US$35 billion.37 This program prioritizes the development of a credible defense posture and a self-reliant defense industry. While specific procurement lines for NAVSOCOM are not publicly detailed, the program’s overarching focus on acquiring advanced naval, air, and C4ISTAR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance) capabilities will create a new operational ecosystem in which NAVSOCOM’s skills will be indispensable.39 The acquisition of new frigates, offshore patrol vessels, submarines, and shore-based anti-ship missile systems will fundamentally change how the AFP operates, and NAVSOCOM will be a key enabler for these new platforms.

4.2 Evolving Roles in Archipelagic Defense

The strategic guidance for this modernization is the new Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept (CADC), which formally shifts the AFP’s focus from internal counter-insurgency to external defense of the nation’s territory and exclusive economic zone (EEZ).39 Within this framework, NAVSOCOM’s future missions are likely to expand and evolve significantly. The command is on a trajectory to transform from a primarily direct-action force into a critical enabler for the AFP’s joint, multi-domain A2/AD strategy. Its future value will be measured less by kinetic actions alone and more by its ability to provide clandestine access, intelligence, and targeting for other strategic assets.

Potential new and expanded roles include:

  • Maritime Special Reconnaissance (SR): NAVSOCOM is the ideal force to conduct clandestine surveillance and reconnaissance of contested maritime features and adversary naval movements within the Philippine archipelago. Its operators can be inserted stealthily via sea (diving, SDVs, fast boats) or air to establish observation posts, place unattended ground sensors, and provide real-time intelligence to the fleet and joint headquarters.15 This “eyes-on-target” capability will be vital for the effective employment of the Marines’ new shore-based BrahMos anti-ship missile batteries.
  • Support to Subsurface Warfare: The planned acquisition of a submarine force under Re-Horizon 3 will create a host of new requirements for which NAVSOCOM is uniquely suited.39 These missions could include submarine search and rescue, and clandestine insertion and extraction of personnel or equipment via submarine, a classic SEAL mission set.
  • Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) Operations: In a conflict scenario, NAVSOCOM could be tasked with conducting direct action against adversary assets to deny them freedom of movement within Philippine waters. This could include sabotage of naval platforms, seizure of key maritime infrastructure, and securing vital chokepoints and sea lanes of communication.40

4.3 Technological Integration and Future Challenges

To execute these future missions, NAVSOCOM will need to integrate emerging military technologies. Based on global special operations trends, this will likely include unmanned systems, such as small Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for team-level overwatch and Unmanned Surface Vessels (USVs) for reconnaissance and decoy operations.45 The integration of AI-driven tools for processing intelligence data gathered during SR missions will also be a key force multiplier.47

However, the realization of this future vision is not without significant challenges. The greatest threat to NAVSOCOM’s development is not a specific adversary, but the programmatic and budgetary risks inherent in the AFP modernization program. The program has a history of being delayed and underfunded due to shifting political priorities and national fiscal constraints.37 NAVSOCOM’s future roles are symbiotically linked to the success of the entire Re-Horizon 3 plan; it cannot provide support to a submarine force that is never procured or provide targeting data for missile systems that are not fielded. A failure in the broader program would risk relegating NAVSOCOM to its legacy counter-terrorism role, limiting its strategic potential.

Furthermore, as equipment becomes more technologically advanced, the human factor remains paramount. The command must continue to invest heavily in its rigorous selection and training pipeline to produce operators who not only possess the physical and mental toughness to be a SEAL but also the technical acumen to operate and maintain complex modern systems in high-stress environments.47

Conclusion

The Philippine Naval Special Operations Command has traversed a remarkable evolutionary path, from its humble origins as a seven-man Underwater Operations Team to its current status as a command-level component of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Forged in the fires of decades-long internal conflicts and honed by a deep and enduring partnership with United States Naval Special Warfare, NAVSOCOM has proven itself to be a highly professional, combat-effective, and strategically vital asset for the Republic of the Philippines.

The command’s history of adaptation—from amphibious support to jungle warfare, and from high-intensity urban combat in Zamboanga and Marawi to gray zone confrontations in the South China Sea—demonstrates a culture of resilience and innovation. Its pragmatic approach to armament, blending top-tier imported weapons with effective, indigenously developed systems, further underscores its maturity as a special operations force.

Today, NAVSOCOM stands at the precipice of its most significant transformation. As the Philippines shifts its defense posture to address the challenges of external territorial security under the Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept, NAVSOCOM will be central to this new strategy. Its future will be defined not only by its proven capacity for direct action but by its expanding role as a key enabler of joint, multi-domain operations, providing the critical intelligence, reconnaissance, and clandestine access required for the nation’s defense in the 21st century. The successful realization of this future will depend on sustained national commitment to modernizing the entire armed forces, ensuring that this elite unit has the strategic assets to support and the advanced tools to maintain its edge.

