11.11.2014 Views

HQ$History - United States Special Operations Command

HQ$History - United States Special Operations Command

HQ$History - United States Special Operations Command

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

missions through, with, and by the newly created<br />

Afghan border security force, the Afghan<br />

National Security Force (ANSF). Six ODAs did<br />

remain in RC East to disrupt insurgent flow<br />

along border towns. These detachments, still<br />

occupying terrain from Bari Kowt to Shkin in<br />

support of the conventional forces, were headquartered<br />

at Chapman, where an ODB performed<br />

the traditional role of SOCCE to the RC<br />

East commander. By and large, however, the<br />

CJSOTF had fully transitioned to its FID<br />

assignment.<br />

The CJSOTF rotation from February –<br />

August 2006 witnessed unprecedented interoperability<br />

with the CJTF. 7th SFG (A) established<br />

conditions for this relationship by conducting<br />

pre-mission training with the 10th<br />

Mountain Division prior to its assumption of<br />

CJTF responsibilities. Processes were worked<br />

out, and ideas for implementing operations were<br />

shared. The relationship quickly paid dividends<br />

for the CJSOTF in the winter of 2006. During<br />

planning for Operation MOUNTAIN THRUST,<br />

an operation designed to disrupt ACM activity<br />

and thereby set conditions for NATO’s assumption<br />

of command in RC South, the CJTF made<br />

the CJSOTF its main effort. The CJTF assigned<br />

the CJSOTF an infantry battalion TACON and<br />

an infantry company OPCON, and placed both<br />

an engineer company and aviation squadron in<br />

direct support. What made this arrangement all<br />

the more remarkable was that no command relationship<br />

existed between the CJTF and the<br />

CJSOTF.<br />

FOB 73, operating out of BAF, employed the<br />

CJTF forces largely in support of ANA operations.<br />

The operation kicked off in April and ran<br />

through late May. The results of Operation<br />

MOUNTAIN THRUST were measurable: hundreds<br />

of Taliban and ACM were killed; the<br />

NATO transition of RC South occurred as scheduled;<br />

infrastructural improvements, such as<br />

bridges over the Helmand River and several new<br />

government broadcasting stations, were completed<br />

at an unprecedented pace; and ANA<br />

authority spread over large swaths of RC South.<br />

The ANA employed and permanently assigned<br />

nine Kandaks in RC South in conjunction with<br />

the operation.<br />

Through the fall of 2006, 3rd SFG (A) continued<br />

to execute Operation VALLEY FORGE<br />

117<br />

U.S. SOF patrol with British soldiers in Helmand Province<br />

throughout Afghanistan. While the transition of<br />

authority between ISAF and CFC-A brought<br />

changes to coordinating responsibilities, SOF<br />

forces adapted to these nuances and worked not<br />

only with the Afghan military, but with other<br />

coalition partners to buttress GOA legitimacy.<br />

After assuming control of RC South, ISAF,<br />

further delegated responsibility for different<br />

provinces to different nations. The UK got<br />

Helmand, Canada got Kandahar, and the<br />

Netherlands got Oruzgan. <strong>Command</strong> of RC<br />

South rotated among those three nations. All<br />

ISAF forces operated under ISAF rules of<br />

engagement (ROE), and each nation also added<br />

its own caveats that further restricted the ability<br />

to use force. Most U.S. conventional forces<br />

pulled out of RC South leaving CJSOTF elements<br />

as the enduring U.S. presence in the area.<br />

The FOB in Kandahar supported RC South, but<br />

continued to operate under OEF ROE. The commanders<br />

of the ODAs, AOBs, and the FOB had<br />

to develop personal relationships with the various<br />

ISAF commanders in their areas to make<br />

this arrangement work. This was sometimes<br />

challenging because Taliban propaganda portrayed<br />

U.S. forces, and particularly U.S. SOF, as<br />

being overly aggressive and prone to reckless<br />

attacks that killed innocent Afghan civilians.<br />

The Taliban had been building up strength<br />

in its sanctuaries in Pakistan. In late 2006 and<br />

2007, the Taliban and ACM redoubled their<br />

efforts in hopes of driving out non-U.S. coalition<br />

forces. The Taliban increased its combat operations,<br />

and some ISAF elements required changes<br />

to their ROEs to respond in kind. Taliban propaganda<br />

made extravagant claims of civilian<br />

casualties after firefights. U.S. SOF increased

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!