Britain to continue training Ukrainian military – Ambassador

23:30, 16.04.21 – UNIAN

UK will keep supporting the implementation of defense reform in line with NATO standards.

Britain is set to continue training the Ukrainian military as part of the ongoing mission in support of the country in the face of Russian aggression.

That’s according to a report by the press service of Ukraine’s defense ministry released following the meeting of Andriy Taran, Ukraine’s defense minister, and the British Ambassador to Ukraine, Melinda Simmons.

The defense chief has briefed the chief of the British diplomatic corps in Ukraine on the security situation on the line of contact with the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. He also noted the ongoing build-up of Russian military presence in the vicinity of Ukraine’s state border and in the temporarily occupied Crimea.

In turn, Simmons reaffirmed UK support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. She assured that Britain will continue training Ukrainian military personnel and developing capabilities of the Armed Forces, including in implementing defense reform in line with NATO standards.

The parties agreed to continue joint work on developing bilateral relations and strengthening cooperation in security and defense.

British instructors in Ukraine

Operation Orbital, the UK’s training mission to Ukraine, was established following the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia, in a demonstration of the UK’s unwavering support to Ukraine.

UK personnel have already trained over 17,500 members of the Ukrainian Armed Forces since the start of Operation Orbital in 2015.

UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace on November 4 said UK would be extending its training mission to Ukraine by three years, until March 2023.

Read more on UNIAN:


  1. I know from my own primary sources that the British trainers are highly valued. But this is a British initiative, not a Nato one. I consider Nato, like the EU, to be an enemy; to Britain, Ukraine and Georgia, since it is crawling with covert and overt Russia lackeys.
    British trainers are not giving Ukraine ‘Nato standards’ (whatever the fuck that is), they are giving them the benefits of centuries of British martial experience. Does anyone seriously think that the joke armies of Spain, Portugal, North Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, Belgium etc are anything like a match for those of Ukraine in terms of quality or bravery?
    Nato is run by a Marxist who has a political agenda. He will likely be eventually replaced by a similar arsehole. Which is I why I am advocating a new military, trade and intel sharing bloc that consists only of countries that will fight putlerstan.

    • I hate to break the news to you but British standards ARE NATO standards. Just as the US’s standards also. I do not know which cost center the money comes from NATO or the UK but there is not sense in having one group of trainers teaching the Ukrainians one thing and the Brits teaching another.
      As for “NATO standards” these are a set of procedures and organization so that NATO units can work together with as little confusion as possible.
      For example a Ukrainian officer can be assigned to a US or German battalion staff and know how to function with a minimum of learning curve. They also includes standardized communications. Similar caliber of weapons. The same kind of gas(petrol) nozzles (Soviet and NATO are not compatible deliberately so). The procedure for calling for artillery support (Don’t want to fuck that up!) Even rank structure.
      This may seem trivial but it can be very serious. For example In 03 the Poles were providing a brigade and a Division HQ for the occupation of Iraq. The US was going to help them by providing air lift. When the time came to ship the Poles ammo the aircrafts load Master refused to let the ammo be loaded (Yeah they have that kind of power). The polish boxes would not fit the US loading straps.
      So what do you do?
      Ignore the problem and load up, cargo can shift in flight and the next thing you know there is a talking head on CNN asking how did this happened? Don’t ship the ammo and the soldiers down range could have a BAD day.
      My office at EUCOM HQ had to send a team to to Poland to work with them to address the problem. The poles were great and really worked with us. We got it straightened out and the mission was accomplished.
      Just a small real world problem to illustrate the challenges of making a an effective fighting force out of 28 different armies.
      It took Poland and the Baltics 10 years to complete their transition.
      And they were not fighting a war nor did they have the bloated bureaucratic inertia of the Ukraine Ministry of Defense.( the former minister said there was one manager who had been in charge of the same office for 30 years. Nor a hard headed officers who as one US Marine General said “They are fat and overly proud of their soviet educations”
      So there you are.

      • Nato is not a homogeneous entity. Russian commanders will never be shitting themselves about Portuguese, Spanish, North Macedonian, Albanian, Montenegrin etc armed forces. Furthermore, although the French on paper have a powerful armed forces, they would never fight Russia because they are slimy lackeys. Ditto Germany.
        The only Nato players that would do the heavy lifting would be Poland, Pribaltika, Britain, Canada and America.
        Which is why I believe Nato is not fit for purpose, since it is crawling with putler lackeys. A new trade, military and intel sharing organisation needs to be formed, consisting solely of countries that will fight putlerstan.

  2. “Britain is set to continue training the Ukrainian military as part of the ongoing mission in support of the country in the face of Russian aggression.”
    Any and all help is highly appreciated, I’m sure. However, I am also sure that the Ukrainians could train British troops too, seeing the vast experience they had gathered in seven years of war with mafia land.

    “…including in implementing defense reform in line with NATO standards.”
    I place more value on Ukrainian capabilities than NATO’s. Which NATO countries, except Britain and the US, could have withstood mafia land for seven years?

    • It still looks terrible bro.
      “We signed the treaty to protect you and guarantee your safety if you give up your nuclear weapons.” Then Russia invades and they say, “Ok, here are some trainers to help you guarantee your security. Never mind the 14,000 already dead.”

      • Of course, the effort is quite feeble in light of what was promised. At this point, I hope that at least Britain will finally wake up and smell the coffee, regarding the appeasement of the rodent. They are in a unique position in Europe to put on the hurt, what with all the mafia money in London. They could do a lot with all that loot besides hurting the rodent’s allied oligarchs and hence mafia land’s political structure.

        • I agree we should. But there is even more putinazi money in America.
          What America should do is sanction the krauts until they give up Nordstream 2.

          • I think its finally becoming obvious to the Germans that NS2 really is a national security risk for Ukraine and that if it goes through there is every reason to sanction Molotov-Ribbentrop 2.0.

Enter comments here: