No. 4

NOTES ON MILITARY ELITE UNITS by LTC Gary L. Bounds

Combat Studies Institute
U.S. Army Command and General Staff College

Prepared in response to TRADOC Chief of Staff request
(16 March 1984)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

CONTENTS

Preface
Historical Examples of Types of Elite Units
General Characteristics of Elite Units
Why Do People Join
Other Factors/Considerations
Historical Examples

Vignette

1.    World War I
2.    World War II
3.    1st Special Service Force
4.    The American Volunteer Group (AVG) "Flying Tigers"
5.    U.S. Airborne (World War II and Postwar)
6.    French Airborne

Summary
Sources

PREFACE

The attached notes were prepared by the Combat Studies Institute in response to a request by TRADOC Chief of Staff, MG Robert Forman, to assist in formulating ideas on elite forces using a historical perspective. CSI staff members discussed the paper with MG Forman at a working luncheon during his visit to the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College on 16 March 1984. Present at the luncheon were the Deputy Commandant of the College, MG Dave Palmer, and four historians from the Combat Studies Institute.

Most of the material in the "Notes" come from Roger Beaumont's Military Elites and Eliot Cohen's Commandos and Politicians. These two works address elite units in general. Many other works on elite units address specific operations of elite forces; some of these works appear under sources. This is not a comprehensive study of elite forces and only represents an overview prepared in response to MG Forman's request.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLES

Vignette 1: World War I

During World War I, the stalemate of trench warfare created conditions of intense frustration because of high casualties, seemingly endless artillery fire, and no sense of accomplishment. The stalemate forced a turn to elite units, which required aggressive, reliable, and intelligent personnel to carry out the operations. Examples were the German Storm Troopers of the 1917-18 offensive, the Italian Arditi and Alpini, the British and French tank units, and German U-Boats. The Storm Trooper volunteers Came from the urban middle class, and many had university backgrounds. Training emphasized knives, hand grenades, entrenching tools, and other individual weapons. The Arditi wore black shirts and distinctive headgear and had a nihilistic motto, "who cares?"

Vignette 2: World War II

From December 1941 through November 1942, the United States experienced a period of frustration from not being able to respond to the German threat with large-scale operations. As a result, the first Ranger Companies were formed in England by MG Lucian Truscott. This action was approved by U.S. Army Chief of Staff GEN George C. Marshall. The units formed, trained with the British, and participated in a limited role in the Dieppe raid. After a number of successful limited operations, they were used as a spearhead force at Cisterna during the Anzio Beachhead expansion. In this conventional role, all but six members of a 767-man forces were killed or captured. The remaining numbers were either transferred to the 1st Special Service Force or sent home to train new units.

Vignette 3: 1st Special Service Force

This Canadian-American unit was created to take part in a raid designed to destroy Norway's industrial capability. The Canadians were high quality volunteers, but the U.S. "volunteers" came, for the most part, from various jails and detention facilities. Thus, the unit required restaffing, before training. Political considerations kept the unit from being committed to the Norway mission. The unit, however, still received airborne, mountain, and Arctic training. Later, the unit was committed to the Italian campaign and then to southern France. After suffering substantial casualties, it was disbanded in December 1944. This unit enjoyed direct communication with Ottawa and the Combined Chiefs of Staff.

Vignette 4: The American Volunteer Group (AVG) “Flying Tigers”

This elite group was chose from already elite pilot volunteers and further screened training and combat. Characterized by courage and skill and operating with deficient equipment, the unit had a strong visual image (tiger's mouth on the radiator scoop) and made dramatic press copy. Personnel for this illegal (by U.S. law) volunteer force were recruited by representatives of the Chinese government during visits to U.S. Army and Navy bases. Already carefully screened on medical grounds, trained and ready to fight, they were offered lucrative one-year contracts and dispatched to China under U.S. Navy escort in June 1941. The AVG, with its excellent combat record, proved that properly screened, well qualified, relatively highly paid elite forces could produce outstanding results: 299 confirmed Japanese aircraft downed plus 253 probable destroyed at a cost of 12 AVG planes lost in the air and 61 on the ground. These results occurred in spite of disciplinary problems, including a virtual mutiny, during the AVG's short existence.

Vignette 5: U.S. Airborne (World War II and Postwar)

During the reorganization of 1942, GEN McNair expressed concern over the growing number of "specialized" units and suggested breaking up airborne divisions, keeping parachutists separate, and making the rest into light divisions. This plan was unacceptable to European Theater planners, and an Airborne Center was established to develop doctrine and conduct training. Airborne successes were uneven, and many times the rapid advance of ground forces overran airborne objectives. Beaumont stated that Bradley intentionally allowed objectives to be overrun so lift aircraft could be used for supply runs to ground troops. In many instances, Allied airborne's greatest contribution was in the diversion of enemy forces and materiel to cope with real or perceived threats to the rear area. As is true with many elite forces, practice ran ahead of doctrine in the airborne.

