First in, last out

ALAN CHRISTOPHER SHEPPARD

I think I can lay claim to being the first member of the NATO alliance to conduct infantry training for the Estonian Defense Forces. I was part of a group of 14 Royal Marines known as the Baltic States Training Team. This group was, historically, the first team to conduct serious military training for former Soviet Bloc countries.

Many of our first trainees had been Soviet conscripts, now free and wishing to serve in the professional Estonian, Latvian and Lithuania armies. This all started for me in 1994 and ended with my retirement in January 2022. It was due to a strange quirk of fate, or something I jokingly refer to as the “Longest Tour in NATO.” I think there are a lot of lessons to be learned from my experiences, which are often ignored by those who think that they are always the first to offer assistance, even to this day.

I am a former Royal Marine Commando who, back in 1994, was employed in the NCO and officer training wing at the Commando Training Center in the UK. I was a Platoon Weapons Instructor, 1st class and was volunteered by my boss to attend an interview for some job in Latvia called the Baltic Battalion Project. “Hell, where’s Latvia?” I thought.

On investigation, I came to realize it was part of the former Soviet Union, which explained why I knew nothing about it. My interest was piqued. At the time, I had served 20 years in the Royal Marines and all my service had been in a Rifle Company or a training job as a Platoon Weapons Instructor.

Said specialization forms part of the Royal Marines, whose function is to train and maintain infantry standards throughout our Corps. The Corps and everyone in it highly value this branch, which also has a member of the Small Arms School Corps attached to it to ensure continuity of standards and cross training and development within the British Army.

Alan Cristopher Sheppard (2nd R) teaching small unit tactics to a platoon that is going to be deployed to Iraq, attached to the US Army, near Klooga, Estonia, April 21, 2005. Since 1995 Sheppard has taught infantry skills to thousands of Estonian soldiers.

EDF photo

TRAINING NEVER ENDS

I have traveled far and wide with the Royal Marines, from the Arctic to the Antarctic. I have seen operational service in Northern Ireland and in the Falklands war. You do not need to go to war to be a good soldier, but it proves the effectiveness (or otherwise) of your training. It also produces personal and collective lessons, and I found as a trainer a firm conviction to pass this training on to others.

I was once on a fighting/probing patrol in the Falklands war in an enemy battalion position. The Argentinian sentry we encountered had clearly not been briefed/ trained properly, and because of his failure we took out six of his troops (their casualty report then being intercepted by our Y troop). The information gained ensured a very successful attack by 42 Commando Royal Marines a few days later.

I have always been very careful to teach the basic skill of the duties of a sentry ever since. The last words my father, a World War II veteran, said to me as I left home to join up were, “You never finish training.” This is very true, and I met with many who thought, “I know that, I never need to practice it, do it again or improve that skill.” They were always poorly trained.

THOSE WHO TEACH MUST ALSO BE ABLE TO DO, AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE MUST HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT AND CORRECT MISTAKES.

I eventually served 24 years in the Royal Marines and now 23 years in an Estonian uniform. I have served in a multitude of EDF institutions and am now a member of the Estonian Defense League ‒ the volunteer citizen army.

THE HARD WAY

I was volunteered for the Baltic States Training Team and, after a successful interview, I joined a 14-man team which consisted of a five-man HQ element and three training teams of three members each. Each team nominated to train 30 men from each of the three Baltic States centrally in Adazi in Latvia. I would join the Estonian platoon, and this quirk of fate would change my life.

I now knew where Latvia was! This was in August 1994, and as I later found out, the Baltic company was forming up to learn English at the same time.

The aim of our mission was first and foremost to train each group to operate as an infantry platoon. Then, we were to train them to train a company of volunteers in an infantry role in their own countries, which is to say, to train the trainers.

These trainers were all sergeants and officers who would fill the platoon and company leadership positions, ready for handing over for mission training with the Nordic countries before deployment. Estonia, for example, joined the Norwegians on a very successful tour of Lebanon.

Now our aim was established and we could formulate our training objectives and standards. This being before the era of the laptop, we put together hard-copy lessons to cover all of the subjects to be delivered from our block syllabus of instruction. This filled many boxes of hard copy which you could now put in your pocket in CD format.

