Beginning with perestroika, in the USSR and then in Russia it became fashionable to refer to foreign experience to deepen argumentation in any field, including the military one.
Many references to foreign experience can be found in the course of the discussion, which has been going on for more than ten years now, about ways of reforming, first, the Soviet, and then the Russian army.
However, even a not very deep acquaintance with the practice of foreign military development shows that no one here (with the possible exception of the GRU General Staff) has seriously studied the military experience of other countries and is not studying it. Frequent references to this experience in disputes about the ways of military reform in Russia are calculated mainly on the ignorance of opponents.
Let's try to illustrate this thesis with the example of the noisy slogan "Give us a professional army!" ”And active propaganda of this slogan by the Union of Right Forces today. The US military is more often cited as the model for a professional army. However, the American professional army is a myth, and a myth of local, still Soviet origin. It arose in the late 80s - early 90s and was introduced into society by politicians and publicists of the so-called "democratic wave" and picked up by young officers-deputies of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, who put forward the idea of creating a professional Soviet army (the so-called "project Major Lopatin ").
I must say that the army itself was taken by surprise by such slogans and projects (as, indeed, by subsequent events, including the collapse of the USSR). After all, she did not have the slightest idea of what a professional army is. The level of her knowledge in this matter can be judged at least by the handbook of a Soviet officer of the 70s-80s - the eight-volume "Soviet Military Encyclopedia".
In it, who wants to know what is “ professional army”, The compilers of the encyclopedia referred to the article“ Theory of small armies ”. It says that it is
a theory based on the idea of achieving victory in a war with the help of a few technically highly equipped professional armies. It arose in Western capitalist countries after World War I, 1914-1918. Supporters of small professional armies fulfilled the social order of the imperialists, who were afraid of massive armed forces staffed by workers and peasants, and overestimated the role of weapons and military equipment in the war. ... The theory of "small armies", as it did not have any real ground, was not accepted as official in any country, because the objective laws of the development of military affairs demanded the creation of massive armies.
It is clear that with such a level of knowledge about professional armies, the Soviet army turned out to be completely unprepared for conducting a meaningful discussion about military professionalism.
Supporters of the creation of a Russian professional army, citing as an example “ professional The US Army completely ignore the fact that, according to American views, not every American who serves in the army under contract has the right to consider himself or be called a professional.
Thus, according to the views of the most consistent apologist of military professionalism, Samuel Huntington, only an officer can be considered a professional, and even then not everyone, but only one who, according to Huntington, is an expert in "managing violence." It is this feature, in his opinion, that separates the military professional from the officers of other specialties (engineers, technicians, logisticians, etc.). Their skill, according to Huntington, is necessary to achieve the tasks assigned to the armed forces, but their specialties are an auxiliary occupation, related to the competence of a professional officer, just as the skill of a nurse, pharmacist, laboratory assistant, or radiologist is related to the competence of a doctor. All of these officers, who are not specialists in the management of violence, belong to the officer corps only in its capacity as an administrative organization, but by no means as a professional community.
Huntington vehemently denies the professionalism of the rank and file. This is how he explains this point of view in his classic work The Soldier and the State, first published in 1957 and reprinted several times since then.
The soldiers and sergeants reporting to the officer corps are part of the organizational, but not the professional, bureaucracy. They have neither intellectual knowledge nor a sense of professional responsibility as an officer. They are specialists in using violence, not in managing it. Their occupation is a craft, not a profession. This fundamental distinction between officers and non-commissioned and non-commissioned officers is reflected in the clear dividing line that exists between the two in all the armies of the world. If this dividing line did not exist, then it would become possible for the existence of a single military hierarchy from the private to the officer of the highest rank. ... However, the existing differences between an officer and a private exclude the transition from one level to another. Some members of the rank and file and non-commissioned officers sometimes still manage to rise to the rank of officer, but this is more the exception than the rule. The education and training required to become an officer is normally incompatible with a long service as a private or sergeant.
True, some military researchers recognize the presence of elements of professionalism among the so-called "career" sergeants (that is, sergeants who received many years of training and serve in sergeant positions until retirement) and even sometimes use the term "professional sergeant". However, sergeants are not recognized as full-fledged professionals by all military experts.
For example, the renowned American expert on military professionalism Sam Sargsyan writes:
The concepts of military profession and military professional refer primarily to the officer corps. Professional NCOs and Warrant Officers play an important role, but the form and content of the professional ethos, as well as the relationship between the military and society, is determined primarily by the officer corps.
The professionalism of the rank and file, regardless of whether they are recruited or on a contract basis, is denied not only by American, but also by many European military experts. Thus, the English researcher Gwen Harris-Jenkins writes:
The concept of the military profession has traditionally been associated with officers, not rank and file. The reason for this is clear. The specific set of values and norms of behavior that constitutes the professional ethos is predominant among officers, rarely found among NCOs, and, as is commonly believed, does not exist among ordinary military personnel.
Americans are not classified as professional soldiers and reserve officers. In the opinion of such a tough guardian of the purity of military professionalism as Huntington, the reservist only temporarily takes on professional responsibility. His main functions and knowledge are outside the army. As a result, a reservist's motivation, behavior, and value system most often differ markedly from the standards of a professional officer.
Another reason why the Americans do not name, and indeed cannot call and consider their army professional, is that a significant part of the US armed forces is militia in nature. We are talking about the National Guard, which is an integral component of the US Army and Air Force.
The second amendment to the US Constitution reads: "Since a well-organized militia is necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms will not be limited." The National Guard, in fact, is, in spite of its ultra-modern armament, that militia (militia), the necessity of which the founding fathers of the United States considered a guarantee of the preservation of American democracy. That is why the National Guard is staffed on a territorial basis and is under a double subordination - the federal government and local governments (states).
We hope that these examples are enough to understand why the Americans are so perplexed when they learn that in Russia their army is called professional.
The method of determining the level of professionalism of a serviceman in the United States is also different from the Russian one.
A professional military specialist is the officer most trained to manage the use of violence in a given setting. Within the military professionalism itself, there are specialists in the management of violence at sea, on land, in the air and in space, just as in medicine there are specialists in the treatment of heart, stomach and eye diseases. The larger and more complex organizations for the implementation of violence an officer is able to manage, the wider the range of situations and conditions in which he can be used, the higher his professional skills.
The profession of an officer is not a craft (mostly technical) and not an art (requiring a unique talent that cannot be passed on to others). This is an unusually difficult intellectual activity that requires long-term comprehensive training and constant training.
Before the conduct of hostilities acquired the character of an extremely complex matter, one could become an officer without special training, buying, for example, an officer's patent. However, today only those who devote all their working time to military affairs can hope to achieve mastery. The profession of an officer is not a craft (mostly technical) and not an art that requires a unique talent that cannot be passed on to others. This is a complex intellectual activity, which implies long-term comprehensive education and training.
American experts believe that the main features of military professionalism are universal in the sense that its essence is not affected by changes in time and geographic location. Just as the qualifications of a good surgeon are the same in Zurich and New York, the same criteria for military excellence are applied in Russia, and in America, in the 19th and 20th centuries. The possession of general professional knowledge and skills is the bond that binds officers across state borders, despite all other differences.
Material incentives are not decisive for the professional motivation of an officer. In Western society, the officer profession does not belong to the highly paid one. An officer is not a mercenary who offers his services where they pay more for them. But at the same time, he is not a soldier-citizen, inspired by a strong short-term patriotic impulse and duty, but not having a steady and constant desire to achieve excellence in mastering the skill of managing violence. The main driving motives of an officer are love for his specialty, as well as a sense of social responsibility for using this specialty for the benefit of society. The combination of these two aspirations forms his professional motivation.
When studying the world experience of military development, it is important to remember that in the West, and above all in the United States, the term "professional" is used in a different sense than in our country. In russian language " profession"- this is, first of all," the type of labor activity » , which requires special theoretical knowledge and practical skills and is the main source of livelihood. Our dictionaries indicate that the word “ profession"Comes from the Latin word" professio", Which translates as" I declare my business. " Americans also occasionally use the word "professional" in relation to their occupation, but only as a contrast to amateurism, mainly in sports ("professional football"). Latin " professio"American dictionaries are interpreted in a completely different way, namely as a" public solemn declaration "," vow. "
The American military, including Pentagon analysts and military scientists, are sincerely amazed when they learn that the American military is called professional in Russia. Our request at the Pentagon for an explanation of the terms "professional armed forces" and "professional military" received the following response, excerpts from which are reproduced below.
We searched for an official interpretation of the terms "professional army" and "professional military". We found the results interesting. It turned out that the Chiefs of Staff Committee did not use such terms. The speechwriters of the Minister of Defense also do not use them, although they helped us in trying to find an answer. Moreover, these speechwriters are intrigued by the problem of the use of these terms in Russia, since their use by Russians does not at all reflect the meaning invested in them by the Americans. However, they had to admit that there was no official definition of these terms. Speechwriters are likely to try to get the Secretary of Defense's office to formulate these definitions in the future.
As for the problems of professionalism in general and military professionalism in particular, a large amount of special literature is devoted to them in the West, which is completely unknown in our country. In its most brief form, views on professionalism in the United States are as follows.
Competence (availability of special knowledge and academic education), a sense of responsibility and vocation, corporatism (belonging to one or another corporate-bureaucratic structure) and self-government are considered indispensable attributes of professionalism. In turn, these signs are quite specific in content.
Competence ... The so-called “ scientists profession» (« learned professions"). Webster's Explanatory Dictionary defines them as follows:
The academic profession is one of three professions - theology, jurisprudence, and medicine, traditionally associated with intensive study and erudition; in a broad sense, any profession for the acquisition of which an academic education is considered necessary.
Professional competence is part of the general cultural tradition of the society. A professional can apply his knowledge successfully only by realizing himself as a part of this wider tradition. Accordingly, vocational education consists of two stages: the first, which includes broad liberal (general cultural) training, and the second, which provides specialized knowledge in the profession. The liberal education of a professional is usually acquired in general education institutions. The second, technical phase of vocational education presupposes the presence of specialized educational institutions.
To imagine the gap between the Soviet (post-Soviet) and American concept of vocational education, it is enough to remember what kind of education our vocational schools provide.
A sense of responsibility and vocation ... A professional is a practitioner who provides services to the public, such as health care, education, legal or military protection, that are essential to the functioning of the entire society. A research chemist, for example, is not a professional, since his activities, although useful for society, are not vital. At the same time, the essential to society nature of the professional's services and his monopoly on them impose on the professional the obligation to provide services at the request of the society. This responsibility to society distinguishes the professional from other professionals whose occupation is associated only with intellectual skill. The same research chemist is still a research chemist, even if he decides to apply his knowledge for antisocial purposes. In this regard, it should be clear how ridiculous it is to call, for example, a Chechen fighter or a terrorist a professional, as we often do.
It is the duty to serve the community and dedication to one's vocation that constitute the main motivation of a professional. Financial self-interest cannot be the main goal of a professional if he is a true professional.
