Since the army has fully implemented the "division to brigade" reform, this reform move has been questioned by military fans, who believe that the original four-level system of "army-division-regiment-battalion" is more suitable, and many people are worried about this because of the failure of the Russian army in "division to brigade". However, facts have proved that the "division to brigade" implemented by the squadron has been successful. And there is a reason why the Russian army failed and the squadron succeeded.
First of all, let's take a look at the tremendous changes brought about by the reform of "transforming divisions into brigades." Under the new structure, the divisional command was disbanded and replaced by a more flexible and mobile brigade command. In this way, the command system is more concise and efficient, the chain of command is more compact, and the problems of lagging information transmission and inflexible command caused by excessive hierarchy are avoided. In addition, there has also been a significant increase in combat effectiveness, and the brigade-level command has been able to better centralize command and dispatch forces and make decisions more quickly by reducing the hierarchy. As a result, the ability of the entire unit to work together has been greatly enhanced.
And to understand why the "division to brigade" is questioned and the reasons for the defeat of the Russian army, we have to mention the historical background and specific implementation. When the Russian army carried out the "transformation of divisions into brigades," there were problems of lack of preparation and immaturity. In the process of implementation, they ignored the particularities of wartime, resulting in the command system not being flexible enough and making timely decisions, which affected the combat effectiveness. On the contrary, the squadron chose a selective and reserved method when implementing the "division to brigade", that is, the low-level units retained the original company-level and battalion-level headquarters, coupled with the reform of the high-level command, which made the chain of command closer and the ability to coordinate operations greatly improved, thus avoiding the problems encountered by the Russian army.
As a matter of fact, the reform of "transforming divisions into brigades" was not achieved overnight, but was summed up after a long period of study and practice. Through many military Xi exercises and actual combat training, the squadron has gradually explored a reform plan suitable for its own national conditions. In this process, the military's top leadership has always maintained a high degree of attention and support, and commanders at all levels have also actively cooperated, and they have also won full understanding and support from all sectors of society. This fact also shows that the reform of the "division to brigade" reform is well thought out and has clear goals and strategic objectives, rather than blindly following the trend.
From a social point of view, the implementation of the "division to brigade" by the squadron has aroused widespread concern and controversy. On the one hand, many military fans and experts have expressed concern about this, fearing that the new command system will affect the effectiveness of operations;On the other hand, there are also many people who have a positive attitude toward military reform, believing that "changing divisions into brigades" can enhance the combat effectiveness of the troops and meet the needs of the situation of modern warfare. This kind of social concern and controversy has made the armed forces act more cautiously in the process of reform and pay more attention to grasping details and solving problems. It can be said that social supervision and concern have a positive role in promoting the reform of the armed forces and are conducive to the formation of a scientific and rational reform plan.
In short, the squadron's implementation of the "division into brigade" has been carefully studied and practiced, and remarkable results have been achieved. In contrast, the defeat of the Russian army just shows that the reform of the army should be adapted to local conditions and cannot be one-size-fits-all. Through the coordination and cooperation of command headquarters at all levels, the new command system has become more efficient and flexible, and the combat effectiveness of the armed forces has been markedly enhanced. Although there are some controversies in the process of reform, this is also a manifestation of social concern and supervision, which helps to form a more scientific and effective reform plan. Let us wait and see, and look forward to the squadron being able to exert more powerful combat effectiveness under the new system and make greater contributions to the security and stability of the country.