Milyutin transformation: an enlightening experience – part III

Leonty Shevtsov
Military-Industrial Courier
Published in issue number 48 (414) for the December 7, 2011

"MIC" continues to publish reports and statements made at the recent Russian military leaders in the Club of scientific and practical conference "On the 150th anniversary of the military reform Lopatkin Milutin and its significance for the modern military building."

That is necessary for the success of the reform

High professionalism of managers, their personal responsibility to the country, the supreme authority and society

Certainly, the reform undertaken under the guidance of Lopatkin Milutin, though not entirely completed (this will be said), was an outstanding event. It was almost the first after the military reforms of Peter I quite successful military reform.

To be or not to be a country

Sometimes, that is justified, this reform is called "name" because it embodied the personality war minister, which it conceived, organized and executed, though not completely. It has a great interest from the point of view of history, but we are now important to see how these big things are made and how they should be doing, because the fate of the country, like a hundred, a thousand years ago, depends on the state of its defense and the Armed Forces . This is the cornerstone of all activities of the state, and apply to the defense, the Armed Forces should be respectful, careful and cautious.

Transformation of the army and navy must be repeatedly verified, designed and historically legitimized.

Military reform – a change of the inner being of the indigenous and the quality of the army and the military organization of the state.

The main thing is to understand everything – from top to bottom, that military reform holds the state, not an agency or Minister and the legal basis of the legally – decrees and documents of the President, his administration, the Security Council. Minister of Defence and Chief of General Staff only organizers and performers.

Unfortunately, in Russia today, no public discussion of military reform, military doctrine or new regulations to guide the troops were not. Although these are not the questions of where one may easily make mistakes and do not bear any responsibility. The responsibility should not be taken deprivation office. Other governor has done a lot of "mistakes" in its favor and go at will with tens of millions of dollars in your pocket. For errors related to the state of the armed forces and defense, the question is to be or not to be the country’s independence and integrity. Such errors are worse crimes.

I remind Milutin get tasks for reform, despite his wealth of experience, he sent 211 military and prominent statesmen letter in which he asked to share their views on the upcoming changes.

Management

Major reforms in the field of reorganization of military command was military-district system.

In May 1862 the king Milutin submitted proposals under the title "The main reason to military control device intended for districts."

In August 1864, approved the "Regulation on the military districts" where the team was a man manager.

In 1868, the draft Regulation on the field command troops in wartime, according to which the conduct of combat operations in theater form one or more armies, led by a chief.

In 1868, the War Department was established, and from 1 January 1869 introduced the Regulations on the Military Ministry.

All this, of course, improved the management of troops and their mobilization software. Were refined relationship commander and Minister of War.

Currently, it is necessary to deal with the legal problems and the situation and the military theater district.

Mobilization and supply issues, operational command and control from Moscow did not solve.

Virtually eliminated the district, and the rates are not created.

Importantly – clear lines of authority of the Ministry of Defence and the General Staff. Earlier in the Soviet army issue was not so acute, because the head of the Defense Ministry and the General Staff are people who are deeply versed in military affairs.

Now the situation is different. In our time, the only way – to paint a clear mandate of the Ministry of Defence and the General Staff. Now we take a lot from the experience of the U.S. Army.

We did not at the expense of the defense on the surface of the problem of Defense:

participation in political affairs as a member of the government and a permanent member of the Security Council;

military budget, the army of (MIC);
the prestige of military service, military pay, housing, etc.

The tasks of the General Staff:

military and strategic management;
construction of the army;
mobilization issues;
order equipment;
management of operational, strategic training, etc.

Milutin deprived military office priority over the General Staff.

Now, almost military office (office of the Ministry of Defense) determines which have the army as to train personnel how to supply, feed and water the armed forces in times of peace and war, it is necessary to equip someone to assign (ie personnel issues), and much more.

Important in the management of:

1) The powers of the Ministry of Defence and the General Staff (Terms of Defense and the General Staff);

2) the role and place bets and military districts / fleets.