Corporate and self-government ... A distinctive feature of professionalism is the "sense of organic unity" characteristic of members of one profession, simply - collectivism. Those with one profession clearly recognize themselves as a group with their own performance criteria, distinct from non-professionals and members of other professions. This collective feeling is the result of long-term joint training and collaboration, as well as an awareness of our unique social responsibility.
The military profession has all three of the above "generic" features of any profession. However, each of them, due to the specifics of military service, has its own characteristics.
The skill of an officer lies in the management of armed violence, but not in the use of violence per se. Shooting from a machine gun, grenade launcher or tank is basically a technical craft. Leading a motorized rifle or tank company is a completely different skill. The intellectual content of the military profession confronts the modern officer with the need to devote from one third to one half of his professional life to organized training; probably the highest ratio between learning and working time.
At the same time, the larger and more complex organizations for the implementation of armed violence an officer is able to manage, the wider the range of situations and conditions in which he can be used, the higher his professional skills. An officer capable of leading only a motorized rifle platoon has such a low level of professional skill that he is on the verge of professionalism. An officer who can control the actions of an airborne division or a nuclear submarine is a highly qualified professional. A general who can lead a combined-arms operation involving naval, air and ground forces is at the highest level of his profession.
Mastering military skills requires a broad liberal arts education. The methods of organizing and using armed violence at any stage of history are very closely related to the culture of society. The facets of military skill, as well as the facets of law, intersect with history, politics, economics, sociology and psychology. In addition, military knowledge is associated with natural sciences such as chemistry, physics and biology. For a proper understanding of his business, the officer must understand how it is related to other areas of knowledge, as well as how these areas of knowledge can be used for his purposes. He will not truly develop his analytical skills, intuition and imagination if he only trains in the performance of narrow professional duties. Just like a lawyer or a doctor, an officer constantly deals with people, which requires him to have a deep understanding of the nature of a person, the motivation of behavior, and this is achieved by a liberal education. Therefore, just like general humanitarian, liberal education has become a prerequisite for mastering the professions of a doctor and a lawyer, it is considered a necessary element of the training of a professional officer.
Perhaps this is the main difference between our and the Western understanding of the essence of military professionalism.
The emergence of military professionalism and a professional officer corps dates back to the early 19th century. Its appearance was due to three main reasons:
- accelerated development of military technologies;
- the emergence of massive armies;
- strengthening of the institutions of bourgeois democracy.
Military-technical progress has contributed to the transformation of armies and navies into complex organizational structures that include hundreds of different military specialties. This gave rise to the need for specialists to coordinate them. At the same time, the increasing complexity and complexity of military affairs practically ruled out combining coordination functions with competence in all specialized areas of military activity. It became increasingly difficult to remain an expert on the use of armed force in interstate conflicts and to be competent in the use of the army to maintain internal order in the state and control the latter. The function of an officer began to distance itself from that of a police officer or politician.
The emergence of massive armies led to the ousting of an aristocratic military leader who combined military affairs with the occupations of a courtier and landowner, a specialist officer who devoted himself entirely to military craft. The relatively small armies of the 18th century, which consisted of life-long recruits, were replaced by conscripts who returned to civilian life after several years of military service. The training of the sharply increased and constantly renewed stream of recruits required officers who were completely and completely dedicated to military service.
The emergence of massive armies changed the relationship of the officer corps and enlisted personnel with the rest of society. In the 18th century, mercenary soldiers were a kind of outcast, and often just scum of society, who did not have roots in the people and did not enjoy their trust, and officers, on the contrary, due to their aristocratic origin, occupied a privileged position. In the 19th century, their roles changed. The private became a representative of the widest strata of the population, in fact a citizen in uniform, and the officers turned into a closed professional group (caste) living in their own world and weakly connected with the life of society.
The third factor that contributed to the establishment of professionalism was the strengthening of democratic institutions in the West. The ideologists of bourgeois democracy naturally strove to bring the army as close as possible to society. The extreme forms of this desire to democratize the army are the requirements for the election of officers. Thus, during the years of the American Revolution, officers of the American militia army were elected by the population, officers were elected in the early years of the French Revolution.
Of course, the principle of the election of officers is as incompatible with military professionalism as their appointment due to their aristocratic origin. Nevertheless, the requirement for equal representation of the population in all institutions of power, including the army, destroyed the monopoly of the nobility on the formation of the officer corps. It was the struggle between the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy for the right to determine the officer corps of the army, during which both sides were forced to make compromises, that allowed the officer corps to distance themselves from both and build the army in accordance with their own principles and interests.
Prussia is considered the progenitor of military professionalism. Some researchers (for example, S.P. Huntington) even call the exact date of his birth - August 6, 1808. On this day, the Prussian government issued a decree on the procedure for assigning an officer rank, which, with uncompromising clarity, established the following basic standards of professionalism:
From now on, the only basis for awarding an officer's rank will be education and professional knowledge in peacetime, and in wartime - outstanding valor and the ability to comprehend what is required to do. Therefore, in the entire state, all persons possessing these qualities have the right to occupy the highest military posts. All class privileges and preferences that existed before in the army are canceled, and every person, regardless of his origin, has equal rights and obligations.
Prussian military reformers set the highest educational requirements of their time for officer candidates. They placed their main emphasis on knowledge in the humanities and natural sciences and on the ability to think analytically. An officer candidate had to have an education not lower than a classical gymnasium or a cadet school.
The Prussian system of military education, which gave priority to general educational training and the development of the analytical abilities of an officer over the military disciplines proper at the first stage of his studies, was later adopted by other Western countries as well. The most advanced in this direction is the United States. And now, with all the complication of modern military affairs, in the elite American military academies of West Point, Annapolis and Colorado Springs, military disciplines themselves occupy a relatively modest place. But in terms of the general education level and the prestige of their diplomas in society, the graduates of these academies are in no way inferior to the graduates of the best and most expensive universities in America (Harvard, Stanford or Yale).
The Prussian reformers did not confine themselves to establishing professional standards for admission to the officer corps. Their next step was the development of norms regulating the promotion of an officer in the service: a strictly observed system of examinations (written, oral, field, etc.) was introduced, without which no officer could get a promotion. In 1810, the famous Military Academy ( Kriegsakademie) for the training of officers of the general staff, where any officer could enter after five years of military service. Of course, subject to passing the strictest examinations.
The officer was obliged to educate himself. In particular, he was required to study foreign languages, prepare translations or, at least, reviews of foreign military literature. The famous German General Staff officer von Moltke (Sr.), who later received the title of Russian Field Marshal, for example, spoke six foreign languages (Danish, Turkish, French, Russian, English and Italian). He translated Gibbon's 12-volume work "History of the Fall of the Roman Empire" from English into German, and based on his own translation of the original documents, he wrote and published the history of the Russian-Turkish war of 1828-1829. The General Staff centrally prepared and sent out to the troops abstract reviews of foreign military newspapers, magazines and hearings on military and political issues in the parliaments of other countries. Officers, especially officers of the General Staff, were regularly sent abroad to study foreign experience. In a word, Prussian officers had to keep abreast of the development of military affairs abroad.
Prussia is the first country in the world to introduce military service on a permanent basis. According to the law of September 3, 1814, all male Prussian subjects were required to serve five years in the regular army (three years in active service and two years in the reserve) and 14 years in the militia (landwehr).
In order not to distract officers for routine training and retraining of the draft contingent, a large and privileged non-commissioned officer corps is being created on a permanent basis. After training in special schools, the non-commissioned officer was obliged to serve in this capacity for 12 years, during which he was regularly subjected to examinations and checks. After completing his military service, a non-commissioned officer received a special certificate that guaranteed his employment in the civilian sector.
The main impetus for the Prussian military reforms was the crushing defeat inflicted on the Prussian troops by the French at Jena and Auerstadt in October 1806. King Frederick Wilhelm II ordered Adjutant General Gerhard Johann von Scharnhorst to understand the reasons for the defeat and submit a plan to reform the army.
One of the main components of French victories, Scharnhorst called the conscription nature of the French army, recruited from patriotic citizens, while the Prussian army was recruited mainly from the marginalized, in connection with which society viewed the war as a matter of the king and the state, and not the entire people.
However, the most revolutionary aspect of the military reform of Scharnhorst and his associates was not the transfer of the army to a conscription recruitment system, but the conclusion that genius in military affairs was unnecessary and even dangerous. According to Scharnhorst, in modern warfare, success ultimately comes not to a genius commander like Napoleon with his intuitive gift for selecting talented military nuggets, which he produced as generals and marshals at the age of twenty, but to armies consisting of ordinary people, superior to the enemy. in education, organization and continuous improvement of their military skills.
Thus arose the classical Prussian military school, devoid of emotional impulses, senseless heroism, amorphous and non-specific ideological dogmas and party leanings from a professional point of view.
Step by step, the former aristocratic spirit of the Prussian officer corps gave way to the spirit of the military caste. Already in the second half of the 19th century, the dividing line between officers of aristocratic and bourgeois origin was largely blurred. Instead of a military aristocracy by birth, a kind of officer aristocracy appeared by education and achievements in the service.
The Prussian model became a model for the professionalization of the officer corps in Europe and especially in the United States. The end of the 19th century can be considered a period when military professionalism received a more or less complete development in the armies of all the leading capitalist states of the world.
Russia did not stand aside from this triumphant march of military professionalism. Its development in Russia is associated primarily with the name of General D.A. Milyutin, who was appointed by Emperor Alexander II in 1861 as Minister of War. Milyutin's reforms, like those of the Prussian reformers of the beginning of the century, were based on the realization of the bankruptcy of the existing military system of the state.
The "professional" feudal army of Russia, forcibly recruited from serfs for virtually lifelong military service and led by officers-nobles, whose promotion was determined primarily by their place in the aristocratic hierarchy, turned out to be unsuitable as an instrument of war in the conditions of the rapid development of bourgeois nation-states , as evidenced by the defeat of Russia in the Crimea during the Eastern War of 1853-1856.
During the two decades during which Milyutin headed the military department, he managed to do a lot to ensure that Russia has a professional officer corps.
Like Scharnhorst, Milyutin believed that education was the foundation of professionalism. Here he faced a titanic job, for in 1825-1855, for example, less than 30% of Russian officers received at least some formal military education. Milyutin not only made the assignment of an officer's rank directly dependent on military education, but also reformed the entire system of the latter.
The old cadet corps, which provided primary and secondary education and instilled automatic obedience through harsh disciplinary action, were abolished. Instead, Milyutin created military gymnasiums, staffed by civilian teachers, whose task was to teach primarily the humanities and natural sciences. Graduates of military gymnasiums received the right to enter the newly created military schools, where, along with the development of military subjects (strategy, tactics, fortification affairs, etc.), they continued to study foreign languages, literature and natural sciences. At the same time, the so-called progymnasiums with a four-year term of study were opened, where they prepared for admission to the cadet schools, which gave a more simplified and less prestigious education than military schools.
Since 1874, Milyutin allowed the education of representatives of not only the nobility, but also of other estates, including the peasant, in all cadets and some military schools. The goal of the minister was to create a diversified, socially responsible officer corps capable of leading a massive army with variable personnel and representing all sectors of society. The need for such an army became especially evident after the impressive victories of Prussia over Austria in 1866 and France in 1871. A decisive step in this direction was the adoption, on the initiative of Milyutin, on January 4, 1874, of the Law on universal military service.
