Author Wieslaw Rogalski provides a detailed account of the selection, training, and employment of Polish men and women who parachuted into Nazi-occupied Poland to help form up the Polish resistance. He traces the history of this effort in Special Operations Executive: Polish Section. The primary aim of his book is to ascertain the ultimate effectiveness of SOE assistance provided to the Second Polish Republic during World War II. Attention is also given to the politics involved in British support to the Poles; but, at the same time, later in the war, ensuring the Soviet Union continues the fight on the Eastern Front.

1939. Just prior to the start of World War II, the United Kingdom and Poland signed a pact of mutual assistance which led to early contacts between British and Polish military authorities. It is here where Rogalski starts his narrative – with details about the British Military Mission to Poland in 1939. He goes on to describe the state of the Polish Army prior to the German invasion – detailing the shortages of military equipment, array of forces, and more.

1939 – German Onslaught. In September 1939 the Germans invaded Poland and overwhelmed the Polish army; although it fought bravely. The author describes the defeat and, once the Soviets invaded from the east, how some Polish forces and the government fled Poland, many eventually taking refuge in France. Of course, once the Germans attacked France, the Polish government and military forces left for Britain.

Ramping Up the Resistance and SOE. This is the point where the author describes the formation of a a large and effective Polish resistance movement within Poland called the Home Army. He also details the establishment of the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) and the subsequent formation of the “Polish Section”. Covered in the book are the relationships of the British government, Polish government in exile, SOE, Polish Section, the Air Ministry, and other organizations. The personalities of the Polish government, SOE, Polish Section, and others get a lot of attention in this book.

Selection and Training. The selection and training of the Poles was difficult and comprehensive, covering the use of weapons, communications, tradecraft, demolitions, intelligence, parachutes, and more. The training sites were located in Scotland and England; and later, at other locations around the world. The Poles enjoyed more autonomy in the SOE training program than did those from other nations who would link up with their respective resistance movements. Once fully trained the Poles were parachuted into occupied Poland to link up with the Home Army.

Air Bridge. The establishment of an air bridge to accomplish personnel infiltrations and supply drops was a difficult and dangerous task. There were several air routes for infiltrating the Poles, weapons, ammunition, communications gear, and other equipment. Various aircraft were tried, some more suited for the long two-way trip than others. The initial air infiltrations were conducted over Denmark, then the southern tip of Sweden, over the Baltic Sea and then into Poland. Later flights were launched from Italy and over the Caucasus and Hungary into Poland. Some air infiltration (and exfiltration) routes worked better than others. Hundreds of Poles would parachute into Poland from early 1941 to late 1944 from aircraft. Most of the drops sites would be in central Poland. The author provides a wealth of details about the aircraft, air infiltration routes, difficulties of getting support from the Air Ministry, and the use of Polish pilots for the infiltration and supply flights.

1941. It wasn’t long before the Germans broke their agreement with the Soviets and launched Operation Barbarossa – a widescale attack against that country in 1941. The relationship between the British and the Poles would see a drastic adjustment once the Soviet Union became an ally of Britain. Moscow had plans for Poland after the war and that did not include the survival of the Second Polish Republic; rather it wanted to establish a Communist regime. Britain had to balance its support for the Polish government in exile in London and its support to the Polish resistance movement with the need to keep the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front. The Polish Home Army wanted to be equipped and supplied sufficiently to be able to conduct guerrilla warfare and to subsequently support an uprising of the Polish people against the Germans. However, according to the author, the British were content to supply just enough assistance through the air drops to support sabotage, subversion, and intelligence gathering.

Relevance to Current Events. Although this book covers events decades ago, in World War II, it has relevance to today’s security environment in Europe. In World War II resistance movements formed under Nazi occupation were supported by the Special Operations Executive (SOE) and the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Today, a similar construct is occurring – Russian forces occupying eastern Ukraine and resistance by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in a conventional fight; but also special operations and resistance activities taking place behind the lines in the Russian occupied territories.

Supporting a Resistance Movement in Today’s World. In light of the Russian invasion of Ukraine; the Nordic, Baltic, and East European countries are prudent in improving their ability to deter or delay a Russian invasion until NATO can respond. In the future, it is possible that Western nations could be providing assistance to guerrillas and an underground in Russian occupied countries. However, the world has changed since World War II – and assisting a resistance movement the way it was done in the 1940s would not work well today. A read of Rogalski’s book provides a good account of the logistical difficulties of supporting a resistance movement in a Russian-occupied Eastern European country.