The commander in chief has to work closely with both the Minister of Defence and Chief of the General Staff (his body control). Civilian minister of defense in time of war – almost no one in management at the strategic and operational level and at the tactical – especially.

Certainly, the experience of the reform of the U.S. Army can take a lot. U.S. Army after Vietnam was in the same conditions, especially in matters of prestige and construction, as we are in the 90s and the first decade of the new century.

I think that in terms of learning management requires the status and powers of the Ministry of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff of the armed forces of the United States.

When in 1960 John Kennedy offered Robert McNamara as defense minister, he initially refused, citing the fact that it is not ready and it did not go anywhere. In response, Kennedy said it is reasonable that the president also never taught.

U.S. defense industry was taking a lot of money, and therefore had the task of reform without extraordinary costs. McNamara said it will finance and economic issues, in which he perfectly understood, and the military should decide purely military matters. (Neither one general and admiral of money will not be allowed.)

Yes, we have under the Ministry of Defence of a very large and complex. I have in mind here the land, military camps, and housing. Now the issues related to the market, solved or close to it. The prestige of military service, military pay and allowances of all levels grow and brought to the forefront issues of operational and strategic, operational and tactical, that is, training senior management, such as the Supreme Command in case of war, control levels in theater (really – rates), military districts .

We now have four military districts. In practice, this rate in theater that face, and should be the main task – to guide the actions of the large-scale, regional or local wars. But after a lot of important issues in the theater is to be addressed, such as partial or full mobilization, adherence to the EP or PE, territorial defense, inter-theater lift, and others. It is impossible to transfer the army and navy with the provisions of the peace at the time of martial law, to prepare the first operation and at the same time solve the issues listed above. (Incidentally, not all are listed.)

We must call a spade a spade. Bet there is a bet, and is led by the commander of the district is not, as Commander in theater with appropriate authority, responsibility and rank, and his staff must be prepared to teach. A newly created controls in theater require years of unity, cohesiveness, and the optimal structure for a competent training operations and management.

For example, in the current Western District (Moscow and Leningrad VO, Northern and Baltic fleets, other security forces) is very difficult to prepare and conduct operational-strategic exercise GSH. After all, it is ultimately not about the exercises to combat terrorism, and war, which is much more complicated.

Output: the next three to five years, new structures require serious study and attention by the General Staff. As a result, to turn out the optimal structure will be able to express themselves talented generals, admirals and officers.

What’s done is done. Could not be in a hurry with the creation of four new structures at the same time, and his plan to break in one county (rate). General Staff at the same time is very hard to prepare four structures. In the GS, too, because there are serious changes, he needs serious training in terms of the working body of the Supreme Civil Code.

Mobilization issues

Implementation of the main goals Milutin – creating a small regular army, which if necessary can be quickly increased by recruitment of trained people from the reserve, continued throughout the military reform.

I must say that previously did not exist in the state mobilization plan. In the case of its development, a number of serious measures. At the end of 1875 created a mobilization committee from 1875 to 1877 resulted in the first proper system of all information about readiness of the army in all fields of supply, and have discussed the steps to be taken by the Office for the best allocation of available funds and replenish the missing items.

In May 1876, the committee has begun compiling a general mobilization plan. However, the complication of the situation of foreign made to abandon the work and to begin preparations for urgent action, the threat of war against Turkey.

Do not have time to plan, but the mobilization reserve of 500 thousand people was created. It should be emphasized that before Milutin in the country was virtually no mobilization.

General mobilization most complex issues. The mass armies have not yet passed. Rely on local war and the fight against terrorism can not. However, even long-term local war requires considerable manpower. Example – the war in Afghanistan, demanded that the Americans engaging reserve. So that there is the United States. Even the decor and the absence of war (campaign) in the North Caucasus requires a shift of troops every six months (six months for a local war, three months – rest, training again – and more).