Milyutin's reforms were the first and, unfortunately, the last attempt to build the Russian officer corps in accordance with the principles of military professionalism, which were established as universal by the beginning of the 20th century in all the leading armies of the world.
The conservative autocrat Alexander III, who ascended the throne in 1881 after the assassination of his reformer father, immediately fired Milyutin and severely criticized and revised his reforms.
Military gymnasiums were abolished, and instead of them the old cadet corps were recreated without civilian teachers. Teaching programs both in cadet corps and in military schools were reduced due to humanitarian and natural science subjects. Military discipline was tightened and corporal punishment was reintroduced. Admission to cadet corps and military schools again became available to almost only nobles. The only way to the officer rank for representatives of other classes became possible through the cadet schools. However, this path was extremely difficult. Graduates of cadet schools were awarded the rank of ensign (lieutenant), and to receive the first officer rank of warrant officer (since 1884 - second lieutenant) or cornet, they were required to serve for several years in the army, in fact, as non-commissioned officers. The cadets' schools were transferred from the jurisdiction of the main directorate of military education to the jurisdiction of the military districts, which also reduced the level of education received by the cadets.
The differences between officers-graduates of cadet corps and military schools, who were recruited almost exclusively by noble children (in 1895, 87% of students of cadet corps and 85% of cadets of military schools were nobles) and graduates of cadet schools (the share of nobles in which decreased from 74% to 1877 to 53% in 1894).
Since graduates of military schools received a better education than cadets, they were more closely associated with the aristocratic military elite, they had more opportunities to serve in the elite guards units and to enter military academies.
Guards officers, in contrast to ordinary officers, had a number of advantages in promotion. So, in the guard there were no intermediate steps between the captain and the colonel; when a guard officer was transferred to army units, he immediately rose in rank, regardless of the length of service available, etc. The lifestyle of the guards officers was also markedly different from the army ones. Hence, only slightly disguised antagonism between these groups of officers.
Naturally, this did not contribute to the development of such inherent qualities of professionalism as corporatism and group identification.
The presence of numerous undeserved privileges for a part of the officer corps hindered the development of another important element of professionalism - the desire for self-education as a means of career growth. There is a lot of evidence that in the 80s and 90s of the 19th century, among the officers, interest in studying and reading special literature fell. According to statistics, in 1894, only 2% of books published in the empire by titles and 0.9% by circulation were related to military topics. For comparison: in 1894 there were 34 thousand officers in Russia, twice as many as doctors. Nevertheless, in the same year, medical books accounted for 9% of titles and 3.7% of circulation of all book publications. In 1903–1904, a total of 165 and 124 books on the military theme were published, respectively.
From the beginning of the 1880s until the First World War, there was a progressive decline in the prestige of an officer's career. The reactionary nature of counterreforms in the army after Milyutin's resignation repelled liberal and idealistically minded educated youth, who preferred to look for other ways of serving the fatherland. The rapid growth of trade and industry in Russia at the end of the 19th century opened up many opportunities for good earnings and interesting work in the civil sector.
In addition, the financial situation of the bulk of the officers became extremely unenviable. Their monetary allowance in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was the lowest in comparison with all other armies in Europe. Therefore, many officers were looking for opportunities to transfer to a higher-paid service in the border troops, gendarmerie and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
In general, if we proceed from the criteria of professionalism, it should be admitted that military professionalism in Russia reached its peak (albeit at a low level) during the period of the Milyutin reforms, after which, up to the present time, its degradation was either accelerating or temporarily slowing down.
Take the Civil War. In the Red Army during this period there were still many regular officers and generals of the tsarist army. Of the 20 front commanders, there were 17 of them. All the chiefs of staff of the fronts (22 people) were also military specialists. Of the 100 army commanders, 82 previously served as officers of the Russian army, and 77 of the 93 chiefs of staff of the armies. The regular officers of the Russian army (II Vatsetis and SS Kamenev) held the post of commander-in-chief. In total, in the second half of the Civil War, the Red Army had from 150 to 180 thousand commanders, of which 70-75 thousand were former officers of the Russian army, including about 10 thousand regular officers and 60-65 thousand military officers. time.
From whom was the rest of the command staff of the Red Army recruited? According to Leon Trotsky, "by the end of the civil war, there were more than 43% of commanders deprived of military education, 13% of former non-commissioned officers, 10% of commanders who passed the Soviet military school, and about 34% of officers of the tsarist army."
Subsequently, the overwhelming majority of the tsarist officers were either expelled from the Red Army or physically exterminated. By the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, only a few hundred of them remained.
Who replaced them? During the four years of the Civil War, Second Lieutenant Mikhail Tukhachevsky became the front commander, Warrant Officer Dmitry Gai became the corps commander, Second Lieutenant Ieronim Uborevich became the commander-in-chief of the army of the Far Eastern Republic, Vitaly Primakov, who did not serve in the army at all, became the corps commander.
On August 5, 1921, Tukhachevsky, who had never studied at a higher educational institution, became the head of the Military Academy of the Red Army.
The repressed self-taught commanders of the Civil War were replaced by the former non-commissioned officer Georgy Zhukov, who became the squadron commander by the end of the war. By the same time, Konstantin Meretskov was the assistant chief of staff of the division, Rodion Malinovsky was the chief of the machine-gun command, the future admiral of the fleet Ivan Isakov commanded a destroyer in the Caspian.
Andrei Kokoshin described this process of degradation of the command personnel of the Russian army very well. In 1996, while still in the post of First Deputy Minister of Defense, he said:
We had three categories of civil war commanders. Almost all of the commanders of the troops and army commanders, not to mention the chiefs of staff of the Red Army, were generals or colonels of the tsarist army. There was the second category - these were lieutenants and second lieutenants who became army commanders, corps commanders - Tukhachevsky, Uborevich. And then came sergeant-major and sergeants - Budyonny, Timoshenko ...
There was an inherently deep enmity between all these three categories. In the late 1920s, the lieutenants, relying on the sergeant-major, decided to settle scores with the generals and colonels. Tukhachevsky organized the defeat of Svechin's military school, he argued that they were "not Marxists." ... I believe that the greatest tragedy of our armed forces was that people like Svechin and his entire school were destroyed in 1928-1929. In 1937, the "lieutenants" themselves were eaten by the "sergeant major". "Feldwebel" then also ate. Incidentally, this still reverberates to us. After all, academies are a forge of personnel. They must have a certain continuity, as well as the headquarters and the highest governing bodies. Continuity - in curricula, library funds, documents that transmit such knowledge through generations, from person to person. When this thread is cut off, the next generations of warlords have to start from scratch. And when it comes to war, it invariably means a war of great blood. It is simply surprising that on this basis large military leaders like Zhukov later grew up on this basis.
After the Civil War, the quality of the training of the officer (command) staff in comparison with the pre-revolutionary period sharply decreased. In the 1920s and 1930s, young people with even an incomplete secondary education were admitted to military schools, and young men, often from the countryside, entered military schools without any competition without any competition. The poor quality of education was compensated by the number of graduates. By 1938, there were 75 military schools in the USSR, and in 1940 their number increased to 203, in which about 240 thousand cadets were trained.
The Red Army entered the Great Patriotic War with 680 thousand officers, and during the first month of the war, another 680 thousand were called up from the reserve. In the entire Hitlerite Wehrmacht (and not only on the Soviet-German front), as of December 1, 1941, when the Germans stood at the gates of Moscow, there were only 148 thousand officers, of which only 23 thousand were personnel. And in the army of Emperor Nicholas II on the eve of the First World War there were only 41 thousand officers.
It is not surprising that the losses of the Soviet officer corps during the Great Patriotic War were monstrous. According to General of the Army I. Shkadov, during the four years of the war, about a million officers and generals died and went missing. According to Academician A.N. Yakovlev, who served as a platoon commander during the war, only 924,000 lieutenants - from junior to senior - died.
The post-war years led to a noticeable improvement in the quality of the Soviet officer corps. The periods of training for officers have increased significantly. In particular, higher general military schools were created with a training duration of 4–5 years. The terms of training at the Frunze Academy, which opened the way for a combined-arms officer to command a battalion and regiment, reached three years, and at the General Staff Academy - two. However, studies in all military universities, apart from classes in Marxism-Leninism, were carried out almost exclusively in military and military-technical disciplines, mainly based on the highly embellished experience of the Great Patriotic War. The world experience of military development was often ignored, cadets and students were deprived of the opportunity to study foreign military literature due to total censorship. The teaching of foreign languages was carried out in extremely limited volumes.
It would be unfair, of course, not to say that even in these difficult conditions in the army there were and still are competent, qualified officers and generals for whom military service is a vocation. Indeed, in addition to formal education, there is self-education and combat experience, from which, as the history of the formation of military professionalism shows, the formation of a professional officer corps began. Otherwise, where would such reformers of military affairs as Gneisenau and Scharnhorst in Prussia, Milyutin in Russia or Sherman in the United States come from?
Soviet military encyclopedia. - M .: Military Publishing, 19T. 5, p. 104.
Huntington S.P. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Belknap / Harvard, Cambridge, 1985. Pp. 17-18 .; or For the Professional Army: The Ideas of Charles de Gaulle and Their Development in the 20th Century. Russian military collection. Issue 14. - Moscow: Military University, Independent Military Scientific Center "Fatherland and Warrior", OLMA-Press, 1998. P. 446; or the Army and the military organization of the state. Domestic notes. No. 8, 2002. P. 60.
The article “Military professionalism” from the International Military and Defense Encyclopedia, ed. Trevor N. Dupuis. T. 5.S. 2194. Washington, Brassie's Publishing House. 1993 year
The article “Armed forces and society”, from the International Military and Defense Encyclopedia, ed. Trevor N. Dupuis. T. 1.S. 188. Washington, Brassy's Publishing House. 1993 year
Huntington S.P. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Belknap / Harvard, Cambridge, 1985. P. 30.
All-subject report on the actions of the Ministry of War for 1885. Report on the state of military educational institutions. SPb., 1897.S. 8-9.
Book Bulletin. 1894. No. 9. P. 329; Book Bulletin. 1904. No. 12. S. 107-110.
Kavataradze A.G. Military specialists in the service of the Republic of Soviets. 1917-1920. M., 1988.S. 222.
Communist. 1991. No. 9.P. 56.
Arguments and Facts. 1996. No. 25, p. 3.
Moscow Military Commissar Viktor Shchepilov: "Military requires a level of knowledge that is an order of magnitude superior to knowledge in the civilian specialty"
The profession of defender of the Motherland is honorable and in demand at all times, and for many young men - graduates of schools, cadet corps, Suvorov and Nakhimov schools, right now the moment of the first and truly serious choice of their future life is coming ...
To help them with this choice, the Russian Defense Ministry decided to hold the action "There is such a profession - to defend the Motherland!" MK could not stand aside. And on the eve of Defender of the Fatherland Day, the military commissar of Moscow, Major General Viktor SHCHEPILOV, tells us about the difficult profession of an officer.
