The Lethality of Relationships:

Understanding Culture is a Necessary Skill

By Mark Koopman, Command Sergeant Major (ret.) and Emily Stranger, PhD

Article published on: January 15, 2026 in the Special Warfare Journal E Edition

Read Time: < 8 mins

Picture this: China launches a bold amphibious invasion against a small Indo-Pacific island that is a close U.S. ally. Waves of missile and air strikes smash the island’s air defenses and command centers. Electronic warfare scrambles communications and cyberattacks paralyze coordination, creating an island-wide blackout. A naval blockade cuts the island from outside resupply, while the People’s Liberation Army Navy successfully holds U.S. forces at a distance. Airborne and heliborne units secure beachheads and chokepoints, and Chinese troops surge ashore in massed formations. The situation looks dire.

Yet, despite meticulous planning, Beijing confronts an unexpected obstacle: the island’s people. Hardened through years of training by U.S. special operations forces (SOF), both the military and civilian population mount a ferocious resistance. Their tenacity rivals that of the Ukrainians in defending their homeland.

The cost for China is staggering. Casualties mount, supply lines falter, and the prospect of a quick victory evaporates. Unable to withstand the relentless backlash, the People’s Liberation Army withdraws. The island’s resilience prevails, and its defiance becomes a symbol of national resistance in the face of enormous adversity; David slays Goliath once again. The islanders’ army proved to be the most lethal force of them all.

Special Operations is about the People

U.S. Army Special Operations Soldiers are crucial to establishing cooperative security partnerships and supporting U.S. ally resilience. Autonomous systems, dual-use technologies, and a cutting-edge arsenal may defeat the enemy kinetically, but they won’t win the hearts and minds on the ground or leave a lasting footprint. There is a reason that one of the SOF Truths is “Humans are more important than hardware” and that “the best equipment in the world cannot compensate for a lack of the right people.”¹ If the population is the center of gravity – a claim often made by irregular warfare practitioners² - then understanding that population is imperative. It is also in these “gray zones” where relationships will matter the most. Blinded by hardware's brute promise, McNamara and LeMay plotted to pulverize Vietnam into the Stone Age, oblivious that resilient minds—rooted in cultural grit—forge the true victors on the battlefield. Apply this to military operations since 9/11 and you can see the dangers of ignoring culture more clearly.

Since World War II, special operators have been instrumental in theaters where conventional military forces could not meet operational demands. Army Command Sgt. Maj. Shane W. Shorter has pointed to the role of SOF in the Ukrainian conflict, which he said was vital to stopping Russian forces during their invasion of Ukraine in 2022.³ Although Shorter has acknowledged the importance of technology, he still maintains that relationships are paramount. “It’s always going to come down to a special operator talking to a partner. The special operator has to know the culture, the language, the likes and dislikes and more.”⁴

Drawing on Col. John Boyd’s assertion that “people, ideas, and hardware—in that order” matter most, we can further refine our previous idea. Equipment is important, but not more important than ideas, and the ideas are not more important than the people. Assuming we assess and select the best people, and we have the best equipment, wouldn’t it be a good idea to educate our forces beyond a practice of rote memorization and multiple-choice tests? Instead, of such a banal educational experience, we aim to broaden the perspective beyond the idea of “cultural sensitivity training,” arguing that a dynamic education of the forces who interact with local populations will enable these forces to better understand what they are experiencing, and ultimately enhance their ability to influence their environment.

Case in point: Forging partnerships requires more than showing up with shiny equipment and a rigorous training regimen. Knowing the regional culture and local dynamics in the operational environment is imperative. An understanding of the socio-political landscape enables operators to appreciate the complexities of engaging with foreign populations whose worldviews differ from their own. This knowledge comes in handy when establishing a fruitful and trusting partnership.

Neither cultural competencies nor regional knowledge are inherent skillsets or easily researchable topics that can be mastered through a Google search or an artificial intelligence interface. Simply providing our personnel with a list of cultural “Dos and Don’ts” and a country study flipbook to pack in their rucksack is not sufficient. Foreign travel experience to faraway lands and frequent exposure to foreign peoples and cultures are helpful, but they are also not enough to become a master of intercultural knowledge.⁵ We have found that a comprehensive interdisciplinary analysis - integrated through classroom instruction – to be most effective. In addition, teaching and practicing universal cultural skillsets provides Soldiers with a cultural “toolbox” that enables them to interface successfully with other cultures. The 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) Regional Expertise and Culture (REC) Program is here to provide these tools.

