Is an Army unit something that the Chief of Army can do with as he likes?

He’s the one in charge … so, why not? If he wants a unit to undertake a new role managing emerging technology, what’s wrong with him simply stripping tanks from 1st Armoured Regiment and making it a non-combatant?

What’s wrong … is that a unit is much more than just the numbers of those serving in it at a particular time. A unit is what esprit-de-corps, heritage and tradition, makes it. This is accrued during the service of former members; and maintained and built upon, by those currently serving.

An Army unit has stakeholders in the same way that a business does. These are people who have an interest in it and who are impacted by decisions affecting it, i.e. former and serving members.

1 Armd Regt has crewed tanks for 75 years. Stripping it of its tanks is obviously a decision of major significance for stakeholders. One would anticipate widespread consultation. There was none.

Nor were options involving other contender units, seriously entertained. Serving members were given a choice: either stay with the unit in Adelaide and become a Combat Experimentation Group (CXG); or transfer to 2nd Cavalry Regiment in Townville, for those who wished to continue crewing tanks. Former members were not consulted; nor were they given any warning about what was to happen.

The announcement on 28 Sep 2023, was a complete surprise: “The 1st Armoured Regiment will be re-roled as an experimental unit to deliver and integrate emerging technologies. This will remain in Adelaide.”

1 Armd Regt was awarded three battle-honours and a Unit Citation for Gallantry for its service in support of Infantry and the conduct of independent operations, in Vietnam. The nature of what this involved, i.e. destroying the enemy, is described best by the Royal Tank Regiment:
“We are masters of mounted close combat, fusing mobility and firepower to shatter the will and cohesion of the foe. This is shock action – the sudden and concentrated application of violence”.

Decades spent developing the expertise to destroy the enemy’s will and cohesion through shock action — have been completely wasted. So much for the ideal of building a legacy to pass on to those following; a legacy encapsulating 75 years’ heritage and tradition. It all comes to nothing now!

As far as the Chief of Army is concerned, a tank regiment is just another Army unit. He doesn’t understand the nature of the close bonds formed by crews operating within the confines of their tank. These are bonds which reach into every corner of the unit and make it unique. A tank crew is a highly skilled team, able to collectively execute their duties in a way which makes their tank an effective weapon of war; one capable of shock action.

Members of the 1 Armd Regt Association expressed themselves as follows:
“The pain that Army’s decision has caused the 1st Armoured Regiment veterans, particularly those who served in combat in South Vietnam, cannot be understated. To be frank, they all feel gutted as they watch the Regiment stripped of its tanks and armoured warfighting capability. They see the demise of the Regiment’s esprit-de-corps that they feel they spilt blood to create.
That esprit-de-corps continues to define much of who those veterans see themselves to be, their self-esteem, their pride, and what they carry and draw strength from daily. To them, it feels like betrayal and has generated fear and bitterness in a good number. They sense the risk this poses to the generations of soldiers who will fight and die in the future defence of Australia’s interests.”

There is little doubt that 1 Armd Regt will, at some point in the future, return to being a tank regiment. One has to wonder how long this will take and at what financial cost? In the meantime, Australia’s only armoured brigade is forced to operate without a tank squadron, a cavalry squadron and a battle-group headquarters.

Not only are false lessons being inculcated, but the RAAC is also missing out on experience being gained across the Corps in a range of differing appointments. Furthermore, the brigade’s sole armoured unit is compelled to operate on a dual-role basis with tank and cavalry squadrons; despite these roles being incompatible.

One has to assume that operational readiness and combat power are not high priorities for the CA.

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

.

.

FILE PHOTO: An Australian Army M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams main battle tank provides support for soldiers during an urban assault at Shoalwater Bay Training Area as part of Exercise Talisman Sabre 25. Photo by Corporal Michael Rogers.

.

.


.


.