| TAC has kindly provided us with a breakdown of the future force organised as brigades.
Personally I consider it just as important to look at the training and unitforming structure, that is how are the regiments planned to be organised:
Are they planning INF, Cav and arty regiments, that are supposed to train for motorised, mechanised and armoured forces in each regiment. Or are they making motorised, mechanised and armoured regiments that train their own artillery, infantry and cavalry. Or are they using the big model with light infantry regiments, medium infantry, heavy infantry and so on?
The operational formations are of limited interest (as long as you can build the formations the future situation requires) in a 10 year perspective. Other nations have neglected their regimental structure as the enemy under the cold war was well known, but we have with (for once) commendable conservatism maintained the regimental structure. The regimental commander has during the cold war a side assignment in the territorial defence (commader of a regions forces).
With a view to the reform of the regional structure in Denmark, where counties have merged, the interesting part is that this reform more or less started with the military and has spilled over in the non-military establishment, so the political structure seems to be in harmony with the military, now we only need the police to get into shape. |
