CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia

[IKnowNothing]

The chickens are coming home to roost...

Building brigades: Canada, NATO allies struggle to shore up Baltic defences against Russian threat​

Canada doesn't have enough troops to deploy without resorting to mobilization, report warns​

The idea looks good on paper.

But converting NATO's so-called "tripwire" forces in the three Baltic countries to fully topped-up fighting brigades — the kind that could withstand a Russian invasion — is proving to be a challenge for the lead nations involved: Canada, the United Kingdom and Germany.

At the last NATO summit in Madrid, leaders of the western military alliance ordered the conversion of battle groups in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to full combat brigades with anywhere from 4,000 to 6,000 troops each, depending on the availability of equipment.

Getting there is proving to be a struggle, according to two recent reports — one from the U.K. House of Commons, the other from a Warsaw-based international affairs think-tank.

Since that June NATO summit, journalists have been asking Canadian politicians and military officials when the Canadian-led brigade in Latvia will be created and what it will look like. Their responses have been vague.

In a recent interview with CBC News, Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre wouldn't be pinned down to a precise timeline but said "the first exercise we're looking at is in 2024 … at the brigade level."



https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ukraine-russia-latvia-lithuania-estonia-nato-1.6738735

Honestly, I found that article rather out of touch. Each of the three countries are lead nations on multi-national battlegroups, it seems like a wild leap to assume that the conversion to a Bde would drop the multinational aspect and become wholly Canadian/British/German.

Maybe this is already the case, but in my opinion they should be setting a consistent template for those Bde's, with a shopping list of needs from contributing countries. Say the US throws their weight around, dictates a Bde pattern similar to an ABCT, 3x mech CAB's, some sort of Cavalry unit, 155mm battalion, engineer battalion, support battalion.

What does the make up that look like to be effective, what does a lead nation need to pony up to be "lead"?

HQ goes without saying.
Then lets say at minimum one of the maneuver CAB's
Then the core of a multinational CAB (Same contribution as current eFP)

Looking at the current make up, if you pull the Spanish and Italians out you still have the makings of a CAB with 1x Canadian mech coy, 1x Slovakian mech coy, 1x Polish tank coy, and the grab bag of supporting contributions.

The Spanish and Italian contributions (each a mech coy + ~half dozen tanks) get you a chunk of the way to to the 3rd CAB, (lacking CS, CSS, HQ, dealing with a composite tank coy). Ideally one nation this on it's entirety.

Looking at the above, there seems like a reasonably straight line to a Bde. What is the biggest impediment?

Gaining contributing nations to round out and clean up the 3rd bn?
Providing HQ + CAB + being lead on a 2nd?
Providing enough of the Cavalry/CS/CSS at Bde level to be a credible lead nation?
Are a hodgepodge of sub and sub unit contributions viable to make a Bde or does it have to be scaled up?

 

[Fabius]

Well Germany has committed a German Bde, 41 Panzer Bde specifically to reinforce Lithuania, the UK has committed a UK Bde to Estonia. Both are pure national Bdes over and above the eFP forces, however they are both fly in brigades with only a few hundred HQ type personnel in the respective Baltic states.
So bottom line is Canada is the one country out of the three attempting to cobble together a MN Bde.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Well Germany has committed a German Bde, 41 Panzer Bde specifically to reinforce Lithuania, the UK has committed a UK Bde to Estonia. Both are pure national Bdes over and above the eFP forces, however they are both fly in brigades with only a few hundred HQ type personnel in the respective Baltic states.
So bottom line is Canada is the one country out of the three attempting to cobble together a MN Bde.

But a committed pure national flyover bde doesn't satisfy the ask of a bde in place- which zero of the three countries are capable/willing to do. UK 50% larger by population and GDP, Germany double, neither dealing with the Atlantic ocean.

 

[Kirkhill]

What does the make up that look like to be effective, what does a lead nation need to pony up to be "lead"?

Part of the problem is that each "host" nation is responsible for its own defence. It is expected to defend itself first with its own resources and each one does it own appreciation, makes its own estimates and its own investments. Then it looks for support.

Broadly speaking those countries will look for the things they don't have. Things like aircraft, air defence, long range fires, UAVs, comms and transport and tanks. And then troops.

So what could Canada supply with the warm bodies and equipment it has?

