PDA

View Full Version : In Georgia, Russia saw its Army's shortcomings



RandomGuy
10-10-2008, 11:55 AM
Moscow – The global perception of the Russia-Georgia war this summer is that an armored juggernaut of old Soviet military proportions rolled over its puny rival after a five-day conflict.

But the view from Moscow is different. Many Russian military experts are still shaking their heads in dismay over a catalog of delays and mistakes that plagued the Russian Army's thrust into South Ossetia.

"The war made it clear that we have all kinds of shortcomings in equipment, training, battlefield coordination, and intelligence," says Alexei Arbatov, a military expert with the Carnegie Center in Moscow.

The Russian Army's questionable performance has prompted urgent debate here over Russia's need for a modern, mobile, professional army capable of rapidly responding to challenges that might erupt along Russia's long borders with its unstable post-Soviet neighbors. In fact, the August conflict is giving fresh impetus for a 30 percent jump in defense spending, and a military modernization plan.

It comes on top of years of accumulated oil revenues, and an increasingly patriotic public mood.

"Russia has changed a lot lately, and the spirit in the country is different from what it used to be," says Lt. Gen. (Ret) Gennady Yevstasyev, a senior adviser to the PIR Center, an independent security think tank in Moscow. "The public will now support major military reform, even if it entails financial hardship. Many things that were stalemated for years will now move forward."

Already, Russian defense budgets are set to leap next year to a post-Soviet record of over $50 billion. Similar jumps are projected for coming years as well.

The fresh increases, announced by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in late September, are in addition to a special $200-billion procurement program aimed at restoring the country's degraded strategic forces.

Mr. Arbatov argues that Russia's military problems run deeper than just two decades of neglect. "There is no political leadership over military organization. Nor is there any democratic control. The system needs to be changed," he says.

Russian forces entering South Ossetia lacked even basic intelligence regarding Georgian artillery positions and troop deployments, which led several of their leading units into costly ambushes. In one surprise attack, the 58th Army's senior commander, Gen. Anatoly Khrulyev, was badly wounded and had to be evacuated.

In a desperate effort to get information, the Russians sent an electronic reconnaissance version of the Tupolev Tu-22M Backfire bomber over the battlefield and it got shot down. In all, Russia lost four planes, including three Sukhoi Su-25 attack fighters to unexpectedly effective Georgian air defenses. Some Russian commanders reported using cellphones to communicate with their units when their own radios failed.

Additionally, the tanks deployed by the Russian Army did not have night sights for their guns, and the reactive armor designed to protect them from Georgian antitank weapons proved unreliable.

President Dmitry Medvedev spoke about the Georgia war as a wake-up call for the Kremlin. "A war can flare up suddenly and can be absolutely real," he said to military leaders late last month. "Local smouldering conflicts ... can turn into a real conflagration."

Russia's 2003 military doctrine calls for its armed forces to be able to fight a major war in the West or the Far East, and handle two simultaneous local conflicts or insurgencies. Moscow has relied on its fraying Soviet-era missile forces to deter big enemies, while its conventional army has struggled for over a decade in ultimately successful attempts to quell the separatist rebellion in Chechnya, its only active conflict until Georgia.

"Modernization of the armed forces must go ahead, regardless of any crisis," Medvedev said last week, in apparent reference to global financial turmoil. "We have a sustainable economy. We have enough material and intellectual resources not to depend on anyone."

Moscow does not feel any immediate threat from the West, say military analysts, despite increased tensions over US missile defense deployments in Eastern Europe and the projected expansion of NATO into the former Soviet Union.

"We regard NATO as a dangerous organization, but right now it's not so strong," says Andrei Klimov, deputy chair of the State Duma's international affairs committee. "The problem is that NATO will become more dangerous if it includes countries like Georgia and Ukraine. In the cold war, when only the US and Western countries were in NATO, it was stable and predictable. We have enough resources to defend ourselves at present, but in the future we will need to think about this."

The military now hopes to get a new generation of conventional weapons, including attack helicopters, strike fighters, and multipurpose troop carriers similar to the US Army's Bradley fighting vehicles. "Russia doesn't even have some of the equipment that Georgia deployed, such as unmanned reconnaissance drones," says Vladimir Yevseyev, an analyst at the independent Center for International Security in Moscow.

