Special Warfare The Professional Bulletin of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School PB 80–01–2 Spring 2001 Vol. 14, No. 2 From the Commandant Special Warfare United States Army special-operations forces, or ARSOF, more than any other seg- ment of the military population, recognize the importance of the human terrain in mil- itary operations. On any given day, we have approximately 800 Special Forces soldiers deployed to as many as 40 countries. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations units also face a similar operations tempo. Because of the nature of ARSOF missions, our soldiers may be required to perform a variety of tasks during deployments. They may have to train host-country soldiers, communicate information to the host-coun- try population, or assist the host-country government in restoring essential services. points out in this issue, the law itself cannot Our interactions with foreign populations resolve all human-rights issues. Our soldiers have reinforced the importance of human may encounter situations that will require rights. In fact, the U.S. Special Operations them to make moral decisions, and those deci- Command has issued policy directives man- sions must reflect the soldiers’ organizational dating that SOF promote democracy and and personal values. In addition, our soldiers human rights during all overseas training must be guided not only by the moral compass and that they report any human-rights vio- provided by the Army values and by the SF val- lations committed by the foreign forces with ues, but also by the moral courage to do what is whom they are working. For years we have right — a quality that we begin assessing dur- demonstrated the role of the military in a ing Special Forces Assessment and Selection democratic society. and continue to assess throughout the entire In addition, the Leahy Amendment pro- SF training pipeline. hibits the U.S. from providing training to There is a practical as well as a moral rea- any foreign unit that has been found guilty son for doing what is right: Legitimacy is the of human-rights violations, and the amend- center of gravity in operations other than ment requires that the Department of State war, and our forces must be perceived as fair verify that foreign units have clean records and just by the host nation as well as by the before we can provide training to them. U.S. By demonstrating that our actions sup- In recognition of the importance of human port the best interests of both the host nation rights, the Army Special Forces Command and the U.S., our forces can establish public conducts a predeployment training program support and achieve success in the advisory to ensure that SF Command soldiers are and foreign-training missions that will aware of the human-rights situation in the become increasingly important in the future. country to which they are deploying. The pro- gram also ensures that deploying SF soldiers will provide their host-nation counterparts with training in human rights and in the law of war. But human rights involves more than legis- Major General William G. Boykin lation and directives. As Colonel Rhudy Barnes PB 80–01–2 Contents Spring 2001 Special Warfare Vol. 14, No. 2 Commander & Commandant Major General William G. Boykin Features Editor 2 Human Rights and Legitimacy in the Foreign Training Jerry D. Steelman Mission Associate Editor by Colonel Rudolph C. Barnes Jr. Sylvia W. McCarley 12 Advisory Missions: SF-Command Training Supports Human Graphics & Design Rights Bruce S. Barfield by Staff Sergeant Amanda Glenn Automation Clerk 18 SF Advisers in El Salvador: The Attack on El Paraiso Gloria H. Sawyer by Sergeant First Class John Terzian 26 “Devils & Beasts”: Japanese PSYOP Posters from World War II 28 Advisers and Advising in the 21st Century V E R TAS I T R A B E by Major Paul Marks S LI E T Special Warfare is an authorized, official quarterly of the 38 The State of SF, PSYOP and CA Personnel United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Its mission by Lieutenant Colonel Dan Adelstein is to promote the professional development of special- operations forces by providing a forum for the examination of established doctrine and new ideas. Views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect official Army position. This publication does not supersede any information presented in other official Army publications. Articles, photos, artwork and letters are invited and should be addressed to Editor, Special Warfare, USAJFKSWCS, Fort Bragg, NC 28310. Telephone: DSN 239-5703, commercial (910) 432-5703, fax -3147. Special Warfare reserves the right to edit all material. Published works may be reprinted, except where copyrighted, provided credit is given to Special Warfare and the authors. Official distribution is limited to active and reserve special-operations units. Individuals desiring private subscriptions should forward their requests to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Special Warfare is also available on the USASOC internal web (https://asociweb.soc.mil/swcs/dotd/sw-mag/sw-mag.htm). By Order of the Secretary of the Army: Eric K. Shinseki General, United States Army Departments Chief of Staff 44 Foreign SOF Official: 47 Enlisted Career Notes 48 Officer Career Notes Joel B. Hudson 50 Update Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army 52 Book Reviews 0113503 Headquarters, Department of the Army Human Rights and Legitimacy in the Foreign Training Mission by Colonel Rudolph C. Barnes Jr. hat do human rights have to do step further, requiring that the U.S. military with the military mission? promote democracy and human rights over- WHuman rights are civilian rights, seas in all peacetime-engagement missions. but they have an important connection to But the military’s relationship to human peacetime military missions — especially rights is a two-edged sword. While the mil- the foreign training mission of Army spe- itary is the last line of defense against cial-operations forces, or ARSOF.The viola- forces that threaten human rights, it can tion of human rights can turn an otherwise also represent the greatest threat to those successful training mission into a political rights. By definition, only a government disaster. can violate human rights, and human- Human rights are derivatives of those rights violations are usually committed by inalienable rights referred to in the Decla- a government’s military or police forces. We need only recall the use of the military in Human rights are derivatives of those inalien- the oppressive totalitarian regimes of the Cold War era to realize the contemporary able rights referred to in the Declaration of Inde- relevance of the issue. pendence: the rights to life, liberty and the pur- Even in emerging democracies, the mili- tary is by its very nature an authoritarian suit of happiness. These rights are enshrined in regime within a democratic society — a regime that, with its monopoly of lethal our Constitution, and the protection of the Con- force, is capable of extinguishing democra- stitution is what justifies the existence of the cy, human rights and the rule of law. Unless human rights are enforced by the United States military and shapes its legitimacy. rule of law, democracy is no more than rule by the majority, and that rule can be ruth- ration of Independence: the rights to life, lib- less. When it comes to the subject of pro- erty and the pursuit of happiness. These tecting human rights, some see the mili- rights are enshrined in our Constitution, tary as the fox guarding the hen house, but and the protection of the Constitution is that’s the way it must be in societies that what justifies the existence of the United maintain a strong military. And that is all States military and shapes its legitimacy. the more reason why members of the mili- Officers in the U.S. military are sworn to tary should respect human rights and support and defend the Constitution remain alert to any human-rights viola- against all enemies, foreign and domestic. tions by foreign forces whom they train. The U.S. national-security strategy goes a For ARSOF who are operating overseas, 2 Special Warfare Because ARSOF train for- eign military and police forces, they are held accountable in the eyes of the public for the actions of the foreign security forces whom they train. Photo by Jon Creese the issue of human rights has far-reaching during its 50 years of operation. The outgo- implications. With a primary mission of ing Secretary of the Army, Louis Caldera, training foreign military and police forces, who was a guest speaker at the closing, ARSOF are held accountable in the eyes of defended the school: “Let me say very the public, not only for their own actions, clearly that any soldier in Latin America but also for the actions of the foreign securi- who had even the most remote connection ty forces whom they train. It may not seem with the School of the Americas, who has fair, but that’s the way it works. Witness the ever committed a human-rights violation, continuing controversy over the actions of did so in spite of the training he received at Latin American military officers who were the School of the Americas and not because trained at the U.S. Army School of the of it.” Following the closing, the Depart- Americas in Fort Benning, Ga. Some of ment of Defense Western Hemisphere those officers were later implicated in Institute for Security Cooperation, or human-rights abuses. Defending the poli- WHISC, opened at Fort Benning Jan.