Viktor Alekseevich, you have been in military service for almost 40 years, at one time you commanded both a platoon and a branch of the military district. What can you tell us about this profession?
Every year, 18-year-old boys come to the units for military service. From them it is necessary to prepare warriors-patriots, professionals in their field. This is the task that the officer performs. In general, the essence of this profession is the ability to manage, direct and subordinate to a single goal the activities of huge military teams. It is difficult, requires a certain self-denial, readiness to serve the Motherland unquestioningly.
And these are not just nice words. Indeed, if necessary, the officer takes the first blow. On his shoulders lies such a responsibility that is incomparable with the responsibility in any other profession - responsibility for his Fatherland and for those people whom he commands. The war begins only once, and it is no longer possible to replay its beginning. Only those who have a vocation, who have become attached to the dream of an officer's future, become a happy person and a real professional in this matter.
But in order to master this profession, you need to withstand serious tests and pass a rigorous selection, to acquire a solid baggage of deep knowledge. You need to be prepared for the fact that study and service will be much more stressful in comparison with civilian life.
The path to the profession that you have outlined somehow leaves no room for romance, which, I am sure, not for one boy can become the starting point in choosing a life's work.
I will say so. The romance of this profession is made up of the results of difficult exercises, difficult campaigns, intense combat services, and overcoming insurmountable trials. And most importantly - overcoming yourself.
And yet, despite all these difficulties, thousands of young men enter military schools every year. What will they face?
Modern war is not "who will shoot whom", but "who will change his mind." Military science requires a level of knowledge that is an order of magnitude superior to knowledge in another civilian specialty. Combat equipment of great complexity, a huge number of elements that make up a modern battle, the need to instantly make and execute decisions, an intelligent enemy who does not forgive mistakes - all this requires intense preparation, moral and physical efforts. If we assume that you can be mediocre in some other business, then here it is simply necessary to achieve perfection.
- You have already said a lot about the difficulties. Now tell us about the advantages of this profession.
Unlike many graduates of civilian universities, a graduate of a military university is always employed. Such universities work within the framework of the state personnel order, which is formed by the Ministry of Defense with a perspective of 5 years. Therefore, 5 years after admission, by that time the graduate is guaranteed a place of service.
The graduate is awarded the rank of lieutenant. In the military unit, where he is sent to serve, he is provided with service housing, and in the absence of such housing, monetary compensation for renting an apartment. After 5 years of service, a personal account for mortgage lending is opened for the officer, which he can use to purchase housing both during service and when he is transferred to the reserve.
The length of service required to receive a military pension is 20 years. As a rule, military pensioners at the age of 42–43 are still young, full of strength and in demand people who successfully work in all sectors of the national economy and earn good money in addition to their pension. And the children of servicemen who have been transferred to the reserve enjoy an advantage when entering military educational institutions. Military education is also good because training is carried out in the specialties of the Federal State Educational Standards of the 3rd generation, that is, any military specialty has an analogue of a civilian one - and when a soldier enters the reserve, he can easily find a job in his specialty in civilian life.
- What is the military salary now?
The monthly salary of a lieutenant, excluding all types of allowances - quarterly, annual bonuses and others - is about 50 thousand rubles. He is also provided with clothing and special clothing. Servicemen who have achieved high performance in the service receive, during the year, a monthly addition to their monetary allowance ranging from 35 to 300 thousand rubles. The amount of this remuneration depends on the position held.
- That is, it is no exaggeration to call the military profession a highly paid one.
Yes, the profession of an officer also serves as a reliable social lift that allows you to achieve a decent position in society through personal abilities, perseverance and desire to master the profession. By the way, a large number of generals of the Russian, Soviet and Russian armies come from the most remote corners of our country.
I think, having learned about this, a lot of guys will think seriously about the military profession. But how can they choose their specialty?
The range of military professions is wide enough. Every year tens of thousands of officers join the ranks of the Ground Forces, the Aerospace Forces, the Navy, the Airborne Forces, the Strategic Missile Forces ... Each branch of the Armed Forces and branch of the armed forces makes its own requirements for the officer, for his professional and physical fitness.
Do the military registration and enlistment offices somehow help young people to find their bearings? How are things in the Moscow military commissariat in this sense?
Such events with the involvement of public veteran and military-patriotic organizations, as a rule, take place during all kinds of holidays in educational institutions, districts and districts - at the celebration of the Days of Military Glory, the holding of Spartakiads in military-applied sports, when holding five-day training camps with high school students at base of military units. They have already been attended by 94 representatives of military universities and about 2 thousand students from Moscow.
In the Military Commissariat of the city of Moscow, the main tasks of the work were and remain the preparation of young people for service in the army and study in the universities of the Ministry of Defense. The main goal of working with the younger generation for us is the upbringing of an educated person who has certain knowledge and practical skills, a patriot of his Motherland.
The military spirit occupies a prominent place in the structure of the officer's spiritual qualities. To become an officer, it is not enough to put on a military uniform and even graduate from a military educational institution. One must become akin to the profession, one must acquire thousands of skills necessary in military affairs. This cannot be achieved without a high military spirit.
The officer must be imbued with a sense of discipline, that is, the consciousness that he is obliged to obey the elders and is obliged to command the younger, he must quickly grasp the meaning of the order and learn to give orders himself firmly, briefly and clearly. As a subordinate, he must be respectful, restrained, but at the same time he must courageously report to the boss what may be unpleasant for him. As a boss, he must take care of his subordinates, be humane in dealing with them, but at the same time, he must not allow flirting and familiarity.
Where does the formation of a military spirit begin? Of course, in a military educational institution. But how to keep in the army the vast majority of those civilian youths dressed in officer's uniforms, writes M. Menshikov, that our supposedly military, but in fact, civilian schools that have long since become graduates graduate? How acute the problem of the formation of a military spirit in military educational institutions and troops was, can be judged by the large number of articles on this topic by A. Dmitrevsky.
Education in a military spirit, as historical experience shows, should be started as early as possible. "In a truly military spirit, it is necessary to educate from an early age in corps, accustoming one to the simplicity of life, to work, hardships, developing physically through constant sports, and to bring mental studies out of the present dead routine and put on practical ground."
In this regard, the urgent task today is to recreate the cadet corps as military educational institutions, carrying out an earlier one than. conventional military schools, training of the military elite.
On the monument to the Spartans who died in an unequal battle at Thermopylae, it was written: "Traveler, if you come to Sparta, notify there that you saw us lying here, as required by law." The law from the time of Sparta to this day has remained sacred for a soldier-officer. Its essence is beautifully expressed by the words of the philosopher Seneca: "It is worthy to die - it means avoiding the danger of living unworthily."
Honor, which is the basis of an officer's duty, is the most important spiritual quality of an officer.
The unshakable rule "to serve faithfully" was included in the officer's code of honor and had the status of an ethical value, a moral law. This law was unconditionally recognized by many generations belonging to different circles of society. Indicative in this respect is the episode captured by A.S. Pushkin in his "Captain's Daughter", when the nobleman Andrei Petrovich Grinev instructs his son: "Farewell, Peter. Serve faithfully to whom you swear; obey your superiors; do not chase after their caress; do not ask for service; do not excuse yourself from the service; and remember the proverb: take care of your dress again, and honor from your youth. "
The self-esteem brought up from childhood clearly drew the line between the sovereign's service and the servile's service. One of the principles of the officer was the conviction that the high position of the officer in society obliges him to be an example of high moral qualities. The decisive attitude in the education of the cadet was that he was focused not on success, but on the ideal.Be brave, honest, educated he should not be in order to achieve fame, wealth, high rank, but because he is an officer, because he has a lot given, because it should be just like that, because that was the requirement of the officer's honor.
Honor does not give an officer any privileges; on the contrary, it makes him more vulnerable than others. Ideally, honor was the basic law of the officer's behavior, undoubtedly and unconditionally prevailing over any other considerations, be it profit, success, safety, or just prudence. The willingness to risk one's life in order not to be dishonored required a lot of courage, as well as honesty, and developing the habit of being responsible for one's words. It was considered a sign of bad upbringing and questionable moral principles to demonstrate resentment and not do anything to curb the offender or simply find out the relationship with him.
The constant threat of a deadly duel greatly increased the value of words and, in particular, "word of honor." Public insult inevitably led to a duel. To violate this word means to ruin your reputation once and for all. The duel, as a way of protecting honor, also had a special function, asserting some kind of officer equality, which did not depend on the service hierarchy. If honor is the stimulus of all life, it is quite obvious that the guideline in human behavior was not results, but principles. Thinking about the ethical meaning of an act, and not about its practical results, is the traditional attitude of the Russian officers, which distinguishes it from the Western ones.
Officer's duty is considered the main "impulse of combat energy" (E. Messner). He is considered the greatest virtue in the eyes of the state. Recognizing the importance of having a sense of duty in every citizen, we note that only for an officer, the fulfillment of duty leads to self-sacrifice. It cannot go against or bypass the law, does not allow dexterity, careless performance of its duties.
The motives for fulfilling a person's duty are as follows:
a) fear (fear of punishment, persecution, sanctions, loss of the acquired position, status, condemnation by public opinion, etc.);
b) conscience (conscience);
c) self-interest (enrichment);
d) calculation (careerism);
e) extreme necessity (a situation when a person has no other choice but to fulfill the duties assigned to him).
For an officer's duty, only one thing is acceptable - the fulfillment of duty "not for fear, but for conscience." No wonder a real officer is called "a knight without fear and reproach."
External regulators of official behavior are:
a) warnings, expressed by advice and guidance;
b) punishment and retribution for the deed;
c) awards and incentives.
By touching self-esteem and self-esteem, they induce a person to change his attitude towards fulfilling his duty.
Based on the foregoing, it should be emphasized that the development of conscientiousness, self-esteem, pride and ambition allow instilling a true sense of duty in an officer.
Conscience is an internal law that lives in a person and keeps him from evil deeds, evil and temptations. People with a clear conscience are those who have not tarnished her with anything worthy of condemnation, both personal and public. Here are some authoritative judgments about conscience:
Do not do what your conscience condemns, and do not say what is inconsistent with the truth. Observe the most important thing, and you will complete the entire task of your life (Marcus Aurelius, emperor of ancient Rome, warrior and philosopher).
The power of conscience is great: it makes one feel the same, taking away any fear from the innocent and constantly drawing to the imagination of the culprit all the punishments he deserves (Cicero, an ancient Roman orator).
Our conscience is an infallible judge until we kill her (O. Balzac, French writer).
Conscience constantly reminds a person of his duties and punishes with constant torment if they are not fulfilled. According to I. Maslov, the law has found a faithful assistant in the conscience that controls human behavior. There is no need to say how important this is for military affairs.
