Senior Russian official are adding to the chorus about its military’s early failures in Georgia which include air defense suppression, intelligence analysis and warnings, air attack planning and speed of response.
These opinions -- coming from current and recently retired senior military commanders and appearing in Russia’s Independent Military Review, other defense related publications, and Russian news agencies -- have caught the attention of U.S. government officials and analysts who have been pouring over open-source literature to gather operational and technological clues to events in the Georgia-Russia conflict.
Lack of preparation infected the Russian air force, said its former commander-in-chief, Gen. Peter Deinekin, who accused the service of handing the initiative to the Georgian air force. Like the Russian artillery units, he excoriated the air force for not immediately launching an air attack to blind Georgia’s radar and reconnaissance capability and then shatter command and control. Deinekin proposed the model of the initial attack on Grosni, Chechnya in 1994 when the country’s air force of 250 aircraft was destroyed on the ground.
Here there seems to be a curious disconnect with what actually happened. U.S. analysts said that the Georgian command and control of its forces broke down almost immediately after the initial foray into South Ossetia.
Former Russian Defense Minister Gen. Paul Grachev cast blame on all the Russian intelligence services for lack of warning and commanders of the North Caucasus Military District for not having a detailed contingency plan in case of an attack by Georgia.
Gen. Mahmut Gareyev, president of the Academy of Military Sciences, also blamed military intelligence for the classic failure of miscalculating Georgia’s intentions. The resulting confusion in Russia’s command and control was pointed to as the reason that Russia’s air force took so many losses including a number of Su-25 Frogfoot close attack aircraft, possibly an Su-24 and a front-line, high-performance Tu-22M aircraft which may have been either a bombing or reconnaissance variant operated by the Black Sea Fleet.
More precisely, Russian intelligence failed to analyze the numbers, locations and capabilities of the Georgian air defenses, said former air force commander and chief, Gen. Anatoly Kornukov. As a result, Russian pilots went into combat expecting no resistance. Secondly, there was no campaign to eliminate the Georgia air defense or air force. Thirdly, there was no reason to use a strategic bomber like the Tu-22, he says.
Radar killing missiles were not used on the Georgian air defenses, despite their availability, which meant that Russian aircrews could not use their precision stand-off weapons without being in range of Georgia’s SA-11 air defenses. Some observers pointed to the unavailability of Russian precision, long-range, standoff weaponry.
Other Russian analysts contend the Russians made little or no use of its space-based surveillance and that the rough terrain and heavy vegetation of Georgia foiled the long-range use of laser-guided weapons.
Photo: FAS
And, if that weren't enough, he has it out for the USAF. He always has. So I actually think the Raptor program would fare better under Obama than McCain. Obama is no dove. Read Loren Thompson's article about him that does a good job of establishing the fact that Obama is rather more Reaganesque than Carteresque (thank god).
McCain has been tough on the USAF, but the wing of the Democratic Party Obama comes from is against just about every defense program (except the one in their state or district).
Regarding any claim that Obama is "Reaganesque", I see nothing in the background of the man that would support such a thing. I won't rehash Obama's well-known background, to avoid any further depressing effect.
Post-partisan? I never claimed to be, although I am. There are plenty of Republicans I respect and in fact like, Chuck Hagel being one of them. Arlen Specter is another. Olympia Snowe. Susan Collins. Lincoln Chaffee. The list goes on. Yes, do notice that they are all Northeast Republicans with the exception of Hagel. The pre-I've-got-a-friend-in-Jesus, sweet-home-Alabama Republicans were formidable indeed. Now they're just formidably scary.
Regarding Obama's "Reaganesque" qualities, read Loren Thompson's article, as I urged you and others in an earlier post. Fortunately, he is Reaganesque only to a point. He still has all his marbles, for one.