Vanguard Magazine

READY FOR THE FUTURE? ARE OUR ARMIES EQUIPPED AND F ew will forget the sight of massed Russian armoured vehi- cles parked in the open during their aborted advance on Kiev in March, easy prey for Ukrai- nian tank hunting patrols. It served as an early symbol of the incompetence of the Russian military and the fighting spirit of the Ukrainian defenders. Commentators relished highlighting Russian flaws, gloat- ing in the inadequacies of Putin's military, and basking in the success of the Ukrai- nian Armed Forces. What was less evident was any acknowl- edgment that orchestrating all the tools of war in an attack (Combined Arms Ma- noeuvre in the military jargon) is excep- tionally difficult to do. There is no more complex or challenging endeavour than prosecuting a war; doing it well is incred- ibly hard. While there is no doubt that the Rus- sians made a hash of their offensive and have continued to look inept in the ensu- ing months, commentators would do well to pause to ask what it tells us about our own readiness (and that of our friends and allies) to fight this type of war. Despite being British, my particular focus in this article is on the Canadian military; however, the themes hold true in the UK, the US, Australia and with all our NATO allies. Complacency and the seeming absence of existential threats has allowed successive governments to under- invest in Defence for decades (despite claims by ministers of real term increases in spending). Many of the problems are common be- tween our militaries, with false choices presented during Defence reviews and talk between the Services of winners and losers: cutting the Navy to grow the Army, or vice versa, etc. The real loser from these reviews tends to be national security and the winner has been our prospective adversaries. It is great news that governments ap- pear to be taking Defence more seriously BY MAJOR GENERAL RUPERT JONES www.vanguardcanada.com OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2021 37 ARMY in light of events in Ukraine, with under- takings to increase the percentage of GDP spent on Defence. However, typically spending remains far lower than 30 years ago. Given gloomy economic forecasts, it remains to be seen what these budget un- dertakings will look like in practice. Too often funding announcements are little more than smoke and mirrors. National security requires better. The Canadian military, along with her closest allies, has been significantly emas- culated over recent decades and very con- siderable investment is necessary to allow them to re-build and be ready for today's threats. A few Canadian Army snippets about why we should ask some searching questions of ourselves when observing the Russian failings. • The Canadian Army is just 42,000 strong (regular and reserve). Even these small numbers hide the reality, with combat posts often being discreetly re- invested elsewhere. Aspirations to grow are hampered by an inability to recruit additional personnel. Anyone who says that numbers are not a relevant indicator has clearly never been on a battlefield, size matters. • Much of the Canadian Army's equip- ment fleet is woefully out of date and has no place on a modern battlefield. Their fleet of Leopard 2 tanks date from the late 70s and there is no plan to replace them; some will argue that the tank is dead, but it has proven a constant on the battlefield for over a century and there is life in them yet. The Light Armoured Vehicles 6.0, the mainstay of the fleet, is relatively new, but is used in a range of roles that it was not designed for. Fi- nally, the Tactical Armoured Patrol Ve- hicle is used as a reconnaissance vehicle, for which it is not optimised and it has questionable cross-country ability. • This fleet of vehicles is often in a parlous state of repair despite considerable ef- forts to improve readiness since Afghani- stan: the spare parts and funds required to bring them to an acceptable readiness state are simply not there. The Leopard 2s are so old that they are essentially on life support and are held centrally to husband their maintenance. • The jury is out about what the Ukraine conflict tells us about the balance of new and old weapons of war. However, there is little doubt that technology is actually making Combined Arms Manoeuvre harder, not easier, with the need to in- tegrate and defend against a host of new technologies, from drones to an array of readily available software applications. Unless we practice and train extensive- ly, we cannot hope to be as good as we could be. As a young officer in Germany in the 1990s, it was common to spend five months a year on exercise or on the ranges; today's troops can only dream of so much training time. There is plenty in here to be gloomy about and hard analysis is required about how the Canadian Army and her allies would perform in high intensity warfare, but there are reasons to be optimistic too. The young men and women joining the military are as good as ever. Innovation projects are underway to give meaning to the aspiration to prepare the Army for the Information Age. Moves are afoot to arm troops with the essential digital skills to al- low them to fight with software as effec- tively as with their rifles. This can only be done in partnership with industry, and specifically with dis- ruptive tech start-ups who can enable a digital insurgency to fast-track the trans- formation of the fighting force. Luckily, there is a small group of highly dynamic companies who genuinely care about na- tional security who are committed to help- ing. Among them is WithYouWithMe, a veteran-founded digital skills company, who are dedicated to helping address the

• Cover