What can be done to save the Royal Australian Armoured Corps (part 2)

The following is a follow-up to this letter.

Unfortunately, the options available are few indeed.  One might hope that Lieutenant General Susan Coyle would already be aware of the mistake made by her predecessor when he transformed 1st Armoured Regiment into an experimentation unit.   If so … there’s every possibility that she will direct that 3 Brigade be returned to its intended role as a full armoured brigade (with the experimentation unit being reformed as a new unit).

This, however, might not be the case … she may feel compelled to respect the decisions made by Lt Gen Stuart.  What then? 

Is it possible that sufficient attention could be focussed on the ‘misadventure’ involved, that the force of public opinion could bring about a change?  

This hasn’t worked as far as the considerable awareness generated by CONTACT is concerned.  Over 100 letters have been published in support of the need for 1 Armd Regt to be returned to its combat role.  Those who hold the reins of power, however, have seemingly ignored them and let life just pass on by.  

Just maybe, though, a shift in public opinion is occurring and making its presence felt … albeit a ‘glacial’ one.   How is it, that a change in public opinion can be identified?  The traditional manner is through a series of surveys … ones whose questions are designed specifically to gauge the things that might have changed and those that have stayed constant.  

Unfortunately, this is an expensive business!  Not having that sort of funding available, the only option is to resort to a non-empirical measure; i.e. the ‘feel’ that comes with comments made by those offering opinions.  Sadly, the experimentation unit has banned its members making comments.  Nevertheless, the following insightful points that got through are encouraging:

“I feel that while the Ukraine conflict is seeing a lot of new technologies and tactics developed, I wouldn’t take it all as representative of the new normal. Airpower has been greatly under-represented in the conflict. Western powers possess much more technologically advanced, better trained, and better equipped air forces able to counter air defence networks and therefore support ground forces.”

“The current ‘leaders’ have been brought up on small-group action based on special forces such as the SAS and commando units. That is all they know.” 

“I find it quite sad when a major unit such 1st Armoured Regiment is broken up and the Standard put away … similar to 4RAR (even though they became 2 Commando).”

“I firmly agree the Redback should be operated by the RAAC. Ever since 5/7RAR took over the M113s in the ’80s as ‘owner operators’, there’s been no real infantry career pathway for vehicle crew.”

“Keep the pressure on Brian! [for the Editor, CONTACT].”

“Unfortunately, logic and understanding, and certainly heart, are becoming less common in those who ‘lead’ the Defence Force. To me, they appear to be preparing for their PhD, their post Military Guest Speaker engagements, or perhaps political life.”

“So inept to remove a brilliant Regiment from service to have it become a non-entity without understanding the gained experience that First Armoured Regiment has. This is wasting years of know-how and delivering no beneficial result.”

“What a very disappointing decision by this government, in particular the so-called Department of Defence.  I grew up with this great unit and served with it in the SVN campaign.  It seems to be just another loss of our proud military history and I’m extremely disappointed.”

“Dear Contact Magazine … Over 33,000 views for this single letter! Thank you for helping to make known so widely, the unethical and unreasonable manner in which the decision was made to strip tanks from 1st Armoured Regiment.” 

“It has been reported that Rommel was once asked by a visitor to his HQ, “Where is the Front?”.  His reply: “Where the tanks are, that is the Front”!
Tanks are the ‘point of the spear’ in warfare.  Removing a Regiment that has been living and breathing that role for 75 years – and is the ONLY one of its kind in the nation – is an exercise in military stupidity”.

Shredding an operational combat unit to do experimentation work is Defence done by an accountant.  Most certainly, NOT Defence done by anyone with any combat training or experience.

It appears to me, that Defence has entered a period of decision making through non-consultation, i.e. captain’s calls.

A two-star officer told me some time ago that any statement contrary to a known defence position was “termed, insubordination”.  

The following was the response to this from a former infantryman: “It is actually not as he says – to the contrary, it behoves any professional soldier to contribute his views clearly and professionally, to achieve the best outcome to any situation. It would be dereliction of duty NOT to do so.”  So, rank is not always right!

This, of course, touches on the concept of ‘frank and fearless’ advice, i.e. “providing advice that is relevant and comprehensive, is not affected by fear of consequences, and does not withhold important facts or bad news”.  

Wouldn’t it be good, if this could always be assured!

Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Cameron, MC, RAAC (Ret’d)

.

.

FILE PHOTO: An Australian Army M1A1 Abrams tank fires during Exercise Jericho Dawn 2016. Photo by Sergeant Pete Gammie

.

.


.


.