An Eastern Pattern Tank Battalion of 31 Leos.
90 or so LAVs with crews (CC/Gnr/Dr)
6 to 9 Infantry Recce platoons to be equipped with Javelins
UAVs/Radars/LRSS
18 M777s
Immediately acquire 6 to 12 HIMARS on a UOR FMS transfer from the US.
Brigade Transport Battalion - AHSVS and AMSVS-SMP and CH-147s

6 Pack of F18s

1 Frigate to support Baltic Ops.

Limit the number of warm bodies. Exploit the equipment we have available. Plug gaps with UORs from the Market. Seek assistance from allies to plug the rest. Rely on the locals to understand their needs.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Part of the problem is that each "host" nation is responsible for its own defence. It is expected to defend itself first with its own resources and each one does it own appreciation, makes its own estimates and its own investments. Then it looks for support.

Broadly speaking those countries will look for the things they don't have. Things like aircraft, air defence, long range fires, UAVs, comms and transport and tanks. And then troops.

Rely on the locals to understand their needs.

BNN Bloomberg – Canada Business News, TSX Today & Interest Rates

Get the latest Canadian business news, TSX updates, interest rates and Bank of Canada coverage. Explore stock market investing and get expert financial insights on investment portfolio strategies.

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

They're calling for a standing brigade.

We're on tap to lead it.
The question is whether can we scrape together enough to sustainably and credibly do so.

To that end:

A. If a 1 year Latvia deployment was seen as the culmination of the 3 year MRP for a significant portion of a CMBG, how "significant" can portion that before the tempo breaks the Army?
B. Is the answer to A enough to justify calling it a Canadian lead Bde.

For A, From the outside in it seems like we should be able to do
Bde HQ
Cav regiment HQ (2x Lav Recce Sqn)

CAB HQ (1x Tank Sqn, 2x Lav coy, CS Coy-)
CAB HQ (2x Lav Coy, CS Coy-)

Artillery Regiment (1x M777 Bty)
Engineer Regiment
Partial Service Bn

Setting us up to rely on other contributors willing to provide
1x Full CAB
2x Arty Batteries (ideally SP)
Bde Shorad
2x SP Mortar platoon
2x AT Platoon
Partial Service Bn

 

[markppcli]

Part of the problem is that each "host" nation is responsible for its own defence. It is expected to defend itself first with its own resources and each one does it own appreciation, makes its own estimates and its own investments. Then it looks for support.

Broadly speaking those countries will look for the things they don't have. Things like aircraft, air defence, long range fires, UAVs, comms and transport and tanks. And then troops.

So what could Canada supply with the warm bodies and equipment it has?

An Eastern Pattern Tank Battalion of 31 Leos.
90 or so LAVs with crews (CC/Gnr/Dr)
6 to 9 Infantry Recce platoons to be equipped with Javelins
UAVs/Radars/LRSS
18 M777s
Immediately acquire 6 to 12 HIMARS on a UOR FMS transfer from the US.
Brigade Transport Battalion - AHSVS and AMSVS-SMP and CH-147s

6 Pack of F18s

1 Frigate to support Baltic Ops.

Limit the number of warm bodies. Exploit the equipment we have available. Plug gaps with UORs from the Market. Seek assistance from allies to plug the rest. Rely on the locals to understand their needs.

The. Why did they ask for Bns and Bde’s instead of what ever “6-9 infantry Recce Platoons” would be? The one thing the Latvians have is infantry.

I don’t get your transport Bn but I don’t get most of you ideas so that’s no shock.

 

[KevinB]

Months ago the ask was for a Cdn Bde
We knew it down here, I don’t get how Canada seems to have missed that memo.
Not just leadership of a MN Bde, but a full Cdn Bde

I’m curious if the GOC just puts distressing information into the trash, rather than deal with it.

 

[Kirkhill]

The. Why did they ask for Bns and Bde’s instead of what ever “6-9 infantry Recce Platoons” would be? The one thing the Latvians have is infantry.

I don’t get your transport Bn but I don’t get most of you ideas so that’s no shock.

Never mind.

 

[markppcli]

Months ago the ask was for a Cdn Bde
We knew it down here, I don’t get how Canada seems to have missed that memo.
Not just leadership of a MN Bde, but a full Cdn Bde

I’m curious if the GOC just puts distressing information into the trash, rather than deal with it.

I mean that was never going to happen. I’m sure we’ll do something as valuable as flying an aurora over Port Au Prince.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I mean that was never going to happen. I’m sure we’ll do something as valuable as flying an aurora over Port Au Prince.

