Los l\u00edderes de las operaciones especiales estadounidenses expresaron el martes su frustraci\u00f3n por los acuerdos de confidencialidad de los fabricantes que les impiden realizar actualizaciones r\u00e1pidas en el equipo militar.Seg\u00fan indicaron, el problema es especialmente grave en el caso de los sistemas no tripulados, ya que la tecnolog\u00eda evoluciona mucho m\u00e1s r\u00e1pido que la capacidad del Comando de Operaciones Especiales de Estados Unidos para modificar sus drones.<\/p>\n
U.S. special operations leaders expressed frustration Tuesday about manufacturers\u2019 proprietary agreements that block them from making quick upgrades to military equipment.<\/p>\n
The problem is especially acute for unmanned systems, they said, as technology is evolving far faster than the ability of U.S. Special Operations Command to modify its drones.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe biggest challenge that that we face, at least within the majority of our formations, is the inability of the operator at the edge to have the authority to tinker,\u201d Lt. Gen. Lawrence Ferguson, chief of U.S. Army Special Operations Command, told the Senate Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities on Tuesday.<\/p>\n
\u201cSpecifically, I\u2019m thinking of unmanned systems, mainly unmanned aerial systems. We are bound right now to the actual vendor of that system that has the proprietary capability. And so what we are looking for is an ability for our people at the edge to have the\u00a0right to repair<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n Ferguson was joined by the heads of the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps special operations commands, who told the committee of similar issues.<\/p>\n To add a small, long-range cruise missile to an aerial platform, \u201cI want to be able to iterate quickly on the software,\u201d Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, chief of Air Force Special Operations Command, told the subcommittee.<\/p>\n \u201cOften working with the large vendors, there\u2019s proprietary information to get into the mission computers we hit. We hit walls that small vendors that are trying to move fast and give us those capabilities, sometimes get outmuscled by the bigger vendors and they can\u2019t break through.\u201d<\/p>\n Despite prodding by Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., the special operations commanders did not name any of those big manufacturers.<\/p>\n As with civilians resentful over an inability to fix everything from cell phones to farm tractors without having to go through the manufacturer, right to repair has become a\u00a0controversial issue<\/a>\u00a0for the U.S. military. Nonetheless, right-to-repair provisions were\u00a0stripped<\/a>\u00a0from the fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.<\/p>\n This may be particularly galling to the U.S. special operations community, which often uses specialized and cutting-edge equipment \u2014 and which can be the first to test that equipment in combat.<\/p>\n The proprietary agreements make it difficult to keep up with adversaries, the leaders said.<\/p>\n For example, drug cartels, or militant groups like Al-Shabaab in Somalia, can easily acquire and modify small drones, said Maj. Gen. Peter Huntley, chief of Marine Forces Special Operations Command.<\/p>\n \u201cI can buy them right now,\u201d Huntley testified. \u201cI can put them in the hands of our operators. But the ability to kind of adapt them, and make them a real military capability at some form of scale, is very challenging right now.\u201d<\/p>\n US-European relations create complications<\/strong><\/p>\n The subcommittee also heard about the strain that that the war on Iran and other operations have placed upon the SOCOM community.<\/p>\n \u201cAFSOC executed the two largest presidentially directed deployments in our 36-year history, while also maintaining a persistent operational tempo across five other geographic commands,\u201d Conley said.<\/p>\n