Assessment of Russia's armed forces

[RoofGardener]

A somewhat worrying article from the BBC website cites a defence analysis company's report on Putin's troops.

Apparently since the poor performance in Georgia (they won, but it was ugly), they've tried to modernise, with better training, equipment, and doctrine.

And most of the improved units are on the Ukranian border. Surprise surprise.

BBC Article.

"In the last couple of years, there have been indications, even in military parades in Moscow, that this is a more Western-looking army," Mr Giles says.

"New load-carrying equipment for ordinary soldiers and a wider distribution of personal radios - until recently the preserve of platoon commanders at best - are simple and obvious indications of how the Russian army has invested in improving and modernising its equipment overall."

The CSRC says it has tracked many of the units involved in the Crimea operation.

"They were drawn from a wide range of Russia's rapid reaction forces, not just the airborne units that are traditionally thought of in this role," says Mr Giles.

"There were elements from the special forces reconnaissance brigades and the marine infantry."

It goes on....

Whatever its shortcomings, Mr Giles says "today the Russian military is vastly more capable than it was in 2008 and much more capable than certainly the Ukrainians - and superior to the forces currently deployed on the territory of all of its Western neighbours".

He believes that Russia can sustain this military threat to Ukraine for some considerable time.

"The Russian units deployed on Ukraine's eastern border can probably remain in the field longer than many Western planners assume," he says.

"Russia is not much concerned at inconvenience or short-term financial costs if it makes long-term strategic gains.

"Many indicators and warnings of preparation for a possible invasion are in place, including logistics, food supplies, medical services, and interior troops which would be used for control of occupied areas," he says.

"But this is not necessarily an indication that Russia will invade, simply that Russia wishes to be prepared to do so given the opportunity or the perceived necessity. "

Hmmmm

Edited April 8, 2014 by RoofGardener

[Space Commander Travis]

Yes, Putin is the New Hitler and is getting ready for the Blitzekrieg that will re-establish Commie dominance over Europe, repeat ad infinitum until the world swallows the Obama/EU/CIA propaganda.

[Space Commander Travis]

NATO holding "Joint Military Exercises" with the democratic Ukrainian government was not provocative in any way, of course. NATO rushing to welcome all the ex Warsaw PAct countries into its embrace and so establishing a Democratic military presence right on Russia's doorstep, in contravention of the agreement made when the USSR broke up, was not provocative in any way, of course.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Russia pretty much won that conflict with Georgia with ease, no offense to Georgia. i hate to say it but i find this report wrong. Back in 2008 Russia could easily invade Ukraine. Id say Ukraine is much stronger now than in 2008.

[Space Commander Travis]

I think the real reason for this revival of the Red Menace is the same reason as the "West" is so determined to engineer a confrontation with Iran; that it's angry that it can't get Russia to dance to its tune any more like it did when the buffoon Yeltsin (who was of course a CIA patsy) was drunk in charge.

[Helen of Annoy]

I think the real reason for this revival of the Red Menace is the same reason as the "West" is so determined to engineer a confrontation with Iran; that it's angry that it can't get Russia to dance to its tune any more like it did when the buffoon Yeltsin (who was of course a CIA patsy) was drunk in charge.

While I think the real reason for this revival is Russian oligarchy losing last touch with reality. They became too rich too fast and now they truly believe they are better than anyone else. And above any law, of course. I don't even have to mention moral in this context.

It’s very hard if not impossible to explain to people who **** in golden toilets that they can’t have it all.

[+and-then]

While I think the real reason for this revival is Russian oligarchy losing last touch with reality. They became too rich too fast and now they truly believe they are better than anyone else. And above any law, of course. I don't even have to mention moral in this context.

It’s very hard if not impossible to explain to people who **** in golden toilets that they can’t have it all.

It looks very much as if eastern Ukraine is about to go the way of Crimea - unless the Ukrainians are willing to stand alone. Their best move would seem to be a quick preparation (very visibly) of insurgency actions and training. That is probably the only thing that would give Putin pause. The west has become a weak sister and the Ukrainians are next on Putin's list. His military might take Ukraine in a few weeks or less but a determined resistance could make it a Pyrrhic victory at best.

[MordorOrc]

Whilst I think Colonel Rhubarb is talking out of a hole in his ass, Russia's military is still a shadow of the former force that the Soviets possessed. Russia's forces in 2008 and those used in 2014 come from two different branches of the military. Russian naval infantry are those that currently occupy Crimea where as the Mad Max troops that walked into Georgia in 2008 were regular Russian infantry and armor, most of whom still retained their Cold War era weapons and uniform.