Actual use of Allied airborne forces varied: to overrun airfields in North Africa, to seize key points in Sicily, to support beachhead operations in Salerno, to flank cover and diversion on D-Day, and as a supplement to the assault in southern France. During Operation Market, they served an airborne role and later a more conventional role during the Rhine crossings. The greatest misuse of airborne occurred when they operated for long periods as conventional forces, a role they could not fulfill without considerable attachments.

U.S. airborne soldiers in World War II were young, flat-stomached, physically fit, and agile. These men received increased pay, special insignia, and distinctive uniforms. That image continued as the young airborne warriors of World War II (Gavin, Taylor, and Ridgeway) became prominent postwar leaders. As the Cold War era unfolded, the elite airborne units became America's first-line reaction force for deployment contingencies, such as in Lebanon in 1958 and in the Dominican Republic in 1965. After 1950, American maintained peacetime conscription, and the Airborne became more of an elitist institution when all lieutenants commissioned in the Regular Army were required to take such training. This qualification served to distinguish between groups of officers as well as enlisted men.

Vignette 6: French Airborne

Late in developing during World War II, the French airborne came into its own during the postwar years. The classic example of the misuse of French airborne occurred at Dienbienphu in 1954. The Viet Minh, with the help of artillery supplied by the Chinese, besieged the French camp and eventually won the battle. Dienbienphu as since been compared to Arnhem, reflecting many of the same characteristics of elite force misuse: vague concept, confused command, lack of surprise, poor communications, resupply failure, operation at edge of the resupply aircraft range, weak intelligence, and poor choice of terrain. These factors all combined to defeat both the British elite forces at Arnhem and the French forces at Dienbienphu.

Summary

The following comments appear relevant based on the sources consulted. Casualty rates for elite forces are usually higher than for conventional units in both peace and war. For example, the 10th Mountain Division suffered five times more casualties than conventional forces and the heaviest wartime casualties in the Italian Campaign based on relative time in combat. The creation of wartime elite forces has not come so much from need as from a desire to cope with frustration brought on by defeat, pressure, personnel shortages, or economic and materiel shortfalls. From a historical perspective, wartime elite units were “children of the storm,” created in response to a specific challenge, and they often spent too long in the preparation process and, after initial use, were attrited through malassignment and misuse. This process usually led to disbanding after a period of time.

Elite units cause “leadership drains.” Many of the highly motivated enlistees of these units could have gone on to higher rank in conventional units. In a sense, promotion would be stifled if it were not for the high number of leader casualties in elite units. These high casualty losses create what Beaumont calls a “selection-destruction” cycle that leads to depletion of assets (highly motivated, high quality personnel) that are not readily replaceable. Not only does this leadership drain create shortages for future replenishment of elite forces, but it also makes high quality leadership less available for conventional units that must carry the bulk of the fighting load.

It also appears that, during wartime, elite units are often misused and create numerous intra-organizational problems. Special considerations detract from overall force productivity.

During peacetime, elite units seem to be somewhat better received by the Army as a whole. One of the primary roles for elite forces is to serve as “visual spice” to political initiatives. Their use in this role was and is a good way to demonstrate force presence and technological advances. Casualties, except for training accidents, are not a major drain during peacetime. The "leadership drain" still exists to the detriment of conventional units when an elite force is too large. Many critics felt that elite forces should be assigned restricted missions, that operations should be small-scale, and that units should remain below brigade size in order to preclude their use as regular infantry. Elite forces serve a real purpose but must be considered in the context of the total force structure. Beaumont questioned whether elite forces were worth the cost and whether their past effectiveness had enhanced the overall force structure. These questions still need answers.

SOURCES

Beaumont, Roger A. Military Elites. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1974.

Burton, Hal. The Ski Troops. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971.

Cohen, Eliot A. Commandos and Politicians: Elite Military Units in Modern Democracies. Cambridge, MA: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, 1978.

Edwards, Roger. German Airborne Troops. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Co., 1974.

Gavin, James M. Airborne Warfare. Washington: Infantry Journal Press, 1947.

Geraghty, Tony. This is the SAS. New York: Arco Publishing Co., 1983.

King, Michael J. Ranger Operations. Leavenworth Paper. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Institute, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, forthcoming.

Lucas, James. Alpine Elite. New York: Jane's Publishing, 1980.

McMichael, Scott R. Light Infantry Forces, CSI Historical Bibliography no. 2 and accompanying chart. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Institute, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, 1984.

Mrazek, James E. The Fall of Eban Emal. Washington: Luce, 1971.

Sajer, Guy. The Forgotten Soldier. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1971.

90-3780-CGSC-1000-29 June 90