Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The systematic targeting of medical infrastructure, personnel, and casualty evacuation routes by Russia in Ukraine challenges whether the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) can still rely on the Geneva Conventions for the protection of medical assets and personnel. This necessitates a thorough review of NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAGs) and doctrine used for Medical Planning for future Large Scale Combat Operations (LSCO). However, drawing lessons from the Ukrainian experience requires consideration of cultural context, medical evidence, and human factors. Ukraine's military medical system is burdened by its inherited Soviet-era doctrine, which was centralized and resistant to change. Initial reforms, aided by foreign assistance, aimed to modernize this system, emphasizing decentralized medical supply and improved training. However, the ongoing conflict has revealed the persistence of cultural issues, such as false reporting, lack of critical thinking, poor accountability, and resistance to change. Negative experiences can lead to abandonment of proven medical interventions, and without a comprehensive trauma registry, the effectiveness of the military medical system cannot be assessed with certainty. Frontline medical personnel often face high attrition and lack comprehensive command and control, further exacerbating challenges in delivering effective medical support. Despite these challenges to human factors, examples of innovative problem-solving exist. These solutions will be lost if not put into peer-reviewed doctrine or shared in a formal process. Previous NATO engagements assumed air-dominance and safe casualty evacuation and treatment across all echelons of care. The Ukrainian battlefield has shown that a near-peer adversary willing to systematically target medical units and the casualty evacuation system has catastrophic effects on military and civilian healthcare. Near-total reliance on ground-based evacuation platforms has forced Ukrainians to repurpose a large variety of nonstandard vehicles for casualty evacuation, as military ambulances were destroyed and most tracked/armored vehicles are prioritized for combat operations. Future NATO doctrine should emphasize mine-drone-resistant evacuation platforms with versatile (electronic) countermeasures. With the destruction of critical medical facilities, coupled with a high operational tempo and a massive influx of battlefield casualties, conventional triage models had to be abandoned, and casualties may remain in the prehospital setting for hours or even days. Point-of-injury stabilization has, therefore, taken on an even greater role than envisioned in NATO doctrine, and Ukrainian medical personnel adopted high-mobility approaches, such as delivery of lifesaving materials using drones. As medical treatment facilities came under attack, Ukrainians have resorted to distributed and hidden "micro-hospitals" and highly mobile surgical teams to avoid detection. The logistical challenges faced by Ukraine's medical system exposed weaknesses in NATO's approach to medical supply chains, requiring a more decentralized and on-demand medical supply model. The high level of civil-military medical coordination seen in Ukraine is far beyond what NATO doctrine currently envisions. Planning capabilities and tactical decision-making should be included in doctrine and in the curriculum of all medical unit leaders, with guiding frameworks that balance overall operational goals, personal safety, triage, and timely delivery of care. Co-development using validated "lessons learned" from Ukraine can provide a reliable roadmap for strategic reform.
Bongartz et al. (Thu,) studied this question.