ROC. When the Russians first invaded eastern Ukraine and Crimea in 2014, Special Operations Command Europe (SOCEUR) became very active in providing advice, support, and training to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Much of this training was in accordance with the Resistance Operating Concept – a method with which Nordic, Baltic, and East European countries can conduct ‘resistance operations’ in the event of an invasion or occupation by Russian military forces. Just as the SOE Polish Section supported the Home Army in Poland, western SOF forces may find themselves conducting unconventional warfare and supporting resistance movements in the Baltic States, the Nordic countries, or in Eastern Europe.

A British Dilemma. The British were caught in the middle – do they support the Polish Home Army fighting in Poland and risk alienating their valuable ally, the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front? Or do they keep their relationship with the Soviets intact and ensure they continue their march on Berlin? The United Kingdom attempted to straddle the middle ground. The allies would provide just enough assistance to the Home Army to enable it to conduct sabotage, subversion, and intelligence gathering . . . and to demonstrate continued support for the Poles. However, the quantity and types of weapons and equipment that would support a general uprising were not provided. This would ensure the Soviets were not antagonized by the support provided to the Home Army; to the extent that the Soviets might scale down their campaign against Germany.

Warsaw Uprising 1944. As the Soviets were approaching Warsaw the Home Army rose up against the Germans in the summer of 1944. The British and the United States flew supplies, weapons, ammunition, money, equipment, and humanitarian supplies to Warsaw to aid the revolt. It was enough to show support for the Poles; but not enough for the uprising to be successful. The Soviets halted their advance short of Warsaw; only to continue once the Germans had defeated the Warsaw uprising (Wikipedia).

Aftermath. The end of the Second World War would see a Soviet-occupied Poland and the death of the Second Polish Republic. The Home Army was disbanded, the Polish government in exile was dissolved, and the thousands of Poles in conventional Polish military units fighting alongside Allied units around the world were discharged. After the war many were assimilated into the United Kingdom and other allied nations; choosing not to return to a Soviet-occupied Poland. The Soviets tightened their grip on Poland and established a communist regime that would last for decades. Members of the Home Army were hunted down, interrogated, imprisoned, or killed. Wieslaw Rogalski’s book is an excellent read for one who is interested in history, World War II, and resistance movements. It is also a good study on the difficulties of supporting a resistance movement in an occupied East European country.

**********

About the Book Author: Wieslaw Rogalski was born in England in 1950. His parents came to Britain as members of the Polish Allied Forces under British Command.

Special Operations Executive: Polish Section, The Death of the Second Polish Republic, by Wieslaw Rogalski, Helion & Company Limited, Warick, England, 2022. Available on Amazon.com and the SOF News Book Shop.

By Devin Klecan, DVIDS.

“The eyes and ears of V Corps move on little cat feet. The Long Range Reconnaissance Company could set themselves up on your front lawn, stay all day, and you’d never know they were there, all the time they’d be radioing your every action, including your dinner menu, back to their base camp,” wrote Richard Cole in 1961, a reporter for The Guardian.

On July 15, 1961, the U.S. Army Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol Company 3779 was activated in Wildflecken, Germany, by the Seventh U.S. Army to specifically serve as a special company under V Corps. At first, the company was assigned to the 14th Armored Cavalry Regiment for administration and court-martial jurisdiction. During that time, the company wore the Seventh Army shoulder patch complimented with a blue and white airborne tab, and was the only unit near the East German border actively on jump status.

V Corps needed Soldiers that were ready to fight and win during an era of uncertainty, now known as the Cold War. The Corps deployed across the West German states of Hessen and Bayern (Bavaria), providing protection and support for four of the six hotspots said to be the most likely Soviet penetration corridors into West Germany.

The company conducted extensive exercises such as rehearsals for deep penetration missions in tactically significant areas, troop training for special missions that involved team placements of T-4 Atomic Demolition Munitions, and locating enemy battlefield targets for Army Nuclear Delivery Systems.

In Jan. 1963, the company relocated to Edwards Kaserne (near Frankfurt, Germany), and upon the completion of a successful change of command ceremony shortly after, replaced their Seventh Army patches with the well-known white and blue V Corps patches placed below their airborne tab.

V Corps Soldiers stayed at Edwards Kaserne temporarily. The company moved again on May 9, 1963, to Gibbs Kaserne in Frankfurt to support the corps’ intelligence section, with the Soldiers classified as “V Corps Special Troops.”

At the time, the company was often assigned to honor guard duties in garrison. Later, the company was chosen to provide honor guards to represent the U.S. Army Airborne at the 20th anniversary of the corps’ D-Day landing of 1944 on June 6, 1964. The ceremony consisted of 122 enlisted men and four officers in attendance.

The company name was officially changed to Company D, LRRP,17th Infantry on May 15, 1965, due to the end of the company’s provisional status under V and VII Corps. The company did not change, containing the same personnel, mission, and barracks.

