There are still major gaps in the training and skills of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. They should be fixed quickly so that Ukraine does not lose so many soldiers.
This is the assessment of a British military expert interviewed by Glen Grantwhich has prepared on the changes needs of the armed forces of Ukraine report (you switch to another service).
According to Grant’s report, there are still too many incompetent commanders in the armed forces who have been promoted by relationships rather than skills, and they are not being removed.
Mistakes backfire in many ways. At worst, Ukraine will send soldiers to the front, according to Grant with only one week of training (you switch to another service). This is what the soldiers’ mothers and friends tell him.
Officers are particularly lacking in training, and the armed forces are therefore not capable of mobile warfare, Grant tells via video link from Kyiv.
– It’s the kiss of death. If we don’t move, Russia will grind forward meter by meter, says Grant.
Lieutenant Colonel Grant, who retired from the British armed forces, works as an expert at the Baltic Security Foundation think tank in Latvia, but also has an influence in Ukraine.
Grant has worked in various roles to reform the Ukrainian Armed Forces since 2014 and has written on the subject, among others In the Kyiv Post newspaper (you will switch to another service).
During the past year, Grant has informally advised, among other things, on the development of Ukraine’s territorial defense forces and is working to promote reforms in military training.
Grant is also very familiar with Finnish military training, as he served as Britain’s military representative in Finland in 1998–2001.
Grant’s review focuses largely on the same mistakes and shortcomings that a high-ranking Finnish officer told in his interview in Kyiv.
– There was nothing surprising in that for me. He hit the nail on the head. It’s interesting because I hear the same thing from the front, says Grant.
“The shortcomings have been known for a long time”
The report has not sparked a wide debate in Ukraine. It has been published on some Ukrainian platforms on the internet, but not many people seem to know about it. The Baltic Security Foundation plans to publish the report later.
Grant submitted his report to the leadership of the Ukrainian Armed Forces at the turn of January and February. unsuccessfully reached out to a representative of the armed forces to comment on Grant’s assessments.
At ‘s request, the report was read by a Ukrainian researcher It would be Melnyk as well as a former officer of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Serhii Hrabskyi.
Researcher Melnyk thinks Grant knows his stuff well.
– He is absolutely right, and his recommendations make sense. Most of the things are not new to experts or soldiers. The biggest challenge is to wage war and make the necessary changes at the same time, says Melnyk.
Melnyk works as a security policy expert In the Razumkov center (you will switch to another service)which is an independent social science research institute in Kyiv.
Hrabsky, who has had a military career, is also familiar with the shortcomings listed by Grant. According to Hrabsky, the mentioned problems exist in the Ukrainian armed forces, but he does not consider them fatal.
According to Hrabsky, there are shortcomings in the training, but there is a strong effort to improve.
– We have to understand that we are acquiring this experience with our blood. The command echelon would certainly like more soldiers to replace those lost, but thorough training is a priority, says Hrabskyi.
Hrabskyi is a reserve colonel. As part of his military career, he has also worked as a peacekeeper. Nowadays, he works as a civil activist and military expert, and leads the Ukrainian organization he founded organization of peacekeepers (you move to another service).
As for mobile warfare, Hrabskyi says it is not at the top of the priority list.
– The most important task of the Ukrainians at the moment is to repel enemy attacks.
According to Grant, the West is under the spell of the public image of the armed forces
Grant made the report on his own initiative. The report is very straightforward and its suggestions for improvement are detailed.
According to Grant, mistakes start at the top. Grant points out that the best commanders in the Ukrainian armed forces are excellent, but some are “thoroughly Soviet”.
– High-ranking commanders are not based on competence but on loyalty. Who appointed them and what clan they belong to. So if it’s a friend, they won’t be fired, no matter how bad they are, Grant says.
Grant inherits a score-or-out mentality from the military. In his opinion, it is typical in the armed forces today that commanders do not want subordinates who are more qualified than themselves, and competence is not rewarded.
In Grant’s opinion, the armed forces, on the other hand, know how to build a public image all too well. As a result, the self-conceit of the armed forces sinks into Western leaders.
