I read Russian army is not organized in the way as the western armies do. Russia doesn’t have non commissioned officers called NCO. That may explain the failure of Russian military in real combats. Their military doctrine sucks. They rather get used to consume domestic political propaganda than how to effectively fight foreign armies. NCO is the backbone of every army. Can you shed a light?
Were you asking why NCO is the backbone of every army or were you asking why Russia don't have an NCO corps?
Well, the reason why NCO corps are backbone of every army because it give you the flexibility to make your unit organic. There are two type of NCO, the professional soldier (the leader) and the Specialist (the technician) where it is common for soldier to climb the rank when you are up the ladder, you accumulated combat experience (or other experience if you are a specialist) but not leadership experience, giving command structure to NCO to have the flexibility to do what the NCO leader want means less work load for the guy in charge, and that don't just go at Platoon level, but Company level, Battalion level to even Brigade level.
Why? Take US Army as an example. The basic unit for deployment is Brigade Combat Team (BCT) which mean when you are deploy the 4000 or so men from the same Brigade will be deploy together, but being deployed together does not mean you are going to fight together, each Battalion in a single Brigade would be assigned to a certain Area of Operation (AO) and within each AO, you have Company and Platoon deployed independently with each other, so you can cover more ground instead of sending all the men in a giant blob of 4000 men.
So why NCO is important? Each Company have a Company First Sergeant (E-7), each Platoon have a platoon Sergeant (E-6) and each fireteam have a buck sergeant (E-5) each squad is commanded by a Corporal (E-4) so when a Platoon Leader (2LT) gave order, each unit within that Platoon (3 Fireteams, 6 Squad + 1 Heavy Weapon Squad) can take individual initiative so the buck sergeant can tell their squad where to go because they are the one that was fighting in that battlespace, they know better than the 2LT who in in charge of the entire battlefield, say for example, if I have to micromanage a squad, I would be at that squad and seeing what that Buck Sergeant see and make decision that way, if I do that, me as a Platoon Leader would lose the big picture because I am not looking at the overall situation, I am looking at that particular part of Battlefield. But If I delegate duty to that Fireteam leader and he in turn delegate that mission to his squad, then I am free to move my troop as will, and not bound by every little detail in the battlefield.
On the other hand, NCO or SNCO are also act as a mentor to the command structure, because the way they are organised. an NCO would have more experience than the person who command that unit. An O-3 commanding a Company would have 5-9 years of experience, a E-7 would have been in the army for almost 20 years An O-1/2 commanding a platoon would have less than 2 years of experience in the army, a platoon sergeant (E-6) would have 10+ year, which mean they are also a source of information, where you have the command, but don't have the experience, they compensate it by supplying their experience.
Russia do not have a functioning NCO corps. Their sergeant are most or less specialist and veteran which simply rose thru the rank. Which mean the company commander would have to micromanage every move and hence generally losing sight of the big picture. This is also why there are a quite a lot General got killed in this war because there are no one to oversee the battle, The small picture were not oversee by NCO because they don't have NCO. the big picture is not oversee by junior officer because they need to deal with the small picture, which mean the chain of command would have to be personally involved if there battle plan have to alter, which mean you have more General or Colonel in the firing line dealing with stuff Junior Officer are supposed to deal with, but they can't because they are busy dealing with every little thing in different corner of the battlefield. Which mean a company in Russia can take on less ground than a company in the US. Which I don't think I need to tell you, this is a bad thing.
As for why Russian Army does not have a NCO Corps? Well, the Soviet Doctrine (What the Russian followed) does not like splitting up power like that, all power are centralised, much like the government, you have an officer, and you have your troop, and when your troop disobey, the officer execute that man and make an example out of it, so how would it fare if you put Platoon Sergeant or Company sergeant in the mix? You now have 3 leaders instead of 1 (The Company CO). So who's order you are going to follow if you are a lowly soldier (or a conscript)
The officer corps in Russia have absolute power, that's how they reign in their men, this is their military tradition, officer gave order, soldier follow order. And it have not change since 1917.
?