A strong local war Standby Brigade (by the way, the big question that they are, as 1/4 or 1/3 – the young soldiers who, because of age and poor training in law can not send) a year and a half to exhale. What’s next? If it is not one, but two such wars? Or local war plus a serious regional conflict? Fight without even partial mobilization would be no one. The current status of mobilization issues difficult.

The problem is that it is necessary to collect not just people, but people who are able to operate at arms. This is not a militia, and people are prepared for the war on modern means of direct official designation. They must be prepared and sborovyh no events.

Only the district is able to organize and carry out duties. Training centers and universities of Defense, which is not enough, do not have besides these practices, do not have such opportunities. I wonder who is responsible for supplying mobresursov? Perhaps the one who prepares them. It can not be so: the one responsible, and prepares another.

From Moscow, divisions, brigades not razverneshsya. Of Moscow, from the MoD can only be removed from office, but did not mobilize the connection part. If anyone doubts, put the task mobilize units, units, and all becomes clear.

If we have not given up massive armies, the issue of mobilization should be seriously addressed. If you think only of local wars and terrorism and not think of even regional wars, while relevant to the issues of mobilization becomes clear.

Military Education

The most important part of military reform in the reign of Alexander II, which was designed to excretion army to a new level of development, was the reorganization of officer training. Milutin in his memoirs, recalled that this issue was among the priorities. February 10, 1862 Dmitri gave a detailed note on the transformation of the military schools.

Emphasized the importance of this issue and the fact that Alexander II appointed chief captain over the military schools of his brother – the Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, who immediately appealed to a number of prominent military and government officials to offer an opinion on how to improve military education.

Develop specific measures to implement the project was assigned to the General Directorate of the military schools, established in 1863 as part of the War Office, and not autonomous, as it were.

I want to raise one question about the place of the military schools (academies and schools) – I mean geography. In 1866 was founded the Orenburg military school, which already in 1870, was closed. "The place is – described in the annual report GUVUZa – being away from the center of education, met with difficulties in the environment is not only educational, but even the drill …"

This fact indicates that the military leaders, who believed that the provincial schools will not be able to provide a high level of education, were largely correct.

Designed and implemented by the Ministry of War military education system was a significant step forward. The reorganization of the military academies promote better training of officers of the highest category, but the number of graduates was negligible. A serious shortcoming is the lack of short-term training courses of senior officers. Establishment of military schools significantly raised the level of training of officers, but again because of the insufficient number of graduates do not address the needs of the army officers, even in peacetime. If the infantry and cavalry, the problem was solved by the cadet schools, for the artillery and engineering troops it remained unsolved.

The system of military schools was a rational and durable, its significant features were retained until 1917 and in the future. The main thing – it provided an army trained officers.

Today, in our system of military education training officers are in military institutions (schools), academies and universities. Cadets and students receive:

in military institutions – full professional military (special) training;

in military academies – the highest military operational and tactical training;

at the Military Academy of the General Staff – the highest military operational and strategic training.

Simultaneously, the profiles of the main educational programs in military schools implemented programs of additional professional education, training and retraining of duration of studies 72-500 and 500 hours respectively.

Currently, a number of federal laws that change the laws governing the educational activities of higher education institutions and the impact on the whole system of vocational education, including the military.

According to these changes instead of three levels of higher education, the qualifications of "Bachelor", "The Graduate" and "Master", introduced two levels of higher education, "Bachelor" training "specialist" or "Master." Standard terms of development of basic educational programs "Bachelor" – four years, "Specialist" – at least five years, "Masters" – two years.

As a result, three-tier system of military education was not legally secured and is currently undergoing reform (full military training, the highest military operational and tactical training, the highest military operational and strategic training).

Practical steps to change the system of military education, including their level accepted by the protocol of the meeting with the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation on March 24, 2011 № 110. This record reflects the fundamental steps in the development of the new scheme (the system) providing vocational training officers (Continuing Professional Education), the period of availability set for September 1, 2011.