Overlooked by motivated leadership, V Corps’ LRRP’s “developed and perfected aspects of Long Range Patrol Operations that resulted in the issue of the first LRRP TO&E (Table of Organization & Equipment) 7-157E, and the publication of the first Long Range Reconnaissance Company Field Manual, FM 31-16,” wrote Bob Murphy, a Soldier that served in the company from 1964-1967.

The company also formalized the trends for Ranger status, with a requirement to have pre-set designated positions to ensure success in the field. Bearing the title “Ranger” was a requirement, with all 208 Soldiers in the company being Airborne qualified.

The men conducted constant training in cycles, focusing on field training exercises that emphasized the importance of camouflage, radio operator training and combating tactics used by the Soviet Union.

In 1968, the U.S. Army began a large pullout of troops from Europe, code named “OPERATION REFORGER.” The company found itself at Fort Benning, Georgia, in July that same year. At Fort Benning, the company was the only active duty Airborne unit on post. The Soldiers of the company, still bearing the V Corps patch, used their training to act as enemy forces at Ranger training sites. Even more so, about half of the ranks that filled the company saw combat in Vietnam, with most of them having been with the 101st Airborne Division and the 173rd Airborne Brigade in theater.

Yet again, on Feb. 1st, 1969, Company D, underwent a name change to A/75th Infantry (Rangers) with a new commanding officer. Upon the name change, the unit adopted the 197th Infantry Brigade’s shoulder patch and kept the Airborne tab.

The company spent time training other Soldiers heading to Vietnam in the states, but never formally deployed to Vietnam themselves due to V Corps’ objective supporting NATO allies and partners in multiple REFORGER (Return of Forces to Germany) exercises. REFORGER tested the ability of conventional forces to fight in a conventional war scenario to demonstrate American determination. The first REFORGER exercise was conducted on Jan. 6, 1969, with V Corps participating in each exercise that same year.

The A/75 Infantry worked with 1st Cavalry Division primarily by July 1972, but always had to stay on a high mission training status for V Corps’ original mission set for the LRRP. The A/75 Infantry maintained their presence in Germany and deployed in 1973 to participate in the year’s annual REFORGER exercise. Just as V Corps’ LRRP Company before them, the Soldiers of A/75 developed as a unit dedicated to service in Europe. On Dec. 19, 1974, the company was deactivated and cased its colors for the last time.

*********

Author: This article by Spc. Devin Klecan of Victory Corps was first published on February 1, 2023 by the Defense Visual Information Distribution Service. DVIDS content is in the public domain.

Image: Various photos show V Corps’ Long Range Recon Patrol Company training in Germany in the 1960s, with the unit patch being displayed in the center. U.S. Army photo illustration by Spc. Devin Klecan.

A new publication, SFA Operator Profile, by NATO offers a information about advisors, mentors, and trainers in the security force assistance environment. The report is published by the NATO Security Force Assistance Centre of Excellence (NATO SFA COE) located in Italy.

The document identifies lessons learned and best practices to enhance NATO HQs and NATO nations’ abilities to select, recruit, train, and deploy personnel in security force assistance operations. The project focuses on the job descriptions as well as the human and professional requirements necessary in a strategic, operational, and tactical environment. The publication aims to be a tool in understanding the complexity of the SFA field and the pivotal role of the human dimension in the SFA environment.

The recommendations in the report will assist in elaborating the profile and job description of the SFA operator. The report examines three broad topics:

• Address the differences and peculiarities of the SFA functions of advising, mentoring, and training
• Outline considerations concerning SFA training
• Focus on the analysis of behavioral aspects and core competencies of the SFA population

There are two main chapters in the report – “Research Outcomes Analysis” and “Psychological Profile”. The SFA Operator Profile has a conclusion and recommendation for each chapter. The end of the report includes a list of acronyms and biographies of the authors. This is a good read for those who are training officers and NCOs to become advisors, mentors, or trainers as well as military personnel who are or will be serving in those roles.

**********

The NATO SFA COE is a multinational entity accredited by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a “Centre of Excellence”. It is sponsored by the countries of Italy, Albania, and Slovenia. The Centre is recognized as a hub of reference in the Security Force Assistance field by NATO and other countries around the world.

SFA Operator Profile, NATO SFA COE, April 2022, PDF, 62 pages.
https://www.nsfacoe.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/SFA-OPERATOR-PROFILE.pdf

**********

Reference: Watch a two-minute long video that describes the intent of the report cited above. “SFA Operator Profile Analysis Report”, NATO SFA COE, April 12, 2022, YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVhazEQ8d_8

By Marc Trepanier.