Russia's controversial system of military conscription could also prove a casualty of the war. Professional soldiers bore the brunt of the fighting while ill-trained recruits, who serve only one year, were mostly kept off the battlefield. "The recruit soldier is fading away. We need professional soldiers, with serious training," says General Yevstasyev.

Under a $200-billion long-term program initiated last year, Russia will renew its land-based arsenal of intercontinental missiles, build a fleet of nuclear submarines designed to fire advanced Bulava-3 underwater-launched missiles, add to its force of strategic bombers, and build many new warships, including up to six aircraft carriers. President Medvedev has pledged to finalize plans for a full makeover of the strategic forces by December.

Whether Russia's depleted defense industries have maintained the capacity to fill the military's ambitious shopping list without much larger infusions of capital and new managerial expertise, remains a serious question.

"The wish is there on the part of our generals, but where will they get the gadgets?" says Vitaly Shlykov, a former deputy defense minister who now works as a civilian adviser to the Defense Ministry. "The military-industrial complex has been declining for the past 20 years, and nowadays all our best managers are working in oil and gas. The climate may be favorable for pumping in money nowadays, but without fundamental reform it will all remain just talk."

-----------------------------------------------

The Georgian president quipped:

"Russian soliders are poorly trained, poorly equipped, and mostly drunk, but there are a LOT of them."

RandomGuy
10-10-2008, 11:56 AM
If the US had finished training and upgrading the Georgian military, it would have been VERY ugly for the Russians.

I can guarantee that the next president will pump up Georgia with some serious military aid.

MannyIsGod
10-10-2008, 03:03 PM
The Russians have huge problems.

1) Their equipment is old and shitty.
2) They don't have a lot of training

Putin has been trying to fix those things but that takes time. Is their navy even functional now? There's something to be said for having vast numbers, but their forces just aren't top notch and never really were.

RandomGuy
10-21-2008, 12:47 PM
The Russians have huge problems.

1) Their equipment is old and shitty.
2) They don't have a lot of training

Putin has been trying to fix those things but that takes time. Is their navy even functional now? There's something to be said for having vast numbers, but their forces just aren't top notch and never really were.

Speaking as an army intel analyst from the very last few years of the Cold War:

We kinda knew that, but didn't really know how much their tanks sucked until they got absolutely owned in the first Gulf War.

(the following is something I remember reading about a specific battle in the gulf war, and as such is subject to the details being off, if not the overall story)

They had ONE rolling engagment between a company of m1's spearheading the advance and a Battallion (3 companies) of Russian t72's and some older tanks. The battalion was from the Republican Guard and didn't join the surrender-a-thon.

Basically, it was a night engagement at range. Soviet tanks can't fire on the move as the M1 can, generally can't see as well due to older night-vision technology, if they even had it, and were outranged by about 500 meters.

The slaughter resulted in dozens of T72's being destroyed, no losses aside from one Bradley crewmember, and no M1's lost.

If we had equipped Georgia with M1's and a bit more anti-air assets to counter the Russian air advantage, I wonder if the Russian Georgian war wouldn't have gone differently.

boutons_
10-21-2008, 01:25 PM
Divided South Ossetia wants to secede from Georgia.
Russia wants to re-integrate SO into Russia, while intimidating Georgia.

WTF does the USA have to do with that ?

1369
10-21-2008, 01:45 PM
army intel analyst

Oxymoron.

Shastafarian
10-21-2008, 01:47 PM
The Russians still use T72s?

1369
10-21-2008, 01:49 PM
I'm sure they still have a number of them in their inventory and I believe they still produce them for other nations, such as the ones destined for the Sudan before the Somali pirates got to them.

MannyIsGod
10-21-2008, 02:07 PM
The Russians still use T72s?

The next series wasn't much better. They lack the fire control systems that western tanks use which doesn't allow them to fire on the go. They probably don't have very many units with T8x.

Soviet doctorine was always about superiority in numbers as opposed to technology and thats never going to work against American forces.

Shastafarian
10-21-2008, 02:14 PM
The next series wasn't much better. They lack the fire control systems that western tanks use which doesn't allow them to fire on the go. They probably don't have very many units with T8x.

Soviet doctorine was always about superiority in numbers as opposed to technology and thats never going to work against American forces.