"for a few days"

 

[markppcli]

BNN Bloomberg – Canada Business News, TSX Today & Interest Rates

Get the latest Canadian business news, TSX updates, interest rates and Bank of Canada coverage. Explore stock market investing and get expert financial insights on investment portfolio strategies.

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

They're calling for a standing brigade.

We're on tap to lead it.
The question is whether can we scrape together enough to sustainably and credibly do so.

To that end:

A. If a 1 year Latvia deployment was seen as the culmination of the 3 year MRP for a significant portion of a CMBG, how "significant" can portion that before the tempo breaks the Army?
B. Is the answer to A enough to justify calling it a Canadian lead Bde.

For A, From the outside in it seems like we should be able to do
Bde HQ
Cav regiment HQ (2x Lav Recce Sqn)

CAB HQ (1x Tank Sqn, 2x Lav coy, CS Coy-)
CAB HQ (2x Lav Coy, CS Coy-)

Artillery Regiment (1x M777 Bty)
Engineer Regiment
Partial Service Bn

Setting us up to rely on other contributors willing to provide
1x Full CAB
2x Arty Batteries (ideally SP)
Bde Shorad
2x SP Mortar platoon
2x AT Platoon
Partial Service Bn

I think we could, at a push, manage two LAV Bn, and two Leo Sqns, with a Bde Recce Sqn. Leaving some Leo’s in Wainwright to train a rotation of Sqns on, preferably off set so as not two run through training at once. Assuming we augment to 25% with reservists we’d likely still need to have the Bde’s light Bn back fill -and stand down for 2 out of three years. We could maybe run this for 3 years until we run out of reservists to back fill and finally have to admit we’ve never had 9 Bns worth of infantry soldiers to begin with.

 

[FJAG]

Months ago the ask was for a Cdn Bde
We knew it down here, I don’t get how Canada seems to have missed that memo.
Not just leadership of a MN Bde, but a full Cdn Bde

I’m curious if the GOC just puts distressing information into the trash, rather than deal with it.

I think there is a reality gap between a full-time Canadian Brigade in Latvia and a flyover brigade with a full-time posted in brigade HQ, a rotational Combined Arms battle group (two LAV coys, 1 tank Sqn, one arty battery, one engr sqn and a svc bn slice) and, by flyover, two additional battlegroups, and the remainder of an artillery regiment, engineer regiment and service battalion.

That itself is difficult but not impossible. It becomes even more doable if one of the additional battle groups was the remainder of the existing full-time rotational multinational eFP battlegroup made up by Spain, Italy, Slovakia and Poland (who between them have enough infantry and tanks to form a CAB. That would reduce our commitment to one rotational and one flyover battlegroup.

The training opportunities would guarantee a fairly strong ResF participation. Effectively, the all-up rotational presence would only be around an extra 200-300 personnel. The fly-over component, OTOH would require another 2-3,000 but that can just be treated as part of the ongoing MRP programming. Equipment wise we would need to preposition 2-3 tank squadrons, 18 M777s (unless we can scrounge something up from elsewhere) and 2 LAV battalions in Latvia. That leaves enough gear in Canada for training and contingency operations. Too few guns are once again a weakness and someone would need to pony up some bucks to get the tank maintenance back on line.

Oh, yeah. And lets get that AD, anti-armour and anti-drone weapon UOR moving.

 

[MilEME09]

BNN Bloomberg – Canada Business News, TSX Today & Interest Rates

Get the latest Canadian business news, TSX updates, interest rates and Bank of Canada coverage. Explore stock market investing and get expert financial insights on investment portfolio strategies.

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

They're calling for a standing brigade.

We're on tap to lead it.
The question is whether can we scrape together enough to sustainably and credibly do so.

Radical suggestion, the CA is already hurting for man power, we have the reserves but they lack experience, and equipment. We need manpwer though and inexperienced reservists are still quicker to get up to speed then a raw recruit off the street in Toronto. We need to cover the gap until the Reg force can recruit and train enough troops. So how do you do it when the reserves off volunteers you might get half a section?

