Special operations commanders issue warning about US enemies’ ‘impressive’ tech advancements

On Wednesday, top commanders of the U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) delivered a sobering message to the House Armed Services Committee: America is struggling to keep up with its adversaries in the race for technological advancement. The hearing highlighted a troubling reality: while the pace of global modernization is accelerating, the U.S. is being held back by bureaucratic red tape, outdated systems, and slow procurement processes. Rear Admiral Milton Sands III, Major General Peter Huntley, Lieutenant General Jonathan Braga, and Lieutenant General Michael Conley—all senior leaders within the Special Operations Command—voiced their concerns about the challenges of equipping their forces with the cutting-edge technology they need to remain effective on the modern battlefield.

Major General Huntley, who commands the Marine Forces Special Operations Command, emphasized that while the world is modernizing at an unprecedented pace, the U.S. is finding it difficult to keep up. He pointed to the rapidly evolving role of artificial intelligence (AI) as a critical area where America’s traditional advantage is eroding. For decades, the U.S. has relied on its ability to detect and engage enemies before being detected itself—a capability that has been central to its military dominance. However, Huntley warned that advancements in AI are now leveling the playing field, allowing adversaries to challenge this long-held advantage. The implication is clear: if the U.S. does not accelerate its own technological advancements, it risks losing its edge in future conflicts.

Rear Admiral Sands echoed these concerns, focusing on the imperative of getting critical equipment to U.S. troops quickly. “Our priority is getting equipment that’s required for the modern battlefield rapidly into the hands of our operators,” he told lawmakers, “and the reason is because they need it to survive.” Sands’ words underscored the gravity of the situation: in an age where technological superiority can mean the difference between life and death, delays in procurement and deployment are not just bureaucratic inefficiencies—they are matters of life and death. The slow pace of acquiring and fielding new technologies is leaving U.S. forces at a disadvantage, even as adversaries continue to innovate and adapt.

Lieutenant General Braga, commander of the Army Special Operations Command, added another layer to the discussion by highlighting the tension between innovation and implementation. He praised the ingenuity of U.S. troops, noting that they are “great at innovating” and have “fantastic ideas.” However, Braga lamented the difficulty of turning these ideas into actionable solutions due to funding constraints and cumbersome bureaucratic processes. He noted that even minor modifications to existing systems can take months or years to implement, creating a bottleneck that stifles progress. Braga suggested that streamlining funding and oversight processes could help address these challenges, but the current system remains a significant obstacle to modernization.

Lieutenant General Conley, who leads the Air Force Special Operations Command, shared similar frustrations. He acknowledged the creativity and adaptability of his troops, noting that they are “phenomenal at taking lessons learned and turning them into actionable things.” However, Conley described the procurement process as a major hurdle, particularly when it comes to scaling innovations for broader use. Air fleet modernization, for instance, is both time-consuming and expensive, leaving the U.S. in a “constant loop of trying to catch up with the enemy threat.” Conley also warned that while America’s adversaries are continuously improving their capabilities, the U.S. is unable to match that pace due to its slow and resource-intensive modification processes.

The commanders also drew attention to the growing threat posed by non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations and other irregular forces. Major General Huntley noted that these groups are rapidly advancing their technological capabilities, bringing “pretty impressive” tools to the battlefield. While U.S. forces understand what needs to be done to counter these threats, the critical challenge lies in getting the necessary capabilities into the hands of troops in a timely manner. The gap between awareness and action is a recurring theme in the testimony, highlighting the disconnect between the urgency of the threat and the slow pace of the U.S. military’s response.

In summary, the testimonies of these military leaders paint a concerning picture of a U.S. special operations force struggling to keep pace with the rapid technological advancements of its adversaries. The root causes of this challenge are clear: a slow, expensive, and bureaucratic system that stifles innovation and delays the deployment of critical equipment. While the creativity and determination of U.S. troops remain a significant strength, the military’s inability to quickly adapt and modernize puts these forces at risk. The solution, as suggested by the commanders, lies in streamlining processes, improving funding mechanisms, and reducing the barriers that stand in the way of innovation. However, time is of the essence, and the U.S. cannot afford to continue falling behind in this critical race.