How the failure of Putin’s Soviet warfare changed NATO strategy | Superpowers

How the failure of Putin’s Soviet warfare changed NATO strategy | Superpowers

the trick which is what the the services are trying to come up with now is to work out where the significant areas of breakthrough are likely to occur so we all know it’s something to do with robotics we all understand that drones are robotics uh The Tempest program you know the the new gcap and so on um new air superiority ideas ideas for the Navy again to have robotic ships we all know that’s the that’s the the the future for sixth generation weapons the question is where would robotics make the biggest difference and is there a way in which robotics actually allow you to concentrate your energies elsewhere at the moment that isn’t true um because you know we talk about drones but I mean drones don’t allow you to have fewer people on the battlefield because somebody’s got to control the drones but this is where I think we are on the edge of a real military Revolution when drones become linked really linked to AI then um with large areas they they will become effectively autonomous weapon systems and one person may be the human in the loop who is looking after a thousand drones 10,000 drones you know the area below 5,000 feet could be an autonomous Battlefield area with one or one person or a small team of people responsible for it but the drones working with AI will work out their own strategies they’ll work out their own targets and they will attack them now that hasn’t happened yet but we are not far away from that Revolution and in a sense you know your job as a minister is try is to try to navigate um the areas where would that sort of thing I’m giving you one I think big example Ai and drones where would that make the most difference and where can then you put scarce resources to develop that and be ahead of the game in trying to work that through and Britain is you know has made sincere efforts to do that on the basis of a constrained budget I mean intellectually I’ve always thought Britain is pretty good at making these judgments the problem is can we follow it up with enough investment to actually bring it to fruition um in time the answer to that is not quite but nevertheless we’re pretty good on the scientific side and the technological side of all of that so heus like most uh Western militaries we’re in the process of recapitalizing our army here in the UK um and that recapitalization really looks like the army of the 1990s just with with you just with more sophisticated platforms but fundamentally it’s the same Force design um is there a danger that by the time Challenger 3 the British new main battle tank and boxer the the armored Fighting Vehicle are in service mid 2030s that um the nature of the land Warfare will have changed so fundamentally that we’ve recapitalized and bought an entirely obsolete um Force design that that that’s a great question I mean yes and no I mean you you really um put your finger on the big challenge of of military procurement that you’ll know better than than all of us of course that that because it takes so long you know things will be out of date I mean I I look at the port and down have developed this laser for knocking down drones called Dragonfire uh but we understand it’s not going to be in in place for sort of another four years if it was in place today absolutely it would be game-changing so in the challenge I think really at the root of it um of what we’re seeing in Ukraine at the moment is what we call concept of operations you know how how you actually use the stuff and um that is failing I think to keep up with technology when we you know look at an area that I’ve expert in and written a lot about is you know Russian tactical nuclear weapons for instance you know they their conops are really based in the 70s and 80s when intelligence surveillance Target acquisition was as it was then uh as it is now means that um you know the Russians can barely you know light up a launcher with uh its tactical nuclear weapons without us knowing about it virtually before you know the launcher operators themselves so I think that is a really key element the the other element that um that Mike alluded to what one of the challenges in this sort of techn as technology goes forward um we know that the the key to being successful in in land operations is is combined arms maneuver with the sport of the air and elsewhere but that takes a heck of a lot of training and I think one thing that you and your successors need to think about going back to your original question is are we going to have the right Army in future is you know are we are we going to be able to have the sort of followon echelons that are trained to conduct the Warfare that we want if we look at Ukraine at the moment we know that the you know the the Russian professional Army was killed or wiped out in the first year of the battle to a degree the same with the ukrainians what we’re seeing now on the front line is very inexperienced Russian conscripts who can do little more than sort of get out of the trench and charge the enemy um and that might well be the same you know for the ukrainians too and for ourselves you know the size our army is at the moment if we did get involved in a land war in Europe again we must accept that our first Echelon will last weeks