Shaun Kenney | Politics and Religion in Virginia's Public Square


Wednesday, April 16, 2003 Iraqi defeat jolts Russian military Now isn't this a shame. After the First Persian Gulf War, I remember hearing from the then Soviet military generals on how concerned they were that the Americans had penetrated and destroyed Iraqi defenses so quickly. Back then, our response was that the Iraqis poorly implemented the defense. Fast forward twelve years later, and now it seems as if the Russians are really concerned: The swift victory by mobile, high-tech American forces over heavily armored Iraqi troops dug in to defend large cities like Baghdad has jolted many Russian military planners. "The Iraqi Army was a replica of the Russian Army, and its defeat was not predicted by our generals," says Vitaly Shlykov, a former deputy defense minister of Russia. Like its Soviet prototype, Iraq's Army was huge but made up mainly of young, poorly trained conscripts. Its battle tactics called for broad frontal warfare, with massed armor and artillery, and a highly centralized command structure. But those forces were trounced in a few days by relatively small numbers of US and British forces, who punched holes in the Iraqi front using precision weapons and seized the country's power centers more rapidly than traditional military thinkers could have imagined. "The military paradigm has changed, and luckily we didn't have to learn that lesson firsthand," says Yevgeny Pashentsev, author of a book on Russian military reform. "The Americans have rewritten the textbook, and every country had better take note." Of course, many of the Iraqi generals were negotiated with by the Coalition forces. Additionally, no Ba'athist is going to defend something that will inevitably cease to exist. Iraq ain't Mother Russia. Here's another problem. The articles comes out to say that the Russians "can afford an army comparable to those of France or Britain, but hard decisions must be made," according to Russian military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer. But towards what end? Others say that Russia also must define a clear post-Soviet security doctrine. "How can we reform our Army when we have not defined the threats it must deal with?" says Mr. Dvorkin. "We must first identify our national interests, then we'll know who our enemies might be." For anyone really interested, check out the Russian Federation Military Doctrine, last updated in 1993. It's focus? Strategic Rocket Forces, a.k.a. nuclear bombs. Not an ideal focus when you have a conscript army. posted by Shaun Kenney \| 4/16/2003 10:39:00 AM \| 0 comments 0 Comments: Post a Comment Home
	RedStormPAC $ JEFFERSONIAD POLL: Whom do you support for Virginia Attorney General? 1) John Brownlee 2) Ken Cuccinelli View Results About ShaunKenney.com is one of Virginia's oldest political blogs, focusing on the role of religion and politics in public life. Shaun Kenney, 30, lives in Fluvanna County, Virginia. Contact E-mail RSS/Atom Feed The Jeffersoniad Archives March 2002 April 2002 May 2002 June 2002 July 2002 August 2002 September 2002 October 2002 November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 April 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009