Step 1: Order in Council the activation of reserve regiments for a period of 1 year
Step 2: Organize the units into full battle groups, and train them for three months under the guidance of a Regular Force Training Cadre.
Step 3: Deploy the Reserve brigade for 9 months using 90% reserve and 10% regular force members.
Step 4: repeat per each division for 1 year each

The end state is you reduce the regular force man power burden while they reconstitute, and as you rotate through each division we get a much more skilled and well trained reserve force. In theory if we do this once per 2,3 and 4 Division reserve elements, that gives us 3 years to get the regular force back into fighting shape. Will the reserves like it? probably not but guess what we signed that dotted line and desperate times call for desperate measures.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Radical suggestion, the CA is already hurting for man power, we have the reserves but they lack experience, and equipment. We need manpwer though and inexperienced reservists are still quicker to get up to speed then a raw recruit off the street in Toronto. We need to cover the gap until the Reg force can recruit and train enough troops. So how do you do it when the reserves off volunteers you might get half a section?

Step 1: Order in Council the activation of reserve regiments for a period of 1 year
Step 2: Organize the units into full battle groups, and train them for three months under the guidance of a Regular Force Training Cadre.
Step 3: Deploy the Reserve brigade for 9 months using 90% reserve and 10% regular force members.
Step 4: repeat per each division for 1 year each

The end state is you reduce the regular force man power burden while they reconstitute, and as you rotate through each division we get a much more skilled and well trained reserve force. In theory if we do this once per 2,3 and 4 Division reserve elements, that gives us 3 years to get the regular force back into fighting shape. Will the reserves like it? probably not but guess what we signed that dotted line and desperate times call for desperate measures.

It's even easier than that.

Just declare an overseas mission/operational tour, with hundreds of Class C positions (and medals), and stand back and watch the stampede of reservists wanting to deploy.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

It's even easier than that.

Just declare an overseas mission/operational tour, with hundreds of Class C positions (and medals), and stand back and watch the stampede of reservists wanting to deploy.

One step further: amend the NDA to provide work protections at the national level for Reservists going on Class C... with substantial monetary consequences for employers that fail to allow P Res folks the time to train and deploy without getting laid off.

Another known barrier to Reserve employment taken care of.

 

[MilEME09]

One step further: amend the NDA to provide work protections at the national level for Reservists going on Class C... with substantial monetary consequences for employers that fail to allow P Res folks the time to train and deploy without getting laid off.

Another known barrier to Reserve employment taken care of.

Under every provincial reservist leave policy, if on a named operation, time off must be given for the duration of the deployment including pre and post training. The issue is enforcement, the normal complaints system via a provinces labour board is time consuming and tedious.

 

[markppcli]

It's even easier than that.

Just declare an overseas mission/operational tour, with hundreds of Class C positions (and medals), and stand back and watch the stampede of reservists wanting to deploy.

So what we do now ? Will they show up with pass ports and security clearances done this time.? cough 2022*cough* Snide commentary on the fact a BOR had to work 12hr day 7 days a week because some were told “they’ll waiver your security clearance / passport” aside, I agree we’d get many volunteers, for the first roto. The follow on rotations will see a drop off, some how the prospect of 6 months of maple resolve doesn’t hit the same sense of adventure.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Under every provincial reservist leave policy, if on a named operation, time off must be given for the duration of the deployment including pre and post training. The issue is enforcement, the normal complaints system via a provinces labour board is time consuming and tedious.

Oh I know the system exists. I was recommending we put national level teeth into the problem. Companies won't be as willing to fuck Cpl Bloggins about if it's CAF Inc. going to bat for them, vice having Cpl Bloggins go to the labour board.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I think we could, at a push, manage two LAV Bn, and two Leo Sqns, with a Bde Recce Sqn. Leaving some Leo’s in Wainwright to train a rotation of Sqns on, preferably off set so as not two run through training at once. Assuming we augment to 25% with reservists we’d likely still need to have the Bde’s light Bn back fill -and stand down for 2 out of three years. We could maybe run this for 3 years until we run out of reservists to back fill and finally have to admit we’ve never had 9 Bns worth of infantry soldiers to begin with.

Thanks. Would it become more sustainable (and less dependant on augments) if the RCAC consolidated down to 6 Sqn's (3 each tank and Recce), and the LAV Bn's dropped to 2 Coy's in preparation for being mated with tanks to form CAB's? If so, would that take everything or would the 3rd Bn have something else to support a 2nd deployment?

 

[MilEME09]

Oh I know the system exists. I was recommending we put national level teeth into the problem. Companies won't be as willing to fuck Cpl Bloggins about if it's CAF Inc. going to bat for them, vice having Cpl Bloggins go to the labour board.

Another Rule is fine but who investigates and enforces?