maybe months but what about the follow on the the the war that Michael and and you and I are talking about now is not something you can learn off the back of a packet in in half an hour or so so your question you know will Ajax and boxer be right in 10 years time I am sure they will it’ll be the concept of operations and going back to my own area you know tanks tanks are are over a hundred years old now and and still going strong they and they haven’t funded fundamentally changed there still a metal box with a gun and tracks so it’s I think it’s all about how you use them um and Technology must be balanced about you know people being able to exploit it to its to its degree but but I go back to my original comment at the end of the day you still do need that Mass to be able to Prevail so I think both sides are working with a second naon forces now aren’t they in Ukraine both sides are fighting with the second e Arm Forces and it goes back to the old idea that I mean I think Patrick Sanders the president and CGS of the AR chief of the army who’s stepping down now um he made he always makes the point he said that you know Wars are started by professional armies and they’re finished by citizen armies whether it’s conscript or or um recruited Army a professional Army who is volunteers eventually you know big Wars are finished by by citizen armies professionals start them citizens finish them because that’s the nature of warfare anything other than than expeditionary operations of which we’ve you know conducted for the last 30 odd years are different but a war where somebody has to Prevail and some sort of national mobilization has to take place have to be finished by second or even Third Echelon forces you’re both entirely right about the requirements of generating follow on forces it leads me to want to ask you two questions actually the first is when you talk to Nato senior generals Admirals Air Marshals they will tell you uh when you say well is the war in Ukraine how a NATO War would Russia would translate does it just come down ultimately to both sides ability to absorb a body count an attritional battle and the NATO generals Admirals Air Marshals all say with enormous confidence no no no no NATO would fight this war in an entirely different way now I can see how a first Echelon force would fight in an entirely different way a force that is trained in peace time over decades and is’s equipped with the most sophisticated things that you’re able to buy very deliberately when Supply chains are unconstrained um but once that first Echelon fight is over if not decisive do does even NATO come back to that attritional just who can keep it going longest fight that we’re seeing uh between the ukrainians and the Russians now I’ll come Michael first yeah I think that’s exactly right James that um I mean the the answer is that your followon forces your second Echelon have got to be sufficiently trained reservists that they can they can pick up the combined arms um requirements that heish is talking about as were naturally if they can’t do that and at the moment it’s you know NATO forces don’t have the sort of reserves that could really provide ready second naon forces then of course you you’re in a you’re in a problem when you’re first echon forces are exhausted or can’t do anymore you if you can’t follow on with second Echelon forces who can take up the the Baton in the same way then you’ve got a problem and of course that’s exactly what happened in the Second World War I mean the first Echelon forces were exhausted and finished by the end of 1940 the second Echelon forces the conscript Army that then came together um was was not very good until 1943 44 it wasn’t ready until then and that’s why I often say 194 2 was a was a dreadful year in the second world war and we’re in that 1942 year now in Ukraine that in fact politically the balance of forces moved significantly against the the access powers in 1941 but it wasn’t felt until the end of 1942 and Al so although although it is clear that the Allies would win the war eventually by December 1941 once America came into the war and Russia would changed sides and was fighting Germany that meant that the Germans were always going to lose the Japanese were always going to lose but 1942 was a dreadful year because that was the era in which the follow on forces were not ready and it wasn’t until 1944 that the follow on forces were able then to behave like a professional Army and even then it was tough going for the latest in geopolitics and future episodes of superpowers subscribe to our YouTube channel thanks for watching

The development of drones and surveillance and their degradation of Russian artillery and tactical nuclear systems will have major lessons for NATO nations. Defence Analyst Michael Clarke and Col. Hamish De Bretton-Gordon discuss the importance of robotics and generating a second echelon force with James Heappey on Superpowers.

📻 Listen to Times Radio – https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio

📍 Subscribe to our channel – http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTjDhFuGXlhx9Us0gq0VK2w?sub_confirmation=1

🗞 Subscribe to The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/subscribe/radio-3for3/

📲 Get the free Times Radio app https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/how-to-listen-to-times-radio/app