This instruction came, among other things, from field manuals dealing with individual skills, weapon lessons and platoon tactics. These manuals are based on tried and tested methods but are always open to amendment should we learn something new in training or on operations. I later realized that many armies do not have these manuals, which leads to a lack of standards and loss of control over a training system. I would learn this the hard way when I changed uniforms.

Estonian soldiers of the Baltic Battalion loading ammunition in Adazi training ground, Latvia, 1995. The Baltic Battalion project was initiated by Nordic countries; these soldiers were trained by UK Royal Marines, had American uniforms and Soviet weapons.

Scanpix photo

Those who teach must also be able to do, and those who supervise must have the knowledge to know what they are looking at and correct mistakes. If not, then no matter how good the manuals and lessons are, the results will be minimal. Field Marshall Rommel once said that the British Army has the best manuals in the world, so thank God they do not read them!

The Royal Marines, I am sure, had learned this the hard way and now religiously focus on training and maintenance of standards, ensuring that lessons are continually learned and that training is adjusted accordingly. It may amuse some to know that we copied many individual skill lessons and training methods from the Germans in World War II. We certainly copied their approach to small-unit leadership.

NCOs and junior officers are thoroughly and arduously trained in the field by “doing”, which is to say, completing realistic missions and tasks. This rigorous method also matures them as they climb the promotion ladder, and makes them respect those beneath them.

The failure of top leadership to have these more junior leadership skills and experiences, rather than just those they learnt in the classroom, leads to what I can only describe as staff officers who do not respect those who do the fighting and see planning as the “be-all and end-all.” Keeping that in mind helps to understand how and why we do what we do.

Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland also contributed to the Baltic Battalion Project in the form of training for battalion staff. A Royal Marine colonel was in overall charge of both groups.

THE TIME WARP

We landed in Latvia on Nov. 17, 1994 to do a recce of the Adazi base and the training areas we would use for our lessons. We were waiting in our C-130, complete with our red Land Rover ready to drive off in, and I marveled at the Soviet jets still parked there. Our distinctive Land Rover would later serve as an ATM for the Latvian police on Fridays, until we got wise and refused to pay any fines without supporting tickets.

We were taken to a former Soviet sports hotel and had one whole floor to ourselves. It was basic, to say the least, but we always adapt to our surroundings and just got on with it. It was a time warp ‒ no restaurants, no pubs, people just drinking in ordinary shops, since every shop sold alcohol, and crazy shops at that, full of all sorts of things, but never anything you actually wanted.

The streets were grey and dismal but the people held their heads high, which impressed me. I found the whole situation intriguing, and even lost weight. I realize now, writing this, that so much has changed so rapidly for the better these last 25 years!

Adazi had a large and suitable polygon, so we were happy. The area was littered with remnants of Soviet occupation. Russian helmets and gas masks were scattered everywhere, along with other detritus. Many buildings were covered in murals of Soviet accomplishments and images of Lenin. This I found both surreal and fascinating.

We would travel each day to Adazi in an old people-carrier which was held together with tape and wires. The driver thought he was at the wheel of a Lamborghini, and would overtake vehicles by veering into oncoming traffic, barely making it. I thought it would be a dumb way to die, so we got a new driver.

The camp itself and the Latvian officers reminded me of the Soviet army, which is understandable, as it was the model they knew ‒ they had merely changed uniforms. The camp was pretty broken, literally, as it had been intentionally sabotaged by the departing Soviet army.

We later found out the sewage system had been linked up to the drinking and washing water as their final departing joke. We also had to make sure that we had suitable accommodation for ourselves and the Baltic company that would soon be joining us. This I will only describe as a drama which my boss eventually resolved, but only then because we had a strong memorandum of understanding!

Baltic Battalion badge with its moto in Latin “Strength in unity”.

This mission was accomplished in three weeks. We identified all of the areas needed to meet our training goals and were good to go on Day One of meeting our soldiers in January 1995. years later, “We thought we knew so much, but we knew nothing.”

IT WAS HARD WORK FOR ALL, BUT MANY SOLDIERS TELL ME IT WAS THE BEST THING THEY EVER DID.