The concept of conscience, especially in relation to military affairs and military duty, has long been the subject of speculation, with well-defined goals. In particular, under the slogan of "conscience", attempts were made to bring a "time bomb" under the foundations of military discipline. The essence of the problem and attitude to the issue of conscience of a soldier and an officer was expressed by E. Messner:
“Now, in an era of general shamelessness (political, party, social, legal, etc.), they are worn with the conscience of a citizen-soldier, like a fool with a written sack. They legalize the desertion of those who, out of motives of conscience ... refuse military service; encouraging disobedience in the army by allowing conscience to oppose orders; intimidate the soldier with a threat to consider him a "war criminal" as soon as he fulfills a military order that is contrary to his civil conscience. The officers cannot put up with all this. For him, the rule must be unshakable: the conscience of a soldier is in the execution of an order, and other conscientiousness is criminal. "
It seems that even today such a formulation of the question is quite legitimate. The border between obeying the order and fulfilling the dictates of conscience runs along the field of the law: "do what the law commands, and do not act against the law."
A decent military man, according to D. Balanin, is unthinkable without a sense of his own dignity and pride, this must be very much reckoned with and with special attention and delicacy to understand service rights.
P. Bobrovsky, analyzing the state of upbringing in cadet schools, notes the underdevelopment of self-esteem among the cadets, a lack of pride, the presence of such qualities as resourcefulness, lack of candor, etc.
This phenomenon became so serious that it prompted the publication of a special order of the Chief Chief of military educational institutions of February 24, 1901 on the education of cadets' self-esteem, which included the following significant lines: newcomers to the most vigilant supervision, a closed institution is obliged to gradually raise in them the consciousness of their human dignity as the moral growth of its students and carefully eliminate everything that can humiliate or offend this dignity. Only under this condition can pupils of the senior classes become what they should be - the color and pride of their institutions, friends of their educators and reasonable directors of public opinion of the entire mass of pupils in a good direction. "
An indispensable condition for self-esteem is the ability of an officer to stand up for himself, without resorting to anyone's patronage (P. Izmest'ev).
Self-love belongs to the number of spiritual qualities, the value of which was not always assessed unambiguously. For example, Voltaire characterized him as follows: "Self-love is a balloon inflated with air, from which storms burst when it is pierced."
Such an unflattering characterization of self-love, of course, refers to what we call "painful self-love." But imagine a person without pride, i.e. a certain amount of self-respect and pride in oneself, one's family, one's profession, etc. impossible. In the essay of General I. Maslov "Analysis of the moral forces of a soldier" the author points out: "With the loss of self-respect, a soldier, despite his uncomplaining submission to his superiors, ceases to be capable of fighting, since he does not have goodwill and the necessary energy to defend not only the interests of his state, but also of himself personally ”.
Everything stated on this issue leads us to the conclusion about the need to develop pride, guided by the following ideas:
"True and noble pride should be supported by the unit commander" (P. Kartsev).
“You should lead without hurting your pride and without dropping the official position of your subordinates; the one who does not spare the pride of the younger one harms his own dignity ”(I. Maslov).
“Pressure on self-esteem is a powerful lever for raising the moral level of young people; this technique should be widely used and much can be done by it ”(F. Gershelman).
“Self-esteem is an Archimedes lever with which the earth can be moved from its place” (I. Turgenev).
Ambition plays an equally prominent role in the military vocation, if only it comes from a desire to show one's ability to fulfill what is entrusted as best as possible, and not from an egoistic desire to overshadow the merits of a comrade. Correct ambition (in the noble sense of the word) does not allow personal calculations to the detriment of another:
"Nowhere is the thirst for glory and true ambition, and not vanity, so important as in the officer rank" (I. Maslov).
In the "Instructions to company commanders" of Count S. Vorontsov dated January 17, 1774, it is said: "If the position of a military man in the state is considered, in comparison with other people, to be restless, difficult and dangerous, then at the same time it differs from them in undeniable honor and glory, for a warrior overcomes often unbearable labors and, not sparing his life, provides his fellow citizens, protects them from enemies, defends the fatherland and the holy church from the enslavement of the infidels, and this deserves the gratitude and mercy of the sovereign, the gratitude of fellow countrymen, the gratitude and prayers of spiritual officials;
all this should be repeated and repeated to the soldiers as often as possible; one should diligently try to instill in them as much ambition as possible, which alone can arouse to overcome toil and dangers and move them to all sorts of glorious deeds. An ambitious soldier does everything out of ambition and therefore does everything better. "
Ambition plays a prominent role in war, when everyone expects that his deed will be noticed, retold and taken up by his compatriots, who eagerly follow all the vicissitudes of the war. The peculiarity of Russian ambition is shown in the proverb that "in public, death is red." Since the actions most striking the imagination most often take place in battles, it is clear that battle is a real celebration of ambition. That is why Shakespeare spoke about "proud battles, participation in which is considered for valor, ambition."
To satisfy ambition there is a whole arsenal of means, from competition to orders and awards, which all great generals knew how to use wisely.
Plutarch, recognizing the importance of developing ambition in people, nevertheless warns of the dangers: “As for ambition, it is certainly a higher flight than covetousness, but it has no less disastrous effect on state life; moreover, it is fraught with great audacity, because it takes root for the most part not in timid and lethargic, but determined and ardent souls, and even the excitement of the crowd often inflames it and whips up praise, making it completely unrestrained and unchallengeable. "
Plato advises from childhood to instill in young people that they should not weigh themselves from the outside with gold or acquire it, because inside them there is gold mixed with the composition of their souls. Continuing further the thought of Plato, Plutarch concludes: “So we will pacify our ambition, instilling in ourselves that gold is incorruptible and indestructible, true honor, inaccessible and unattainable for envy and blasphemy, growing from thoughts and memories of what we have done in civilian life. "
Glory has long been noted among those without which a true military man is unthinkable. They say that one Spartan was offered a large sum at the Olympics on the condition that he concede the honor of victory. He did not accept it and, after a difficult struggle, defeated his opponent. "What good is it to you, Spartan, in your victory?" they asked him. “In battle, I will go with the king in front of the army,” he answered, smiling.
Ambition prompted the Spartan to accept the offer, but popularity rejected him. A. Zykov draws the line between these two qualities in the following way: “Glory is much deeper and loftier than ambition, because it requires much more. The ambitious person immediately receives a reward - honor. The slave cannot receive it, he can only believe in it, since his rewards begin only after his death. The ambitious is disappointed, not getting satisfaction; the popular - never from this. Glory is more steadfast, and since steadfastness is one of the greatest worldly and military virtues, popularity in military affairs is more profitable than ambition. "
Taking into account the peculiarities of our national character, in the education of the future and soldiers, it is necessary to carry out the idea that glory is not a happy gift of fate, not luck, but painstaking and hard work, the highest dedication and dedication to the cause. Glory does not visit impatient people. She does not like people who are superficial and flimsy. She, like a capricious young lady, turns away and leaves irrevocably from the proud, ungrateful and arrogant. She loves to unexpectedly reward modest and inconspicuous workers. She avoids lazy people and dreamers.
A sense of realism is also one of the most important spiritual qualities of an officer. Realism is a clear understanding of reality and taking into account its main factors in practice. Realism is based on the following factors.
1) Experience and lessons of history, the study of which gives a lot of value, gets rid of hobbies, mistakes and hard failures. G. Leer said:
"A deep study of military history alone can save us from fabrications and stereotypes in our business and instill respect for principles."
The entire set of traditional norms of behavior can be subdivided into two groups: a) combat and b) norms of peacetime, everyday.
Without hesitation, go into battle, without flinching in the face of danger and death. (D. Dokhturov happily, completely ill, rushes to defend Smolensk, saying: "It is better to die in the field than in bed.")
Fight with dignity and die with dignity. (Y. Kulnev in the battle near Klyastitsy the cannonball tore off both legs; he fell and tore off the cross of St. George from his neck, threw it to those around him, saying to them: “Take it! soldier, and does not take pride in the murder of a Russian general. ")
Attitude for battle and victory in battle; not to flee from the enemy, but to seek him. (Catherine the Great wrote to P. Rumyantsev on his report on the superiority of the Turks' forces: “The Romans never considered enemies, but only asked - where are they?” And the result of this thought was the brilliant Cagul victory won by 17 thousand Russians against 150 Turks. )
Constant vigilance. (Vladimir Monomakh in his "Instruction" says: "Going out to war, do not be lazy, do not rely on the governor; neither drink nor food do not indulge, nor sleep; dress up the watchdog yourself, and at night, having placed soldiers on all sides, lie down, but get up early; and do not rush to take off your weapons without looking around, because of laziness suddenly a person dies. ")
Unusual nobility, the ability to suppress ambition in oneself in moments of danger for the Motherland. (In 1813, after the death of Kutuzov, Count Wittgenstein was appointed Commander-in-Chief. Three senior generals were bypassed by this appointment, but unquestioningly, without a single sound of displeasure obey the younger.)
Private initiative, striving for mutual support in battle. (It is impossible not to mention the outstanding act of Dokhturov, who on December 4, having a categorical order from the corps commander to retreat, himself returned the division from the march and, without asking anyone, entered into a fierce battle with the double forces of the French, with the only news that a detachment of another case is in danger.)
Loyalty to the oath, the absence of any thought about treason, captivity, etc. (There are many examples of this. One of them concerns Major Yurlov, the head of the disabled team, whom Pugachev wanted to lure over to his side, and for his categorical refusal he hanged him.)
Lack of fear in front of a superior boss. (So, for example, Prince Golitsyn, twice repulsed during the assault on Shlisselburg, having received a categorical order from the Tsar to immediately retreat from the walls of the fortress, otherwise his head would fly off his shoulders tomorrow, he was not afraid to answer that tomorrow his head was in the power of the Tsar, and today it is to him will still serve, and took the fortress with the third attack. ")
Service and household traditions
"To fear God and honor the Tsar, to love your neighbor not in word or language, but in deed and truth, obey your mentors, submit to the authorities and be ready for any good deed."
Serve honestly to the Fatherland, and not serve anyone else. (“When the sick officer filed a report in the prescribed form:“ Having fallen ill this day, I cannot bear the service of His Imperial Majesty, ”he really felt that his service was the service of His Imperial Majesty.")
True to your word. ("The word of an officer should be a guarantee of the truth, and therefore lies, boasting, failure to fulfill an obligation are vices that undermine faith in the officer's truthfulness, generally dishonor the officer's rank and cannot be tolerated.")
Respect for the laws of the state. ("An officer must be distinguished by respect for the laws of the state and for the personal rights of every citizen; he must know the legal means to protect these rights, and he must always be ready to help the weak, without going into quixoticism.")
Courageous overcoming of all difficulties and obstacles in service and life. ("Cowardice and cowardice should be alien to the officer; in all the accidents of life, he must courageously overcome the obstacles encountered and firmly adhere to the convictions once developed, so that everyone sees in him a person who can be relied on, who can be trusted and whose protection can be counted on." )
Self-denial. ("Obedience to laws and discipline must reach the level of self-denial; in whom there is no such obedience, he is not worthy not only of the rank of an officer, but also of the rank of a military man in general.")
