Some context about the recent article regarding the 32nd Mechanized Brigade
My thoughts regarding the issues reported by the @KyivIndependent article about the evaluation of NATO training and the 32nd Mechanized Brigade.
Please consider this text as a supplementary piece interjected with opinions – my own and those I spoke to in the field.
I got in… pic.twitter.com/PCkBk6XEbi
— ✙🍒 Constantine 🍒✙ (@Teoyaomiquu) September 5, 2023
by MatchingTurret
10 comments
See [New brigade bears heavy brunt of Russia’s onslaught in Kharkiv Oblast](https://reddit.com/r/ukraine/s/6GkpGjRoWt) for the original article.
>the only drone we have available is DJI Phantom 4, but we can’t even use it for bureaucratic reasons
In case someone is wondering what that means: [US military blacklists DJI](https://www.suasnews.com/2022/10/us-military-blacklists-dji). Other NATO countries have similar bans in place. There is a short list of drones that the US military can use. Other countries don’t even have a list, yet. See [Cleared List](https://www.diu.mil/blue-uas-cleared-list)
Ukraine and technology have changed warfare and the eye in the sky loaded with a munition is everywhere and NATO countries have never trained for this environment or even developed tactics for this environment. It is obvious that Ukraine needed to develop its own post NATO training for thier threat environment. Unfortunately they had to learn this at great cost and you can tell from the progress being made now that they have learned and adapted to the new environment.
I know NATO countries know about defensive operation, driving at night, camouflaging, etc. I did all that training in the past and it’s still relevant.
What they do need is get on board with the use of drones for small units to have their own eyes in the sky. This is clearly the future and also gives a major advantage when you are able to see from above, or at least, gives you the same advantage the opposition may have.
One day, each man may have his own personal mini-drone that is automated in many ways to give him better views. Drones are the future.
Sad truth is, average redditor member of r/ukraine or r/CombatFootage knows more about drones than any NATO instructor. For example professional soldiers do not understand whats the difference between DJI Mavic 3 and Eleron or Orlan. What is even worse they dont know about FPVs (they heard of switchblade, and that it). Not to speak about lancets countermeassures. Asking them about difference between Matrice 600 and Mavic 3 is just pointless.
Ukraine is fighting a war and their know how is like 10 years ahead of NATO. what NATO can help with is comms and first aid, but Ukraine at this point has WAY MORE veterans who know what works and what is not. “NATO training” is way for wstern countries to burn budgets for “supporting Ukraine” – using resources they already had, and they do it poorly on average so far.
Insread of spending tons of money, invest in Ukrainian training programs, equip Ukraine with more weapons (long range preferably).
So I think it sounds like a mix of things.
– they point out areas to improve training – driving at night, understanding camouflage, counter reconnaissance training, etc.
– some of the points made in the article about the training are not mistakes or poor training – it’s a mismatch. Ukraine asked NATO to train it some assault brigades using NATO tactics. Then they took one of those brigades and sent it to defend against a serious Russian offensive and they are complaining that NATO didn’t teach them defensive tactics. But that’s not what they asked for.
– the same with some of the other complaints. For instance the drone training comment. Maybe they did get told not to worry about it but the more likely explanation is the NATO trainers had an 8 week curriculum and they needed to stick to it. Who decided / how it was decided on what the curriculum should be is a good question to ask as well as what changes to be made but they probably felt they couldn’t just keep adding stuff in.
– this was an *INCREDIBLY* compressed training cycle. The training curriculum was tailored to that compresses timetable. Some of their complaints – like how their unit commanders operate from command posts – is very specific to how Ukraine is fighting this war. If that’s what is working for them than good but thats specific to them and I wouldn’t expect NATO to train them on doing that or even how to do that. (But NATO should definitely pay attention to what they are doing)
– finally, this isn’t to downplay the concerns. They need to be heard and they need to be considered. War is about constant learning and adaptation but this is also an extremely green unit made up of guys who were complete civilians a couple of months ago. They are going to take more casualties than a veteran trained and experienced unit. That’s a universal of warfare throughout history.
If Ukraine can afford to give NATO longer training cycles with these guys if would be better for everyone. And Ukraine should be sending their veteran guys to pair with NATO instructors to tailor the training to the fight.
Completely understandable why boobytrap training, defensive training and training with drones was avoided, I’d assume NATO was expecting Ukraine to take these freshly trained guys and give them further training about things NATO left out.
> Ukraine needs to treat NATO training as basic infantry training instead of a complete cycle of brigade/battalion-level preparation. We need to perform post-training exercises and adapt the units to the newest technologies and tactics on the battlefield.
A 3 week hype condensed basic course abroad (the timeframe mentioned in the original article) was never going to generate highly efficient and specialized combat soldiers right away. Seems to have been a disconnect between expectations and reality if anything.
I read the article, the long Twitter explanation, and processed the information as a former Marine of 12 years, and I fail to see why NATO is being blamed. Volunteers have offered to house and train Ukrainian troops for 3 weeks, ensuring that they are equipped with boots, clothes, packs, and all the other essentials a soldier needs. In no way is 3 weeks going to prepare the Chain of Command, various MOS’s, the squad and team leaders, and the soldiers.
These guys had a hard time (understandably so) because they lacked trained leaders. No leadership with experience on building dugouts, avoiding enemy drones, how to set up a company-sized command and control, how to call in artillery, how to call in EOD support, how to work with forward observers, spotters, and drone pilots, etc. The person writing this article, as well as the primary commentators for the article, seem to lack a great deal of understanding as to how the military and combat operations usually work. What’s being blamed on “NATO” (the people volunteering to help train Ukrainian soldiers), seems like a cop out. Basic infantry training never teaches EOD, drones, driving blackout, or anything else described here, other than basic infantry.
Why the Ukrainian got only a small part of what US troops get trained on before deploying I don’t know.
This result of Ukraine saying you have this much time to train them and both sides agreeing on what.
Basically this unit needed six months more training. Three at least.
And US uses Engineers for EOD work where was the detached Engineering Squads for each company?
US already knows how Company commander in rear fails from Vietnam. You cannot lead from the rear. This shows Ukraine conversation to Western NCO system still weak and Russian poor Officer training they still have to some degree.
It the head Sgt back with other enlisted that run monitors maybe a Ex O if that officer slot exists. The Company Commander’s job is to lead the Company in Battle. To rally demoralized troops and actually get in with the troops judging moral. Yes this does mean a Sgt will be controlling where what goes where. A Company Sgt will have a lot more experience than a Company Commander. When I was LT the saying in base Sgt run everything officers stay in rear. In battle the valuable Sgt stays in the Rear and the officer goes forward to lead.
It also amazing how badly the Russian Electronic Warfare Ability has fallen apart. The SOVIET troops I was trained to fight would have had things Jammed to point voice radio communications would be iffy and idea of communication with a drone laughable. Any transmission likely to get targeted by enemy fire.