The 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) Regional Expertise and Culture Program

Our program provides pre-deployment support to 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) units prior to their departure for their areas of responsibility or to their assigned countries. There are Regional Expertise and Culture instructors assigned to each of the command subordinate units to provide support at all levels of training to include the smallest teams. The Regional Expertise and Culture training hinges on a broad interdisciplinary approach. In addition to the vast military experience of some of our instructors, we also come with backgrounds in anthropology, conflict analysis, political science, international relations, and area studies. Our instructors have traversed the globe, touching every continent and most countries where they have either lived, conducted research, or deployed – often all three. We bring over 70 years of combined military experience, including retired Special Forces officers and senior enlisted with years of advise-and-assist combat experience, an anthropologist with three Afghanistan deployments, a former Civil Affairs reservist, a former Psychological Operations cultural analyst, and a former Marine cultural instructor with 15 years of experience. Our senior instructor spent over five years studying Iran in addition to living in and working in China, Vietnam, Azerbaijan, and Kyrgyzstan. Collectively, our experiences and expertise are extensive. We believe that no amount of education can replace real-world interactions with the people and places where our Soldiers live and operate daily.

Our holistic training provides ARSOF Soldiers with a better understanding of intrastate conflict where they may deploy and highlights the complexities they face in the operating environment. We focus on anthropocentric considerations—such as people, culture, values and motivations, institutions, organizations, narratives, governments and political systems, historical context, relationships and networks, national identity, and leadership—and integrate this information with current doctrinal concepts. We believe it is important for Soldiers to understand the root causes of conflict and human security challenges.

Cultural Competencies are Essential Skills

With the current focus on technology, we worry these essential skills and knowledge will be seen as parochial pursuits during USASOC’s force modernization efforts. Although there is doctrine (DoDI 5160.70 and CJSCI 3126.01C) that recognizes the importance of Regional Expertise and Culture capabilities to address priorities outlined in the National Defense Strategy, the enforcement of these policies is lacking. Perhaps that is because these “soft skills” are intangible and hard to track.

Yet, there is an art and a science to learning about culture. There are theories that are concrete and measurable. For example, Hofstede’s six dimensions of national culture⁶ can explain why mission command does not work in many places around the world. This applies to our partners who haven’t embraced the empowerment of subordinates. As simple as this may seem, the introduction of these dimensions has proven effective for an audience of Special Forces noncommissioned officers and officers who are skeptical of spending more time on “soft skills” that aren’t tracked by their command. There are other theories in the same vein that a Soldier may put in their “cargo pocket” and apply on the ground, including determining the origin of conflict along five moral precepts. This is not just knowledge for its own sake; Special Forces students use it to determine the viability of a resistance force in practical exercises. The 5th Special Forces Group’s Regional Expertise and Culture instructor has gone a step further and created a comprehensive training program that integrates highly accessible and easy to understand concepts such as the Big Five personality traits⁷ and Robert Cialdini’s Principles of Persuasion.⁸ This program replicates interactions from previous teams deployed in theater, giving students credibility by showing what actually occurred. Our Psychological Operations instructor teaches students the socio-cultural analysis framework (SCAF)⁹ to enhance their ability to thoroughly analyze the human terrain. She is well qualified to do so, as one of the framework’s original researchers. Paired with her experience assisting human terrain teams in Afghanistan, she can adapt SCAF to the unique needs of Psychological Operations units of action.

In addition, our program has developed an assessment tool to evaluate Soldiers on their cultural competencies during scenario-based training. Called the adaptive readiness for culture (ARC), the rubric is designed to evaluate five specific cultural competencies identified as crucial for building relationships and working with partner forces. The skills¹⁰ were identified during an enterprise-wide qualitative study that involved critical incident and scenario-based interviews with service members.¹¹ The assessment includes mastery level definitions and precise behavioral statements to support evaluation.¹² When integrated into exercises, Soldiers receive precise feedback to help them improve their intercultural skills. We have utilized this tool during and after exercises, and the appraisal has been enthusiastic and positive. If adopted by the Department of War, it will be the first assessment tool of its kind that can measure cultural knowledge, skills, and abilities.

As the United States continues to confront global challenges, a human-centric approach to conflict will remain necessary, especially for ARSOF. In today’s security environment, irregular warfare will be necessary to thwart power competitors like Russia and China, whose “strategies do not fit into conventional paradigms of conflict.”¹³ The ability for our Soldiers to engage with partner forces and foreign civilian populations is more important than ever to build intrastate resilience against insurgencies and prevail in great power conflict. For this reason, not only should there be more emphasis on Regional Expertise and Culture training for our forces, but it should be prioritized.

Notes