Western diplomats in Kiev also get their share of Grant’s criticism. In Grant’s opinion, they haven’t networked enough with the soldiers.
– How many connections do they have with soldiers and how many on the front line? If you don’t have them, you don’t know reality, says Grant.
“If everyone moves forward only with relationships, who has carved out the profits?”
Serhii Hrabskyi refutes the accusations of dubious reasons for promotion by stating that they are not only a problem of the Ukrainian army, but that it occurs everywhere.
– This problem exists in every army, including the British army.
According to Hrabsky, the problem is not so big that it would decisively affect the army’s operational conditions.
Hrabskyi reminds us of the big picture of the war: small Ukraine has been able to evict the big aggressor from the territories it occupied and prevented its progress.
– If everyone only advances with relationships, then who has made the gains on the front? Who is currently holding the defensive positions and how? he points out.
On one thing, Hrabskyi exactly agrees with Grant: the Soviet legacy and the Soviet mentality are Ukraine’s biggest problem. They prevent politicians and commanders from better addressing the problems in the army.
– But the same applies to all countries that belonged to the Soviet Union or were under its influence. Imagine what would have happened to Finland if it had become a Soviet republic. You can get an idea if you look at the state of Karjalankannas, says Hrabskyi.
According to Hrabskyi, it is difficult to unlearn the old.
Grant: Officers’ bad skills lead to soldiers’ deaths
According to Grant, a big drawback is also the image of Ukraine’s military aid needs. According to him, it is skewed.
The media is constantly talking about battle tanks and fighters. They are also needed, but according to Grant, there is a severe shortage on the front lines of drones, night vision devices, mortars, grenades and assault rifle cartridges, among other things. That is, from fairly simple equipment.
He finds it incomprehensible that Ukraine has not achieved mass production of, for example, mortars and grenades in a year.
– It’s incompetence, laziness or complete incompetence, Grant downloads.
According to Grant, pointing out problems in Ukraine often only leads to hand-wringing. The stickiness of the change is blamed, for example, on the organizational structure or legislation.
– Well, then change the law, Grant replies.
During the war, Grant thought, there would be no time to chase. He repeatedly reminds us that in war, the price of mistakes and incompetence is death – unnecessary death, because mistakes could be corrected.
– Soldiers die all the time because they don’t know what they are doing. That’s exactly what the Finnish officer said, Grant reminds.
Grant praises that, despite the lack of skills, the Ukrainian private soldiers are mostly very brave and courageous. However, the poor professionalism of the officers is fatal for them.
“Staying silent about problems plays into Russia’s pocket”
Serious internal problems in the Ukrainian military have rarely been reported, but recently they have been reported by, among other things Kyiv Independent newspaper (you will switch to another service) mixed foreign experts (you switch to another service).
Grant says that he constantly receives feedback that the shortcomings of the Ukrainian armed forces should not be brought out so prominently. Critics think Grant’s criticism plays into Russia’s pocket.
– Badass berries. Since Ukraine is constantly losing soldiers because things are not being done properly, things must be done properly, Grant says emphatically.
According to Grant, it doesn’t matter if Russia hears about the weaknesses of the Ukrainian armed forces, because if Ukraine itself takes its weaknesses seriously, its actions against Russia will become more effective.
– On the contrary, keeping quiet plays into Russia’s pocket, because then Russia is given the opportunity to improve its operations without Ukraine doing the same, Grant says.
Grant writes in his report that failures must be faced honestly and the government must not cover them up with self-righteous self-praise.
In Grant’s opinion, Ukraine is needed to speed up the changes in the Ukrainian armed forces pressure from civil society (you move to another service). It will not arise if the problems are not openly discussed.
Grant also hopes that foreign generals will stop polite but gratuitous praise, as flattery delays necessary changes.
Is the Ukrainian leadership aware of these shortcomings? In Serhii Hrabsky’s opinion, yes and no, because each decision-maker only works within the limits of his own competence and knowledge.
– In the past nine years, however, the Ukrainian army has developed faster than the army of many other countries over decades.