[Paleo Conservative]

But they were trained in Russian style methods, which emphasized tight control from above, and little initiative at the bottom. This is just the opposite of the American/NATO style.

Many officers trained in the Russian style cannot, late in their careers, switch to American methods. This was encountered when the East European communist governments fell in 1989, and those nations joined NATO in the 1990s. This required that their armed forces learn NATO methods, so they could operate with West European NATO forces. Many of the communist era officers could not make the shift to the, to them, radically different methods.

It's pretty hard for a dictatorship that doesn't trust its own people to adopt US/NATO methods that give soldiers at the scene the authority to use their own initiative. A military like that could be an internal threat to the regime.

[strategofr]

"It's pretty hard for a dictatorship that doesn't trust its own people to adopt US/NATO methods that give soldiers at the scene the authority to use their own initiative. A military like that could be an internal threat to the regime."

Good point. Are you sure are the current government of Iraq is similar enough to a US/NATO government to be comfortable with the same type of military?