I see they're going to start deploying their "future" T-90 MBT in 2010. Has anyone viewed the capabilities I wonder.

RandomGuy
10-21-2008, 02:19 PM
The Russians still use T72s?

Yes, they do.

India actually has more modern T90's than the Russian army does. (globalsecurity.org)

I would also note that the T90 still doesn't have the ability to accurately fire while moving.

Here is a picture of the T-72's that were used to annihilate the Georgian Army:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/images/2008/09/02/t72b_minsk_parade_may_2005_1_2.jpg

(from this article:Old Russian Tanks Relied on 'Overwhelming' Force (http://blog.wired.com/defense/images/2008/09/02/t72b_minsk_parade_may_2005_1_2.jpg) )



When you outnumber your enemy 10 to 1, it doesn't much matter if your tanks are museum pieces. "This has been overlooked and forgotten by Western pundits since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union," Sieff contends.

Russia still has a number of T55's in service, if memory serves, mostly in training units and reserves.

MaNuMaNiAc
10-21-2008, 02:20 PM
"The public will now support major military reform, even if it entails financial hardship. Many things that were stalemated for years will now move forward."

WTF does this mean??

1369
10-21-2008, 02:23 PM
WTF does this mean??

"We don't care if the bread lines reopen, we're sinking our money into weapons."

1369
10-21-2008, 02:24 PM
I would also note that the T90 still doesn't have the ability to accurately fire while moving.

Having a big-assed smoothbore barrel doesn't help the matter either, even if it is the biggest piece on the block.

RandomGuy
10-21-2008, 02:27 PM
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4277747.html

The above bit is the popular mechanics take on the war.

Interesting that "cyberwar" was looked at. Russia had a lot of advantages there.

RandomGuy
10-21-2008, 02:33 PM
"We don't care if the bread lines reopen, we're sinking our money into weapons."

Bingo.

The Russian public is fully aligned behind Putin in a way VERY eerily similar to the way the Germans were all about Hitler.

He makes them feel better about their country, after a period of weakness.

The difference of course is that their military sucks sweaty monkey balls, and if they ever really tried anything big, would get spanked thoroughly and sent home to momma.

Russia's military has little capacity to threaten any country larger than Georgia.

1369
10-21-2008, 02:54 PM
The difference of course is that their military sucks sweaty monkey balls, and if they ever really tried anything big, would get spanked thoroughly and sent home to momma.

Russia's military has little capacity to threaten any country larger than Georgia.

But, they have nationalism and numbers. That was always the fear of trying to defend Fulda is they would overrun it through sheer numbers.

And as someone once said, “You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it.”.

Shastafarian
10-21-2008, 02:57 PM
Bingo.

The Russian public is fully aligned behind Putin in a way VERY eerily similar to the way the Germans were all about Hitler.

He makes them feel better about their country, after a period of weakness.

The difference of course is that their military sucks sweaty monkey balls, and if they ever really tried anything big, would get spanked thoroughly and sent home to momma.

Russia's military has little capacity to threaten any country larger than Georgia.

But do you think that's why people are worried? If your military can't do the job then you might as well use a big bomb.

RandomGuy
10-22-2008, 08:47 AM
But, they have nationalism and numbers. That was always the fear of trying to defend Fulda is they would overrun it through sheer numbers.

And as someone once said, “You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it.”.

I would point out that the population of the US now exceeds that of Russia, and the collapse of their health care system and economy has really worsened the demographics in that regard.

US+Western Europe has roughly 3 times the population of Russia.

Add that to the fact that the 10 percent of eligible draftees who actually show up for military service are the ones who aren't smart or educated enough to get out of it...

RandomGuy
10-22-2008, 08:50 AM
Plus there is the fact that they would have to get through Poland today before even reaching Fulda at this point...

RandomGuy
10-22-2008, 08:53 AM
But do you think that's why people are worried? If your military can't do the job then you might as well use a big bomb.

That is about the only thing they have going for them at this point.

BUT

Their strategic nuclear arsenal has the same problems that the conventional forces do.

They haven't made any new designs in decades that I am aware of, and if they don't do some maintenance on what they do have you can bet that their deterrent will degrade. Ballistic missles are fairly complicated things.

The flip side of that is that if you have 10,000 plus of them, you only need to get 1/10 of them to work, heh.