Field commander 'Kurt': Soviet approach to army structure still persists

The Ukrainian army has undergone significant reform over the past 10 years of war. No other European army has such combat experience. Yet, there are still many gaps preventing the military from defending as effectively as possible.

In an interview with RBC-Ukraine, field commander "Kurt" of the "Kurt and Company" unit from the 28th Mechanized Brigade shared his thoughts on Soviet influences within the army, the main factors affecting efficiency, and the mistakes that lead to losses.

Since the war in Ukraine began in 2014, he joined the Armed Forces of Ukraine as a scout. By 2017, "Kurt" continued his service as a sniper and became one of the top defenders. He later formed his unit, "Kurt and Company."

During the full-scale war, he and his unit fought against Wagner Group forces near Bakhmut, participated in the operation to liberate Kherson, held the Kurdiumivka dam, and continue to defend Donbas today.

Commander of the "Kurt and Company" unit from the 28th Mechanized Brigade, named after the Knights of the Winter Campaign, in the interview with RBC-Ukraine (youtube.com/РБК-Україна)

– What is the current state of the Ukrainian army? You've been at war for 10 years, so how has it changed?

– If you compare it to 10 years ago, it's a completely different army. We've grown both in terms of military capabilities and technology. However, many problems remain and need to be resolved – they should have been addressed yesterday, not tomorrow.

I'd say the state of the army is combat-ready. But you can't judge and say when things were better. We need to evaluate the army by its actions. While we have successes in one area, we may face setbacks in others. Our army is unable to hold off the enemy in certain areas, and this is influenced by numerous factors, from political decisions to military actions and equipment supplies from our partners.

– What factors affect the combat capability of a unit?

– First and foremost, it depends on the person leading the unit – the commander. If the commander is a professional and strives to be both a friend, father, and brother to the soldiers and shows interest in the life of the unit, the unit will succeed. However, if commanders are incompetent and just give orders with a pencil on a map, there will never be success.

Interaction with the lower ranks is also crucial – it's a long process, from the common soldier to the colonel. Building a combat-ready unit takes years because it’s a challenging process.

– Is there still a Soviet influence in the army?

– Unfortunately, the Soviet-style approach is still present. I don’t understand it. When will we stop showing only pretty pictures instead of facing the truth? For example, when they show training exercises, as soldiers who fight, we find it laughable.

– Why is it laughable?

– Because what is taught in some military schools is not used in actual combat. For instance, seeing a battalion’s actions in an attack – tanks driving through open fields, infantry walking in single lines behind them – you understand that they're all casualties. This doesn't happen in real war.

A lot of time was wasted in training since the Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) days. I’ve experienced it myself. When I served in another unit, I constantly had to chase the commander for time to train my soldiers. Why should I take the initiative while they focus on paperwork?

There are still individuals I consider enemies of the army, enemies of the unit I previously served in, who ridiculed those motivated soldiers who wanted to fight – like myself.

Photo: If the commander is interested in the life of the unit, then the unit will do well and have success, - Commander "Kurt"

Soviet influence also means that real problems are often concealed or lied about to higher-ups. This fear of superiors is a significant issue, inherited from Soviet times.

– What mistakes has the army made during combat?

– The biggest mistakes happen during rotations or taking new positions. Some commanders don’t plan properly, and bringing a unit to a new position is a major operation. My unit is small, but I always personally scout a new position first. I take one soldier from the group that will move there, and we plan everything carefully.

We plan multiple entry routes. I meet with the commander of the unit we’re replacing or working alongside, and we agree on a precise time for the handover. Everything must run like clockwork. We establish communication to ensure that during the rotation, there’s no confusion—God forbid we’re mistaken for the enemy because we moved to the wrong place. It’s a full-scale military operation, and for larger units like brigades, regiments, or troop groups, the commander must have a strong team in place to handle these rotations properly.

Unfortunately, many commanders in the army aren’t fit for the roles they hold. Sometimes, it’s better to trust an experienced sergeant for rotations than to follow a commander’s blind orders, who simply points at a map and says, "Go there, even if it means walking into your death."

This kind of thinking leads to the unnecessary loss of personnel. A commander must be 100% sure that the group will reach its designated position, not just randomly pick a spot on the map and order a changeover there.

We’ve had situations where commanders simply pointed at a map, and when we arrived to replace another unit from a different brigade, they were already gone. The enemy had taken over, and we found ourselves under fire. Such unprofessional behavior results in the loss of positions, territory, lives, equipment, and everything else at your disposal.

– We are running low on manpower. How can we attract motivated people to the army now?

– We need to establish private military companies (PMCs). Oligarchs could sell a few of their yachts or castles and build PMCs, but they must remain under state control to ensure they fight in the nation's interests.

Photo: We are now one of the strongest armies in Europe, says commander

– Do political decisions affect the war?

– It's the soldiers who change the course of the war. We developed the use of drones and FPVs ourselves, yet now we're being told how to fight. Politicians should stay out of military affairs.

When politics interferes with the military, it's no longer a war. It's something else entirely. We've witnessed this over the past 10 years.

We can turn the tide of this war. Just sign a decree that ensures that all surviving veterans will be taken care of, with pensions like World War II veterans. People who’ve lived through hell shouldn't have to worry about what they’ll do after the war. That's a major factor affecting soldiers.

If I were given guarantees, I’d do even more than I already do, though I feel like I’m doing everything I can. And there are thousands like me in the army, putting in superhuman efforts for victory. We deserve guarantees and respect from society.

– People often say we need to adopt NATO standards. Do you agree?

– I think NATO should learn from us, as we’ve gained invaluable experience in large-scale warfare. What we need from NATO is technology. We should aim for their level of technical equipment, but we shouldn’t just join NATO; we should be part of it.

We are one of the strongest armies in Europe now. We should share our experience with NATO, and they should teach us how to use modern military technology. While we still fall short in some areas technically, we've surpassed NATO in combat experience, and that will play a key role in the future.