Appendix

Table 1: Current Known Small Arms of the Philippine Naval Special Operations Command (NAVSOCOM)

Weapon SystemTypeCaliberCountry of OriginPrimary Role / Remarks
Heckler & Koch HK416Assault Rifle / Carbine5.56x45mm NATOGermanyStandard primary weapon for SEAL teams. Gas-piston system offers high reliability in maritime environments. Used in 11″ and 14.5″ barrel configurations.19
Remington R4Assault Rifle / Carbine5.56x45mm NATOUnited StatesSecondary primary weapon, ensuring commonality with standard AFP forces. Based on the M4A1 platform with a direct impingement gas system.19
Glock 17 Gen4Semi-Automatic Pistol9x19mm LugerAustriaStandard-issue sidearm for all operators. A high-capacity, striker-fired, polymer-framed pistol adopted across the AFP.19
M60E4/E6General Purpose Machine Gun7.62x51mm NATOUnited StatesPrimary squad automatic weapon. Modernized variants of the M60 provide a relatively lightweight medium machine gun capability with improved reliability and ergonomics.2
KAC M110A2 SASSSemi-Automatic Sniper System7.62x51mm NATOUnited StatesPrimary long-range precision rifle. Valued for its ability to deliver rapid, accurate follow-up shots against multiple or moving targets.2
Marine Scout Sniper Rifle (MSSR)Designated Marksman Rifle5.56x45mm NATOPhilippinesIndigenous precision rifle based on a modified M16A1. NAVSOCOM uses a variant with a 20″ barrel for intermediate-range engagements. The integrally suppressed NFWS variant is also used.17

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something. If you’d like to directly contribute towards our continued reporting, please visit our funding page.