Subsequently, a new system of additional vocational training approved by order of the Ministry of Defence on 12 July 2011 № 1136 "On measures to improve training in military educational institutions of higher education of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation."

Normative term retraining for higher military operational and tactical training, the highest military operational and strategic training 10 months approved by the Minister of Defense July 29, 2011.

In order to establish additional vocational training to the federal body of executive power, which is running the military schools, the law presents credentials:

establish a system of continuing education officers (vocational and job growth) and the minimum qualification requirements for the content of the relevant additional professional retraining programs officers;

specify the duration and content of the training programs of additional vocational training.
As a result:

training of officers with higher military tactical and higher military operational and strategic training in the 2011-2012 academic year is based on the Russian Defense Ministry universities Vocational Education Programs (standard period of study – 10 months), the officers received in 2010, re-training for effect at the time the curricula and programs (standard period of study – two years);
in order to ensure the quality of further education for the retraining of officers developed qualifications, curriculum and educational programs.

A little bit about the new draft Federal Law "On Education". It is expedient to consider the following:

1. The problem can not accredit training programs and retraining programs.

As a result of the military who have received additional training, can not be issued for the state sample, since the minimum content of an additional professional education program and the level of professional training requirements established by the federal government that are developed by the federal executive branch responsible for public policy and legal regulation in education.

For this purpose, it is advisable to request the President of the Russian Federation about the issue order for the development of the draft federal law "On Amendments to the Federal Law" On Military Duty and Military Service ", the anchor rule, according to which the federal government requirements for minimum content additional professional educational programs and level of professional retraining would develop on the basis of the federal state requirements set by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

2. He defined the order of formation time of realization of qualification requirements for military training.

In that case, if there is no special procedure for the implementation of the GEF VPO in military educational institutions, this will lead to deterioration in the quality of professional military (special) training for the federal executive authorities, training of staff in the interests of national defense and security, law and order . Also hinder the passage of state accreditation of military schools.

3. In a further professional education in the organization of professional training provided by the formation of a list of additional qualifications (by whom they should be developed, approved).

Bear in mind that when you create a system of additional professional education foundation of its content should be directed to vocational training for appointment to senior military positions from the tactical level to the operational and into strategic. To achieve these levels of professional training required calculations and study time parameters.

4. Provide for the development of relevant federal government requirements and how to enter training programs and vocational training.

OPK – under strict control

A major issue was the military transformation Milyutin rearmament. A lot has been done in this area. But the economic backwardness of the country was an insurmountable obstacle. Difficulties were compounded worship Alexander II and the court before all foreign to the detriment of its own industry.

Therefore, re-was not completed, which is especially evident in the Russian-Japanese war.

The reason was the failure to organize the defense industry, which is now visible in the marketplace.

Enough money now. The main question: there is a pressing need for the development of national defense, to avoid dependence on foreign countries.

Defense must be managed under strict state control, it should not be allowed to float freely, you need to be responsible for their activities, receive specific tasks, requests from the Ministry of Defence, and the market for such products is always there.

Conclusion

Important: military reform holds the state, not an agency or minister, and legal and regulatory framework that – the decrees and orders of the President and his administration, the Security Council. Defense Ministry and General Staff only the organizers and performers.

That is necessary for the success of military reform (the experience Milutin)?

The stable political system in the country.

The favorable economic environment (Finance).

Full confidence in the country’s leadership, the military and society to the executor of military reform.

High professional leaders reform their personal responsibility for the conduct of the country, the supreme authority and the public.

The possibility of finding the leaders of reform in office for at least ten years.

We wish our current state leadership of political will in the implementation of military reform of the state. And our officer corps – the basis of our army – patience and perseverance, professional influence to all the questions and prepare the military entrusted parts, connections and associations to defend the Fatherland.

Leonty Shevtsov , Colonel-General

Translation by Ralph Davis. See the original in Russian: http://vpk-news.ru/articles/8438

Advertisements

Leave a comment

No comments yet.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s