Clarity in choosing friends, acquaintances, determining the circle of communication. (“An officer should visit only those societies in which good morals prevail; he should never forget, especially in public places, that he is not only an educated person, but that, in addition, he has a duty to maintain the dignity of his rank. Therefore, he should refrain from all hobbies and, in general, from all actions that can cast even the slightest shadow not even on him personally, and even more so on the whole body ... ")
Devotion to military uniform. (“Officers wore uniforms on duty, out of service, at home, on vacation, and this constant stay in uniform was a constant reminder to the officer that he was always in the service of His Majesty. The officer was always in arms, and this testified that he I was always ready to bare this weapon for the honor and glory of the Motherland. ")
Public courtesy. (“In a restaurant, at the entrance of a senior in rank, it was necessary to ask permission to continue to sit at the table; in theaters, it was required to stand during intermissions; in the presence of a senior, it was forbidden to smoke without special permission; when meeting on the street with generals, starting from the corps commander, an officer ( on foot or on horseback) stood at the front, disrupting the movement of pedestrians and carriages. ")
Paternal solicitude for the soldier: "Officers are to soldiers, like fathers are children" (Peter I); "Servant to the Tsar, father to soldiers" (AS Pushkin).
Caring for the Decency of Marriage. (It was impossible to marry without asking for the permission of the regiment commander and the consent of the regiment society. And this permission and consent was given upon consideration of the issue of the decency of the marriage.)
Officers are obliged to lead a lifestyle corresponding to their officer dignity. (The rules that were always followed: the officer had no right to go to taverns and restaurants of grades 2 and 3, to take seats in theaters further than 5 rows of chairs; it was required that the officer did not skimp on distributing tips; the officer was obliged to come to acquaintances in a cab, but do not walk, etc ..)
Education in the spirit of officer traditions does not require a cycle of lectures for students in military schools and units. The entire way of life of military educational institutions and military units should be built taking into account these traditions. And in this work, the example remains with the senior commander, who must himself be impeccable in observing the officer's traditions.
Conclusion
The spiritual heritage of the Russian Army is a storehouse of prudent thoughts and ideas, addressed to posterity. That is why, in conclusion, we will point out some of them, hoping that this kind of testament to the minds of Russian patriots will be heard.
Let's not lull ourselves to sleep with the calm appearance of the political horizon. History has clearly shown us how instantaneously modern wars arise and how heavy the price is for that of the parties that, in peacetime, failed to prepare for war (V. Samonov).
To be Russia or not to be - it mainly depends on its army. The army should be strengthened with heroic haste (M. Menshikov). Look, as if, neglecting the army, not to touch the main root of the people's existence (M. Menshikov).
But until the country's faith in its power is restored, one must wait for sad troubles. Everything low that is in every nation raises its head (M. Menshikov). That is why there is no supreme concern for the nation, like the possible development of moral virtues in its members and then the protection of these virtues from decay. Customs, morals, legal provisions and religion itself must meet these concerns (I. Maslov).
All governments, except perhaps very stupid ones, understand the extraordinary height of the officer's duty and try to maintain the consciousness of this height among the people (M. Menshikov). For all peoples, the army is recognized as a state institution, staffed by people for whom military affairs, in the form of protecting the homeland, is considered either a sacred duty or a vocation par excellence. For its part, the state also carefully treats all the benefits and advantages of the military class, realizing the impossibility of paying for everything only with a salary and buying defenders of the homeland at the price of a hard coin (M. Grulev).
Where to begin? First of all, the army should be driven out of the neutrality towards Russia that exists. An indifferent army dies like an army (M. Menshikov). But the spirit of the soldiers is not enough, and their ardent, holy desire for victory is not enough, the firm, skillful hands of the leaders are still needed to lead the army to victories (N. Morozov). It is no longer enough for a top commander to wear a general's uniform: he needs to have the authority of combat experience, a command qualification at all previous levels of the hierarchical ladder, and a broad military education (P. Makhrov).
It should be remembered that the real, true strength of the army lies in the upbringing of such a common selfless rank-and-file mass of command personnel who would not chase after brilliant effects, would not seek beautiful laurels, but boldly and firmly went into battle, proud of their high calling and strong in their ideas about duty and true nobility (N. Morozov).
When training officers, the first place should be given to the training of the highest command staff (N. Golovin). “Let honest people come forward” (M. Menshikov), for the woe of the army where careerism and selfishness reign with impunity among the leaders, where most generals think only about their own well-being, serve because of awards and distinctions, and pursue only their own line (N . Morozov).
It should be remembered that the art of war cannot and should not take the same forms for all peoples, be the same always and everywhere, regardless of the spirit and characteristics of the people. Our salvation and rebirth can only consist in a detachment from foreign foundations and a return to the precepts of the glorious leaders of the Russian army (N. Morozov).
"First of all, pay attention to the officer." This is the thought that should persistently haunt us when reading the draft army renewal. “Look at the root, - I want to tell the authors, - remember that the strength of the army is not in the soldiers, but in the officer” (N. Morozov).
It's time to abandon the dangerous delusion that any educated person can be a good officer (V. Rychkov). Better to be a shortage than a set with such personalities as the officers of "Duel" (A. Drozd-Bonyachevsky). The future belongs to such an army, where officers believe in the height of their mission, and are not held only by uniforms, ranks and orders (A. Dmitrevsky).
Officers are a solid stone, but with insufficient care, with contempt for their needs and requirements, it can be turned into loose sand (V. Maksutov).
It is not physical, but moral force that pushes out of the army, just as it attracts - it is the same. Change the psychological conditions of the officer's service - the flight will stop (M. Menshikov).
The most beneficial reforms of the army will remain in vain until our entire military training system is radically transformed (V. Rychkov).
The system of military education must certainly be based on ideological principles. The lofty idea of an officer's business, firmly embedded in the soul of a cadet, will raise his own dignity and will not allow him, having entered the service, to somehow relate to his duties. But if our military school does not know how to instill in their pupils love for their work, if subsequently the army also turns out to be powerless to warm the young soul of the young, then it is clear that the cause of the ailment being experienced lies in these institutions themselves - in their, so to speak, constant composition, which gives the color of their entire life, and not in the variable composition of the officers that inflows and outflows from the army. In such cases, recommending an increase in salary as a panacea for all evils is the same as when receiving guests in a cold ruin, putting on an extra fur coat for this occasion. Yes, you better heat your house and make it residential and cozy ...
* * *
We must pay tribute to the Russian officers: they knew how to treat with care Russian military history. In the writings of military writers there is a mass of curious and interesting material on various sides of the officer's question -
The history of the activities of military educational institutions is adequately presented in the works of P.O. Bobrovsky “Junker schools. In 3 volumes. " (SPb., 1881); F. Veselago "Essay on the history of the Naval Cadet Corps with the attachment of a list of pupils for 100 years" (St. Petersburg, 1852); P.A. Galenkovsky “Education of youth in the past. Historical sketch of pedagogical means for education in military educational institutions in the period 1700-1856. " (SPb., 1904); N. Glinoetskiy "Historical sketch of the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff" (St. Petersburg, 1882); F.V. Grekov “A Brief Historical Sketch of Military Educational Institutions. 1700-1910 "(M., 1910); V.F. De-Livon "Historical sketch of the activities of the Corps of military topographers 1855-1880" (St. Petersburg, 1880); N.P. Gervais and V.N. Stroeva “Historical sketch of the 2nd cadet corps. 1712-1912 in 2 volumes. " (SPb., 1912); A. Kedrina “Aleksandrovskoe military school. 1863-1901 "(St. Petersburg, 1901); M.S. Lalaeva “Historical sketch of military educational institutions subordinate to their Main Directorate. From the founding of military schools in Russia to the end of the first twenty-five years of the prosperous reign of Sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich. 1700-1880 "(St. Petersburg, 1880); M. Maksimovsky “Historical sketch of the development of the Main Engineering School. 1819-1869 "(St. Petersburg, 1869); N. Melnitsky “Collection of information about military educational institutions in Russia. In 4 volumes, 6 hours. " (SPb., 1857).
Analytical work of the pre-revolutionary period on the military school of Russia should be considered the work “Centenary of the War Ministry. 1802-1902, vol. X, parts I-III. Main Directorate of Military Educational Institutions. Historical sketch (compiled by P. Petrov and N. Sokolov) "(St. Petersburg, 1902). Profound thoughts about the reform of the military school were expressed by N.N. Golovin in his work "Higher military school" (St. Petersburg, 1911). M. Sokolovsky comprehensively analyzed the activities of the magazine for cadets in his work “Kadetskiy zhurnal half a century ago. A magazine for reading by students of military educational institutions, as a time-based publication. 1836-1863 "(St. Petersburg, 1904). The course in jurisprudence for cadet corps is presented in a separate edition "Basic concepts of morality, law and community" (St. Petersburg, 1889).
These works contain interesting historical documents, in particular: "The Highest Decree on the Foundation of the School of Mathematical and Navigational Sciences" dated January 14, 1701; “Letter from the Director of the Saint-Hilaire Naval Academy to Count Andrei Artamonovich Matveyev dated March 1, 1717”, “Plan for the establishment of a gentry cadet corps under the artillery” Shuvalov; "The Regulation for the Permanent Determination or Evaluation of Success in the Science, Supremely Approved on December 8, 1834"; "Manual for the education of pupils of military educational institutions" 1848, developed by Ya.I. Rostovtsev; instructions for cadets, command and teaching staff, training programs, etc.
Of great interest for the study of the history of the officer question are the works: “Notes of Andrei Timofeevich Bolotov. 1738-1760 "(St. Petersburg, 1871); ON. Bobrovsky "Review of military legislation on the main duties of juniors in the army" (St. Petersburg, 1881); N. Vishnyakova "The Court of Society in the Russian Army (Historical Sketch)" (Military Collection, 1909, No. 12); V. Dragomirov "Preparation of the Russian Army for the Great War, part I. Training of command personnel" (Military collection, Belgrade, vol. IV, 1923); A.A. Kersnovsky "History of the Russian Army", parts I-IV (Belgrade, 1933-1938); A. Mariyushkina "The Tragedy of the Russian Officers" (Novy Sad, 1923); ON. Morozov “The Prussian Army of the Jena Pogrom Era. Her revival. The meaning of this teaching for us ”(St. Petersburg, 1912); A.Z. Myshlaevsky “The officer's question in the 17th century. Essay on the history of military affairs in Russia ”(St. Petersburg, 1899); P. Simansky “Before the war of 1812. Characteristics of French and Russian generals "(St. Petersburg, 1906) and others.
Let us also name a number of works containing constructive ideas on strengthening the Russian officer corps. These are works by A.N. Apukhtin "Command staff of the army" (Society of Zealots of Military Knowledge, book 3, 1907); I.N. Blotnikov's "Experience of the handbook for the years. "(St. Petersburg, 1910); A. Denikin "The Way of the Russian Officer" (M., 1990); “Army notes of General M.I. Dragomirov "(St. Petersburg, 1881); P. Izmestieva "The Art of Command" (Warsaw, 1908); P. Kartseva “Command of a separate unit. Practical Notes from Service Experience "(St. Petersburg, 1883); his "Command of a company and a squadron" (St. Petersburg, 1881); B. Panaeva "Officer certification" (St. Petersburg, 1908) and others.