Sources Used

  1. A Brief History of the Philippine Navy Seals From the Underwater Operations Team to the Naval Special Operations Command – The Maritime Review, accessed September 6, 2025, https://maritimereview.ph/a-brief-history-of-the-philippine-navy-seals-from-the-underwater-operations-team-to-the-naval-special-operations-command/
  2. Naval Special Operations Command – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Special_Operations_Command
  3. United States Naval Special Warfare Command – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Naval_Special_Warfare_Command
  4. Philippine Naval Special Warfare Group (NSWG) – Boot Camp & Military Fitness Institute, accessed September 6, 2025, https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/elite-special-forces/philippine-elite-special-forces/philippine-naval-special-warfare-group-nswg/
  5. Philippine Navy – Philippine Fleet History | PDF | Military Units And Formations – Scribd, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/531039/Philippine-Navy-Philippine-Fleet-History
  6. Special Operations Command (Philippines) – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Command_(Philippines)
  7. NAVSOU | Center for International Maritime Security, accessed September 6, 2025, https://cimsec.org/tag/navsou/
  8. Zamboanga City crisis – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zamboanga_City_crisis
  9. Zamboanga siege: Tales from the combat zone – Rappler, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/68885-zamboanga-siege-light-reaction-battalion/
  10. Siege of Marawi – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Marawi
  11. Philippines: Navy Seals battle Maute group on Lake Lanao – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcetHtZE1I
  12. Philippine Navy Seals Overlooking Marawi City During Night-Time Patrols to Prevent Terrorists from Fleeing Marawi 2017. (717×399) : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/10slcy3/philippine_navy_seals_overlooking_marawi_city/
  13. Philippine Watercraft Operations in the South China Sea – Naval News, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/08/philippine-watercraft-operations-in-the-south-china-sea/
  14. U.S. Naval Special Warfare, Philippines NAVSOU Conduct Joint Combined Training Exchange – PACOM, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.pacom.mil/Media/NEWS/News-Article-View/Article/4121327/us-naval-special-warfare-philippines-navsou-conduct-joint-combined-training-exc/
  15. Philippine Navy Maritime Situational Awareness System: Current Situation, Gaps, and Potential Role of Maritime Special Operation – DTIC, accessed September 6, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1126784.pdf
  16. US Navy SEALs, Philippine Special Operations strengthen military tactics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.marforpac.marines.mil/Media-Room/Pacific-Marines-Stories/Article/Article/3388635/us-navy-seals-philippine-special-operations-strengthen-military-tactics/
  17. Marine Scout Sniper Rifle – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Scout_Sniper_Rifle
  18. Converting M16A1s into sniper rifles: the story of the Philippine …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/k6mvfo/converting_m16a1s_into_sniper_rifles_the_story_of/
  19. Armed Forces of the Philippines Weapons – Far East Tactical, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fareastmilsim.com/afp-weapons
  20. Heckler & Koch HK416 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416
  21. HK416 | Delta Force – American Special Ops, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.americanspecialops.com/delta-force/weapons/hk416.php
  22. Philippine Navy SEALs from Naval Special Operations Group (NAVSOG) participating in a VBSS training drill : r/SpecOpsArchive – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/SpecOpsArchive/comments/kny03v/philippine_navy_seals_from_naval_special/
  23. Remington R4 – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_R4
  24. R4 COMPLETE SYSTEM – Remington, accessed September 6, 2025, http://oshocorp.com/vsalute/86612.php
  25. The AFP-wide Pistol Project – Pres. Duterte’s Promised Handguns for the Filipino Soldier, accessed September 6, 2025, http://maxdefense.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-afp-wide-pistol-project-pres.html
  26. Glock 17 Gen 4 Reviewed – Shooters Report, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.shootersreport.com/pistol/9mm-Shoot-Out-Glock-17.htm
  27. G17 Gen4 – GLOCK Perfection, accessed September 6, 2025, https://eu.glock.com/en/products/pistols/g17-gen4
  28. Bacarro is now a Navy SEAL – Manila Bulletin, accessed September 6, 2025, https://mb.com.ph/2022/11/20/bacarro-is-now-a-navy-seal
  29. M60E6 | Weapons – US Ordnance, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.usord.com/weapons/m60e6
  30. M60E6 – US Ordnance, accessed September 6, 2025, http://www.usord.com/content/docs/datasheets/USORD_M60E6_10.17.pdf
  31. M60 machine gun – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M60_machine_gun
  32. M110A2 – Knight’s Armament, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.knightarmco.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/m110A2.pdf
  33. M110A2 – North East Technologies, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ne-tech.co.il/m110a2/
  34. Portfolio – PM SL – M110 7.62mm Semi-Automatic Sniper System (SASS) – PEO Soldier, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.peosoldier.army.mil/Equipment/Equipment-Portfolio/Project-Manager-Soldier-Lethality-Portfolio/M110-Semi-Automatic-Sniper-System/
  35. Last year I wrote a piece for r/ForgottenWeapons about the PMC’s Marine Scout Sniper Rifle – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/PhilippineMilitary/comments/y3ubst/last_year_i_wrote_a_piece_for_rforgottenweapons/
  36. That’s a long tube: the Night Fighting Weapons System (NFWS) used by Philippine Marine Force Recon and Navy SEALs [1080×1411] – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/sx73mz/thats_a_long_tube_the_night_fighting_weapons/
  37. AFP Modernization Act – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFP_Modernization_Act
  38. Philippines military modernisation: revamped but not resolved, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2025/062/philippines-military-modernisation-revamped-but-not-resolved/
  39. The Philippines’ Horizon 3 Military Modernisation Programme – MP-IDSA, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.idsa.in/publisher/issuebrief/the-philippines-horizon-3-military-modernisation-programme
  40. A Brief on the Horizon 3 Phase of the Revised AFP Modernization Program, accessed September 6, 2025, http://maxdefense.blogspot.com/2023/09/a-brief-on-horizon-3-phase-of-revised.html
  41. Philippines Starts Latest Naval Modernization Attempt Amid South China Sea Tensions, accessed September 6, 2025, https://news.usni.org/2024/02/28/philippines-starts-latest-naval-modernization-attempt-amid-south-china-sea-tensions
  42. U.S. INFLUENCE Philippines Military Modernization aims to Deter CHINA’s AGGRESSION in Indo-Pacific – YouTube, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edLlfZjGOOs
  43. Philippine Navy Modernization: 3rd Horizon Infographic : r/PhilippineMilitary – Reddit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/PhilippineMilitary/comments/1iqk6xi/philippine_navy_modernization_3rd_horizon/
  44. New Philippine naval bases mark strategic pivot – Indo-Pacific Defense FORUM, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ipdefenseforum.com/2025/07/new-philippine-naval-bases-mark-strategic-pivot/
  45. Defence 2025: Key Trends Driving Innovation, accessed September 6, 2025, https://mssdefence.com/blog/defence-2025-key-trends-driving-innovation/
  46. Top 10 Military Technology Trends & Innovations for 2025 – StartUs Insights, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.startus-insights.com/innovators-guide/top-10-military-technology-trends-2022/
  47. Exploring the Future of Special Operations at SOF Week 2025 – Satellite World, accessed September 6, 2025, https://satelliteworldtoday.com/exploring-the-future-of-special-operations-at-sof-week-2025/
  48. EDCA Refocus: Eyes on the AFP’s Modernization Program | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, accessed September 6, 2025, https://amti.csis.org/edca-refocus-eyes-on-the-afps-modernization-program/