The naval infantry has always been the sorts of forces which get the new equipment first and I think it will be a few years yet before Russian forces acquire the same level of technology that naval infantry has now across the whole of the regular armed forces. In any case, the only significant threat Russia possesses is it's nuclear arsenal. Russia only poses a threat to the countries it borders.

[stevewinn]

what about a NATO report in 2009 which found only 6,000 Ukrainian troops would be likely to fight. that was out of 87,000 regular soldiers. and we see very little evidence to show this as changed.

As for Russia, Its estimated Russia can sustain a fighting force of 50,000 for three months, and this seems the plan by the west to keep Russia massed on the border for three months or longer. seems to be working because Russia massed 80,000 according to Russian NEWS channel RT. and now only two and a half months later, if NATO are right has reduced to a estimated 60,000. give it a few more weeks and Russia will have to stick or twist.

[MordorOrc]

what about a NATO report in 2009 which found only 6,000 Ukrainian troops would be likely to fight. that was out of 87,000 regular soldiers. and we see very little evidence to show this as changed.

As for Russia, Its estimated Russia can sustain a fighting force of 50,000 for three months, and this seems the plan by the west to keep Russia massed on the border for three months or longer. seems to be working because Russia massed 80,000 according to Russian NEWS channel RT. and now only two and a half months later, if NATO are right has reduced to a estimated 60,000. give it a few more weeks and Russia will have to stick or twist.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have been progressively strangled by countless thieving ogilarchs to the point where they no longer can meet any of their regional neighbors on equal terms. If this sort of thing happened ten years ago to the exact year, Ukraine would have been able to meet any Russian force equally. They had a substantial amount of good equipment that has gone to waste, although I do think that the skill of the average soldier, according to a Russian acquaintance of mine, is just as good as any Russian soldier.

[+and-then]

what about a NATO report in 2009 which found only 6,000 Ukrainian troops would be likely to fight. that was out of 87,000 regular soldiers. and we see very little evidence to show this as changed.

As for Russia, Its estimated Russia can sustain a fighting force of 50,000 for three months, and this seems the plan by the west to keep Russia massed on the border for three months or longer. seems to be working because Russia massed 80,000 according to Russian NEWS channel RT. and now only two and a half months later, if NATO are right has reduced to a estimated 60,000. give it a few more weeks and Russia will have to stick or twist.

Yes, it is expensive to stage forces and not use them. But Ukraine would probably wither quickly from a combined arms assault. They should make a point of showing the assembly and training of their own brand of insurgents. Russia is brutal but they will think twice if they really believe they are facing another Chechnya situation.

[stevewinn]

Yes, it is expensive to stage forces and not use them. But Ukraine would probably wither quickly from a combined arms assault. They should make a point of showing the assembly and training of their own brand of insurgents. Russia is brutal but they will think twice if they really believe they are facing another Chechnya situation.

I dont think they would think twice. Russia has support in Eastern Ukrainian, they could roll into these areas and the people would welcome them, which would lead to the - much feared splitting of the country - as for Chechnya - against the Islamic movement there, Russia crush them as late as 2009. and now we see a pro Russian government in region and it remains part of the Russian Federation. obviously still a guerrilla movement but no-where near as strong as it was.

[SHaYap]

Put the guns away ... fer gawd's sake and the love of humanity ~ put them guns away ~ now is not the time fer blood shedding ~

[+OverSword]

NATO holding "Joint Military Exercises" with the democratic Ukrainian government was not provocative in any way, of course. NATO rushing to welcome all the ex Warsaw PAct countries into its embrace and so establishing a Democratic military presence right on Russia's doorstep, in contravention of the agreement made when the USSR broke up, was not provocative in any way, of course.

Perhaps Russia should have applied for NATO membership.

[acidhead]

NATO holding "Joint Military Exercises" with the democratic Ukrainian government was not provocative in any way, of course. NATO rushing to welcome all the ex Warsaw PAct countries into its embrace and so establishing a Democratic military presence right on Russia's doorstep, in contravention of the agreement made when the USSR broke up, was not provocative in any way, of course.

Joint exercises...

[Harry_Dresden]

Yes, it is expensive to stage forces and not use them. But Ukraine would probably wither quickly from a combined arms assault. They should make a point of showing the assembly and training of their own brand of insurgents. Russia is brutal but they will think twice if they really believe they are facing another Chechnya situation.

Prolly the only way that Ukraine can offer any form of resistance to Putin's Greater Russia plan, other than begging the west for military intervention.