With US Troops being deployed, to NATO partner countries sending arms and support to the Ukraine, the following can be expected:

• Russian war rhetoric to increase
• Russian forces to receive a false flag attack or
• Russian forces to receive an order to invade 
• NATO and US Conventional forces deployed into the Ukraine
• Ukrainian resistance forces taking up arms
• Russian forces slowed by environmental issues

Rhetoric Points to a Possible Invasion. Putin is very likely to order the invasion of the Ukraine. Ukraine was once part of the Soviet Union. Putin wants part or all of the country back. This invasion will be preceded by violent rhetoric and a possible false flag attack against Russian troops.

Russian war rhetoric will likely increase. In his 2007 speech in Munich Putin said “I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.” Placing NATO troops in Ukraine will be met with vitriol from the Kremlin.

Putin’s goal is to reestablish the USSR. You can see this goal in this Munich speech:

“[W]hat is a unipolar world? at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is [a] world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within. … this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. … the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.”

Putin sees a unipolar world as impossible. It sees global crises in the world and Russia as the logical cure. Putin believes it is his duty to project Russia as a foil to the West in general and America in particular.

False Flag Attack. Russia could very likely use SPETSNAZ forces in unmarked uniforms, as used in Crimea, to conduct “cross border” attacks against his troops. Russians dying in training is no concern to the Russian military, so losing a few in a staged attack is no issue. It would give the excuse needed for a military response. As of 3 February 2022, Biden released information received from British intelligence. Russia planned a false flag attack and prepared a video. The video contained scenes with corpses and destroyed military equipment, both Russian and NATO-styled. This video would have been used to justify a Russian attack.

Invasion Order? Russian forces may receive an order to invade Ukraine. The Kremlin may tell the world they are protecting the Russian lineage of the separatists in the Donbas region as they did in Crimea. Crimea was a well-planned operation that was in the works for a long time. However, repeating that success on the scale of a country-wide operation would be near impossible for the Russians.

NATO Deployment. NATO and US Conventional forces have deployed into the Ukraine. At least 3,000 US troops are being deployed in NATO countries in support of coming operations. Policy makers will continue with sanctions and other diplomatic means against Russia, its international businesses and businessmen, its political leaders, and so on.

The Resistance. The Ukrainian resistance forces are taking up arms. Resisting Russia will involve Hybrid Warfare, the combined use of military and non-military assets. Success in this relies on the foundation of a successful information operation prior to the invasion. Since Crimea, Ukraine has made tremendous efforts to invest heavily in its population as a resistance force. The Ukrainian government professionalized their resistance fighters under law 5557 called Fundamentals of National Resistance. This is to avoid overly violent and costly resistance groups.

The current population of the Ukraine is 43.6 million. Of that, 67% of the population is within the age range of 45 to 64 years old. Of this, currently 220,000 are in the military, leaving about 31 million potential resistance fighters.

A Stretched Russian Military. As of 28 January 2022, Canadian Imam Younus Kathrada called for Syrian Muslims to increase their attacks against Russian troops occupying Syria. This, along with ongoing activities in Georgia and Chechnya, would have the Russian military stretched on three active fronts. The Kremlin cannot bankroll these operations and a full scale invasion of the Ukraine followed with a contested occupation.

Environmental Considerations. Raputitsa is a Russian term for two seasons of the year. These two seasons are spring and autumn that are marked by melting snow and ice or persistent rains resulting in heavy mud. Tracked vehicles and heavy troop moving vehicles become largely restricted to hardball surfaces. By being restricted to developed roads, streets, and highways invading Russian forces will find themselves at numerous choke points and ambush points.

Summary. After the discovery of a video appearing to be made in support of a false flag attack it seems that a Russian attack on the Ukraine is inevitable at this point. It remains a matter of when. To avoid the pitfalls of the spring thaw the invasion has to come in early February. The pending incursion has been preceded by a heavy and years’ long propaganda campaign to the separatists in the Donbas region. But this is likely not as effective as Russia would like as support for living under Russian rule appears to have waned.

NATO forces are staging closer to Russian territory. The Ukrainian government has prepared and militarized their citizenry. This may be the turning point in preventing a full take over. The weather may be the deciding factor in how the invasion is conducted and whether it is a success or failure. Much of the Russian armor and heavy troop vehicles may well be useless in the mud and easy targets in columns on the roads for the Ukraine military and the Citizens Defense Forces.

*********

Author Bio: Marc Trepanier is a veteran of both active duty and reserves units. He served 21 years with time in both the Army and Navy in positions from Infantry to Theater level intelligence operations coordination. He has earned a Master’s in writing.