Squad and platoon training followed, which can also be defined as small-unit tactics. These included live-fire exercises. This was done with what you could carry in any weather conditions. It should also be mentioned that all of our

“WE KNEW NOTHING”

We met our platoons and launched into training. We started with physical training and weapon and field craft skills. This was initially met with astonishment by the soldiers who had served in the Soviet army, since they thought they were already experienced in such things. To quote one officer, who told me this many equipment had been donated, so certain items were lacking. However, this we had no problems with, as training can overcome shortages, but not the other way round.

We had a cold winter and a hot summer that year. It was great training weather. We completed our training with three platoons opposing one another in a 10-day exercise operating from patrol bases.

Baltic Battalion Estonian soldiers during a rest period on field training day in Adazi training ground, Latvia, 1995. Many of these men were former conscripts of the Soviet Army and were shocked by the level of professionalism of Royal Marine infantry training.

Scanpix photo

It was a very rewarding experience for the trainers and trainees alike. It was hard work for all, but many soldiers (then and now) tell me it was the best thing they ever did. Every week they felt they had grown, and we could see that growth, which as trainers gave us that clichéd warm fuzzy feeling!

Our team was the first to train former Soviet soldiers since the breakup of the USSR. However, I never thought of them as former Soviet soldiers ‒ just pressed men who had to conform to a system not of their choosing.

“You are doing God’s work,” said Warren Christopher, the United States Secretary of State, on a visit to us.

During this period, we got many visits from very senior military and political departments, including the second-in-command of the British Foreign Office and his delegation (our sponsors), the most senior American four-star general in this part of Eastern Europe, and our own major general from the Royal Marines, to name a few.

They were all astounded by the positive attitude of the Baltic soldiers, many of whom had a background in the Soviet Army, and their enthusiasm for this new style of training. They were also surprised that we were capable of doing so much with so little. Our equipment, as mentioned, was all donated, and our soldiers slept two men to a blanket during the Arctic winter in the field that year.

General Johannes Kert, the Chief of Defense of the EDF, also visited us. He fully understood the project and was its strongest Estonian supporter. Sadly, he was soon removed from his position and was unable to see the project through. This would later cost me and the project dearly, and make an already hard job ten times harder still.

In September of that year, we had a passing-out parade on the main parade square at the Adazi camp. Top diplomats from far and wide attended, but more importantly, it drew the heads of the three Baltic States together to stand side by side. It was a military and political success!

With pride they watched as their soldiers marched past them and took their salute as free, united Baltic soldiers. Now older and wiser, I realize what a privilege it was to see President Lennart Meri of Estonia and his fellow presidents that day, together for the first time in their newfound independence.

The Presidents and Chiefs of Defense of three Baltic countries attending the first military parade of the Baltic Battalion in Adazi, Latvia, 1995. The Baltic Battalion is considered to be the most successful cooperation project of Baltic countries. The Battalion had its own flag that bore the upper colors of three Baltic countries.

FREEDOM ISN’T FREE

The platoons were now ready to return to their respective countries and train their first volunteers. One member of each three-man team was asked to go with them. I was requested by my boss to volunteer. I immediately said yes.

I arrived in Paldiski, Estonia, on my 38th birthday to supervise and assist with the training that was about to be conducted by the platoon for their company. I would need another article to do it full justice! Suffice it to say it was again a fascinating experience. It was a great pleasure to see Estonians training Estonians with such competence, and in such a unique landscape as a former secret Soviet submarine base.

I remember standing in front of a grocery store in British uniform. The store could be best described as a former Soviet PX now run as a civilian shop by the former wife of the man who had once been the Soviet Naval Quartermaster. I was approached by one of the few Russians there who spoke English. It turned out she was an English teacher whose husband was a submarine officer.

“We knew you Americans would come,” she said.

“But I’m English!” I replied, in a most offended voice.

I had the pleasure and honor of meeting an Estonian lady who had been made a Member of the British Empire by the United Kingdom for her efforts in maintaining these graves during the Soviet occupation. She died the following year, but it is gratifying to know that she had been thanked by the Royal Navy and Royal Marines personally.

When I now see the large military presence at these graves on Nov. 11 each year, I wonder whether they fully appreciate what happened in the early days of the first and now second periods of independence.