The works of N. Biryukov "Notes on military pedagogy" (Orel, 1909) are also of practical interest; D.N. Treskin “Course of military-applied pedagogy. The Spirit of the Reform of the Russian Military Cause "(Kiev, 1909) and I.G. Engelman's "Education of the modern soldier and sailor" (St. Petersburg, 1908).
Among the works carried out after 1917 to the present, the following works should be mentioned: L.G. Beskrovny "Russian army and navy in the XIX century. Military-economic potential of Russia "(M., 1973); his "The Army and Navy of Russia at the Beginning of the 20th Century: Essays on the Military-Economic Potential" (Moscow, 1986); M.D. Bonch-Bruevich "The End of the Tsarist Army" (Military History Journal, 1989, No. 6); A.I. Verkhovsky "Russia on Golgotha (From the travel diary of 1914-1918" (Pg., 1918);
P. Krasnova "On the Internal Front" (L., 1925); S. E. Rabinovich "The Fight for the Army in 1917" (M.-L., 1930); P.A. Zayonchkovsky "Autocracy and the Russian army at the turn of the XIX and XX centuries." (M., 1973); his “Russian officer corps at the turn of two centuries (1811-1903)” (Voenno-istoricheskiy zhurnal, 1971, no. 8); A. Krivitsky "Traditions of Russian officers" (Moscow, 1947); S. V. Volkova "Russian officer corps" (M., 1993); E. Messner "Modern Officers" (Buenos Aires, 1961); ON. Mashkin "Higher military school of the Russian Empire in the XIX - early XX century" (M., 1997); A.G. Kavtaradze “Military specialists in the service of the Republic of Soviets. 1917-1920 " (M., 1988); A.I. Kamenev "History of training in Russia". (M., 1990); his “History of training in the USSR” (Novosibirsk, 1991); his "The Tragedy of Russian Officers (Lessons from History and the Present)" (Moscow, 1999); his "Military School of Russia (lessons of history and development strategy)" (Moscow, 1999); “On the duty and honor of the military in the Russian Army: Sobr. materials, documents and articles / Comp. Yu.A. Galushko, A.A. Kolesnikov; Ed. V.N. Lobova "(M., 1990); A.I. Panova "Officers in the Revolution of 1905-1907." (M., 1996); V. Rogozy "The Officer Corps of Russia: History and Traditions" (Army collection, 1997, No. 9); "Russian officers" E. Messner, S. Vakar, V. Granitov, S. Kashirin, A. Petrashevich, M. Rozhchenko, V. Tsishke, V. Shaiditsky and I. Eichenbaum, (Buenos Aires, 1959); V.B. Stankevich “Memories. 1914-1919 " (L., 1926); O.F. Souvenirov “Tragedy of the Red Army. 1937-1938 "(M., 1998); V. Sukhomlinov "Memories" (Berlin, -1924); V. Fluga "The highest command staff" (Bulletin of the Society of Russian Veterans of the Great War, 1937, No. 128-129); R.P. Eideman and V.A. Mashkov "Army in 1917" (M.-L., 1927) and others.
All the authors named and not mentioned in this list should be deeply grateful for their work for the benefit of understanding and strengthening the officer corps of Russia. Being true patriots, rooting for the future of their homeland, each of them tried to convey to their living and descendants their vision of solving the officer question in our country.
Samuel Huntington - Professor at Harvard University, Director of the Institute for Strategic Studies. J. Olin at Harvard University.
Chapter 1Professionalism and military
The modern officer corps is a professional community, and the modern military officer is a professional person. This is perhaps the most fundamental thesis of this book. A profession is a special kind of functional group with highly specialized characteristics. Sculptors, stenographers, entrepreneurs, and advertisers all have different functions, but none of these functions are professional in nature. Professionalism, meanwhile, is characteristic of a modern officer, just as it is for a doctor or a lawyer. Professionalism distinguishes today's military officer from the warriors of previous centuries. The existence of the officer corps as a professional community gives a unique look to the contemporary problem of civil-military relations.
The nature and history of other professional corporations as professions has been extensively discussed. However, the professional character of the modern officer corps has been ignored. In our society, a businessman can have a lot of income; the politician can have more influence; but a professional person is highly respected. However, the public and researchers are unlikely to perceive the officer in the same way as a lawyer or doctor, and certainly do not show the officer the same respect as civilian professionals. Even the military themselves are influenced by the general public's perceptions of them and sometimes refuse to take on the specifics of their professional status. The term “professional” was usually used in relation to the military to oppose “professional” to “amateur”, and not in the sense of distinguishing “profession” from “occupation” or “craft”. The expressions “professional army” and “professional soldier” obscured the distinction between a career private or sergeant, who is a professional in the sense of “one who works for money,” and a career officer, who is a professional in a completely different sense — one who has dedicated himself. ” a higher vocation "in the service of society.
Profession concept
The first step in researching the professional character of the modern officer corps is to define the concept of "professionalism." The distinctive features of the profession as a special kind of activity are competence, responsibility and corporation.
COMPETENCE. A professional person is an expert with special knowledge and skill in the socially significant sphere of human activity. His competence is acquired only through continued education and experience. This is the basis of objective standards of professional competence, which makes it possible to free the profession from non-professionals, as well as to determine the relative competence of representatives of this profession. Such standards are universal. They are inherent in knowledge and skill and are always applicable regardless of time and place. Ordinary skill and skill exist only in the present and are acquired in the process of studying existing technologies without reference to how it was done before, while professional knowledge is intellectual in nature and can be preserved in writing. Professional knowledge has a history, and knowledge of this history is essential for professional competence. To continue and transfer professional knowledge and skills, educational and research institutions are needed. The connection between the academic and practical aspects of the profession is maintained through journal publications, conferences, and employee exchanges between practical and educational institutions.
Professional expertise also has a dimension in breadth, which is not the case in conventional craft. They are part of the general cultural tradition of the society. A professional can apply his skills successfully only by realizing himself as part of this broader tradition. Scientists of the profession are “scientists” simply because they are an integral part of all educational work in society. Thus, vocational education consists of two phases: the first, which includes broad liberal cultural training, and the second, which provides specialized skills and knowledge in the profession. Liberal education of a professional in a society professing these values is usually carried out by general educational institutions. The second, or technical, phase of vocational education, on the other hand, takes place in specialized educational institutions run by or closely associated with a professional corporation.
A RESPONSIBILITY. A professional is a practitioner who works in the community and performs the duties of a service essential to the life of the community, for example, in health care, education or law. The client of any profession is a society, acting in the person of its individual members or collectively. The research chemist, for example, is not a professional, since his service that society needs is still not vital to his immediate existence and functioning: only Du Pont and the Bureau of Standards have a direct and immediate interest in what he has to offer. The essential and universal character of the professional's service and his monopoly of craftsmanship impose on him the obligation to fulfill his official duty at the request of society. This social responsibility distinguishes the professional from other professionals whose business is only related to intellectual skill. A research chemist, for example, will still remain a research chemist, even if he uses his skills to the detriment of society. But a professional will no longer be able to do his own thing if he rejects his social responsibility: a doctor ceases to be a doctor if he uses his skill for antisocial purposes. A duty to serve the community and dedication to one's skill are the motivations for a professional. Financial reward cannot be the primary goal of a professional if he is a professional. Consequently, the compensation of a professional is usually only partly determined by contractual relations in the open market and regulated by professional customs and law.
The performance of essential duties, not governed by the usual expectation of financial rewards, requires some kind of statement that regulates the attitude of the profession to the rest of society. Conflicts between a professional and his clients or between the professionals themselves, as a rule, give an immediate impetus to the formulation of such a statement. Thus, the profession becomes a kind of moral unity that establishes certain values and ideals that guide the members of this profession in their relations with non-professionals. These guidelines may take the form of a set of unwritten norms transmitted through the vocational education system, or they may be codified into written canons of professional ethics.
CORPORATE. Among members of the same profession there is a sense of organic unity and awareness of oneself as a group, distinct from non-professionals. This collective feeling comes from the long-term education and training necessary to acquire professional competence, from the general field of activity and from a general special responsibility to society. A sense of unity manifests itself in a professional organization, which formalizes and applies standards of professional competence, and also sets and implements standards of professional responsibility. Thus, along with the possession of special expert knowledge and the assumption of special responsibility, membership in an organization of professionals becomes a criterion of professional status that distinguishes a professional from a non-professional in the eyes of society. The interests of a professional corporation require that it does not allow its members to use their professional competence in areas to which this competence is not relevant, as well as protect itself from the penetration of outsiders who can declare their abilities based on achievements and merits shown in other areas. activities. Professional organizations usually exist either in the form of communities or in the form of bureaucracies. In community professions such as medicine and law, the medical practitioner or lawyer usually works independently and has a direct personal relationship with his client. Bureaucratic professions, such as the diplomatic service, are characterized by a high degree of specialization of work and responsibilities within the professional corporation itself, which provides its collective services to society as a whole. These two categories are not mutually exclusive: bureaucratic elements exist in most community professions, and communities often complement the formal structures of bureaucratic professional corporations. Community professions usually have written codes of ethics, as each practitioner individually faces the challenge of behaving correctly with clients and colleagues. Bureaucratic professions, on the other hand, tend to develop a shared sense of collective professional responsibility and a proper role for the professional corporation in society.
Military profession
The officer service meets the basic criteria of professionalism. In fact, none of the professional occupations, not even medicine and law, have all the ideal characteristics of the profession. The officer corps is probably even farther from the ideal than the last two professions. However, its fundamental properties undoubtedly indicate that it is a professional corporation. In fact, officers become the strongest and most effective when they are closest to the ideal of the profession, and the weakest and most imperfect when they are most distant from this ideal.
COMPETENCE OF OFFICERS. What constitutes the special competence of a military officer? Is there a special skill common to all military officers but not found in any civilian group? At first glance, this is not the case at all. The officer corps includes a lot of different specialists, many of whom have analogues in civilian life. Engineers, doctors, pilots, supplies, personnel officers, analysts, signalmen - all of them can be found both within the modern officer corps and outside it. Even without considering these technical specialists, each of whom is deep in their own area of expertise, the very general division of the corps into officers of the land, naval and air forces creates wide differences between them in the functions performed and the skill required. It appears that the cruiser captain and the infantry division commander face completely different challenges, which require completely different abilities from them.
But there is still a clear area of military specialization that is common to all (or almost all) officers and distinguishes them from all (or almost all) civilian specialists. This major skill is perhaps best described by Harold Lesswell as “managing violence.” ** The functional task of military power is to conduct successful combat. The duties of a military officer include: (1) organizing, equipping and training this force; (2) planning her activities; and (3) directing her actions in and out of combat. The special skill of the officer is manifested in the leadership, management and control of an organized mass of people, whose main function is the use of violence. This applies equally to the activities of air, land and naval officers. This distinguishes the officer as the actual officer from other specialists existing in the armed forces. Their proficiency may be necessary to achieve the objectives of the military force. But these are mainly auxiliary activities related to the competence of an officer in the same way that the skill of a nurse, pharmacist, laboratory assistant, nutritionist, pharmacist and radiologist relates to the competence of a doctor. None of the ancillary professionals employed or in military service are able to “manage violence” in the same way that none of the specialists helping the medical profession are able to diagnose and treat disease. The essence of the officer corps is expressed in the traditional admonition to the listeners of Annapolis that it will be their responsibility to "conduct combat operations of the fleet." Those who, like doctors, are not proficient in the "management of violence" but are members of the officer corps are usually distinguished by special titles and insignia, and they are not allowed to command positions. They belong to the officer corps in its capacity as the administrative organization of the state, but not as a professional community.