I may have imparted some military knowledge, but I also learned much and continue to do so. I was taught how lucky we were to come from a place that had so much more, and how we take things for granted ‒ so much so that we are preoccupied with indulging ourselves in worrying about nothing.

I was reminded what freedom is, and that freedom is something you do not fully appreciate until you have lost it. I saw the sheer ecstasy of freedom gained in those who had only recently shaken off their shackles of occupation. It was a wakeup call to me about our complacency in freedom seeming so obvious and eternal ‒ which it is not.

Soldiers from the Estonian Company, Baltic Battalion, checking results at a shooting range near Paldiski, Estonia, Sept. 8, 1998. Each Baltic country contributed to the Battalion with one infantry company and one support company.

Scanpix photo by Tiit Blaat

POSTSCRIPT

The aim of the Baltic Battalion Project was to provide an example of westernized infantry training to be used by the host countries. It provided all of the training for individual-level, squad-level and platoon-level skills and drills to enable a rifle company to be formed and trained by our initial trainees under our supervision. Staff training was conducted centrally in Adazi by our Nordic members so as to provide a Battalion HQ.

This was initially very successful, earning many plaudits from the once skeptical Nordics and Americans. In my opinion, they expected the project to fail at this stage of its development. Eastern European countries were not expected to perform well on missions, but could be used in minor roles. However, with this training, they outshone those they were attached to and were ultimately utilized as the spearhead in the infantry role.

What was unexpected, poisoning the development and leading to the eventual demise of all this training effort, was the fact that these standalone institutions did not crossfertilize legally or systematically into the main defense forces, but were dissolved and incorporated by them.

This would have constituted natural military progression from our point of view if the Estonian company of the Baltic Battalion had become an Estonian battalion and the training methods had been used to train new Estonian soldiers in our way of doing things. The opposite happened ‒ these methods were immediately replaced by EDF methods based on a conscript model.

The lack of coherent drills and skills offered by the main EDF ensured that the British skills and drills became de facto rather than de jure and were still used. So it continues to this day and has spread to the many parts of the EDF, but watered down and unsupported, both systematically and with the correct reference manuals.

It has become an individual effort training system led by soldiers, NCOs, and officers with this experience, not a systematic training system with measurable standards led by J7. This is the only way I can describe it.

The memorandum of understanding we had was for the Baltic Battalion. It should have been for the Baltic Brigade, with a further intent that the training should be introduced over time throughout the Baltic Defense Forces. This decision should have been made at the Ministry of Defense and government level between the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom.

Estonian Platoon, Baltic Battalion, marching in formation and led by 1st Lt. Ants Ojasoo, Platoon Commander, at the Adazi training ground, Latvia, 1995.

Scanpix photo

The greatest loss in all this was neglecting to influence the higherechelon officers who eventually called all the shots. Many of them (if not all) had earned their ranks in the former Soviet military. They needed to be convinced, but they were not, as they went ignored by us. This was an enormous mistake on our part.

This failure ensured that they fought against us rather than with us to improve the situation. The Soviet military had a low skill set for its infantry, so we were anathema to them. We ought to have changed that mindset, but we failed to do so.

Senior management serving as commanding officers and their subordinate staff throughout a brigade on operations would have convinced them of the value of having correctly trained infantry. This lesson was learned when the Estonian Scouts Battalion started deploying company-sized units to Afghanistan.

In particular, these junior officer platoon commanders understood that they needed to have well-trained individual soldiers, well-trained squads, and capable squad leaders for a platoon and company to succeed. I hope these officers become top decision-makers and then put more effort into infantry training standards and field leadership.

THE LESSON OF HAVING CORRECTLY TRAINED INFANTRY WAS LEARNED WHEN THE ESTONIAN SCOUTS BATTALION STARTED DEPLOYING COMPANY-SIZED UNITS TO AFGHANISTAN.

There are many pieces of the jigsaw out there to improve this situation. I would recommend a training partnership with the United Kingdom to formulate and standardize training, because you have to ask yourself this question: “Can we integrate our guys with your guys if their standards are different?”

Is it possible to ensure mission success when you cannot quantify what your soldiers can and cannot do until they are committed to the battlefield?

Alan Christopher Sheppard