Within the professional corporation itself, there are specialists in the management of violence at sea, on land and in the air, just as in medicine there are specialists in the treatment of heart, stomach and eye diseases. The military specialist is the officer most trained to manage the use of violence in specific specified conditions. The variety of conditions in which violence can be used, as well as the different forms of use of violence, determine the specialization within the profession. They also form the basis for assessing the respective technical ability. The larger and more complex organizations for the implementation of violence an officer is able to manage, the wider the range of situations and conditions in which he can be used, the higher his professional skills. A person capable of leading only an infantry platoon has such a low level of professional skills that it puts him on the very edge of professionalism. A person who can control the actions of an airborne division or an aircraft carrier maneuvering group is a highly qualified professional. An officer who can lead complex operations in a combined-arms operation involving large naval, air and ground forces is at the highest level of his profession.
It is clear that military activity requires a high degree of competence. Not a single person, no matter what innate abilities, character traits and qualities of a leader he may have, can carry out this activity effectively without significant training and experience. In an emergency, an untrained civilian may be able to perform the duties of a military officer in the lower ranks for a short time, just as a layman in an emergency may replace a doctor prior to his arrival. Before the management of violence became the extremely complex nature of it in modern civilization, the officer could be occupied by someone without special training. However, today only those who devote all their working time to this business can hope to achieve a significant level of professional skill. The skill of an officer is not a craft (mostly technical) and not an art (requiring a unique talent that cannot be passed on to others). It is an unusually challenging intellectual skill that requires extensive education and training. It should be remembered that the officer's special skill lies in the management of violence, but not in the implementation of violence as such. Rifle shooting, for example, is mostly a technical craft; directing a rifle company is a very different kind of skill that can be gleaned partly from books and partly from practice and experience. The intellectual content of the military profession requires the modern officer to devote about a third of his professional life to organized training - probably the highest ratio between training time and practice time than in any other profession. In part, this reflects the officer's limited ability to gain practical experience in the most important parts of his profession. But to a large extent, this also reflects the extremely complex nature of military competence.
The particular skill of a military officer is universal in the sense that it is unaffected by changes in time and location. Just as the qualifications of a good surgeon are the same in Zurich and in New York, the same criteria for military proficiency are applied in Russia, and in America, and in the nineteenth century and in the twentieth. The possession of general professional skills is the bond that binds military officers, despite other differences. The officer profession, in addition, has its own history. The mastery of managing violence cannot be mastered simply by studying modern techniques. This skill is in the process of constant development and the officer must understand this development, be aware of its main tendencies and directions. Only if he is aware of the historical development of the methods of organizing and leading the military forces, the officer can expect to remain at the top of his profession. The importance of the history of war and military affairs is constantly emphasized in military writings and military education.
Mastering military skills requires a broad general cultural education. The methods of organizing and using violence at any stage of history are very closely related to the general cultural characteristics of society. Military prowess, like law, intersects at its borders with history, politics, economics, sociology and psychology. Moreover, military knowledge also intersects with natural sciences such as chemistry, physics and biology. To properly understand his business, the officer must understand how it relates to other areas of expertise, as well as how these areas of knowledge can contribute to his own goals. In addition, he will not be able to truly develop his analytical skills, intuition, imagination and judgment if he only trains in the performance of professional duties. The abilities and properties of the mind, which he needs within the framework of his profession, can to a large extent be obtained only on broader paths of knowledge outside his profession. Like a lawyer and a doctor, an officer constantly deals with people, which requires him to have a deep understanding of human characteristics, motivation, behavior, and this is achieved by a liberal education. Just as general education became a prerequisite for mastering the professions of lawyer and doctor, today it is almost universally recognized as a desirable element in the training of a professional officer.
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OFFICER. The officer's special knowledge imposes on him a special responsibility to society. An officer's indiscriminate use of his knowledge in his own interests can destroy the social order. As with medical practice, society requires that violence management be used only for purposes approved by that society. Society is directly, constantly and wholly interested in using the officer's knowledge and skills to strengthen its military security. All professions are regulated to some extent by the state, but the military profession is monopolized by the state. The skill of a doctor is in the ability to diagnose and treat; his area of responsibility is the health of his clients. The officer's skill is in the management of violence; he is responsible for the military security of his client, the community. The realization of this responsibility requires a perfect mastery of professional skill; perfect mastery involves taking responsibility. The combination of responsibility and skill sets the officer apart from other social types. All members of society are interested in its safety; The direct concern of the state is to achieve this goal along with other public goals, but only the officer corps is responsible for military security and for nothing else.
Does the officer have professional motivation? It is clear that it is not primarily driven by economic incentives. In Western society, the officer profession is not highly paid. And the professional behavior of an officer is not determined by economic rewards and punishments. An officer is not a mercenary who offers his services where they pay more for them; neither is he a citizen soldier, inspired by a strong brief patriotic impulse and duty, but lacking a steady and constant desire to pursue excellence in mastering violence. The officer's driving motives are love for his specialty, as well as a sense of social responsibility for using this specialty for the benefit of society. The combination of these two aspirations forms his professional motivation. Society, for its part, can only support this motivation by offering its officers regular and sufficient pay, both in active service and in retirement.
The skill of an officer is intellectual, mastering it requires strenuous studies. But unlike a lawyer or a doctor, an officer is not primarily an armchair theorist; he deals with people all the time. The test of his professional abilities is the application of technical knowledge in the conditions of human activity. But since this application is not regulated by economic means, the officer needs clear instructions that formulate his duties in relation to his fellow officers, his subordinates, his superiors and in relation to the state he serves. His behavior within the military organization is determined by a complex system of regulations, customs and traditions. His behavior in relation to society is governed by the realization that his skill can only be applied to achieve goals that society approves through its political agent - the state. If a doctor is responsible first of all to his patient, and a lawyer to his client, then the main responsibility of an officer is to the state. He is responsible to the state as a competent adviser. Just like a lawyer and a doctor, he takes care of one of the aspects of his client's activities. Therefore, he cannot impose on his client solutions that go beyond the scope of his special competence. He can only explain to his client the needs of the latter in this area, give recommendations for meeting these needs, and after the client has made decisions, help him to fulfill them. To a certain extent, the behavior of an officer in relation to the state is directly determined by the principles expressed in the law and comparable to the canons of professional ethics of a doctor or lawyer. But to a greater extent, the officer's code is expressed in customs, traditions and a supported professional spirit.
CORPORATE CHARACTER OF THE OFFICER PROFESSION. Officers are a state bureaucratic professional corporation. The legal right to practice in this profession is limited to members of a well-defined organization. An order to confer a primary rank for an officer is the same as a license for a doctor. However, by its very nature, the officer corps is more than just an instrument of the state. Functional security requirements generate a complex professional structure that rallies the officer corps into an independent community organization. Only those who have the necessary education and training, and also have a minimum level of professional competence, can enter this organization. The corporate structure of the officer corps includes not only the official bureaucracy, but also societies, associations, schools, magazines, customs and traditions. The professional world of an officer strives for an almost complete absorption of his vital activity. As a rule, the officer lives and works separately from the rest of society; he probably has fewer direct and social contacts unrelated to the profession than most other professionals. The distinction between him and the layman, or civilian, is officially marked by military uniform and insignia.
The officer corps is both a bureaucratic professional corporation and a bureaucratic organization. Within a professional corporation, the levels of professional competence are delimited by a hierarchy of military ranks; within the organization, responsibilities differ by job position. A rank is a personal characteristic that reflects professional achievement expressed in terms of experience, seniority, education and ability. The assignment of ranks, as a rule, is carried out within the officer corps itself on the basis of general rules established by the state. Job appointments are usually more subject to external influences. In all bureaucratic structures, power is determined by official position. In a professional bureaucracy, suitability for appointment depends on rank. An officer can perform a certain range of duties in accordance with his rank; but he does not receive a title as a result of being appointed to a certain position. Although in practice there are exceptions to this rule, the professional character of the officer corps is ensured by the priority of the hierarchy of ranks over the hierarchy of positions.
Usually a certain number of non-professional "reservists" are included in the officer corps. This is due to the changing need for the number of officers, as well as the impossibility for the state to constantly maintain the officer corps in the sizes that are necessary in emergency situations. Reservists are a temporary addition to the officer corps and receive military ranks in accordance with education and training. As members of the officer corps, they generally have all the powers and duties that are characteristic of a professional of the same rank. However, legal differences remain between them and the professionals, and entry into the permanent officer corps is much more restricted than entry into the reservist corps. Reservists rarely manage to achieve a level of professional excellence that is open to career officers; therefore, the bulk of reservists are in the lower echelons of the professional bureaucracy, while the higher echelons are monopolized by career professionals. The latter, as a permanent element of the military structure and due to their higher professional competence, are usually tasked with training and instilling professional skills and traditions in reservists. The reservist only temporarily assumes professional responsibility. His main responsibilities are in the community, outside the army. As a result, his motivation, his behavior and his value system are often markedly different from the standards of a career professional.
The soldiers and sergeants reporting to the officer corps are part of the organizational, but not the professional, bureaucracy. They have neither intellectual knowledge nor a sense of professional responsibility as an officer. They are specialists in the use of violence, not in its management. Their occupation is a craft, not a profession. This fundamental distinction between officers and non-commissioned and non-commissioned officers is reflected in the clear dividing line that exists between the two in all the armies of the world. If this dividing line did not exist, then it would become possible for the existence of a single military hierarchy from the private to the officer of the highest rank. But the different nature of the two occupations makes the organizational hierarchy discrete. The ranks of private and non-commissioned officers are not part of the professional hierarchy. They reflect differences in skill, ability, and job position within the soldier's craft, and moving up and down these ranks is easier than in the officer corps. However, the existing differences between an officer and a private exclude the transition from one level to another. Some members of the rank and file and non-commissioned officers sometimes still manage to rise to the rank of officer, but this is more the exception than the rule. The education and training required to become an officer is normally incompatible with a long service as a private or sergeant.
Translated from English by Vitaly Shlykov.© V. Shlykov, 2002. Translated with permission of the publisher: Reprinted by permisson of the publisher from “Officership as a Profession” in the THE SOLDIER AND THE STATE: THEORY AND POLITICS OF CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS by Samuel P. Huntington, pp ... 7-18, Cambridge, Mass .: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Copyright © 1957 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College.
“In the Russian language, a profession is, first of all, basic occupation, which requires some preparation and is the main source of livelihood. Even in our dictionaries it is indicated that the word “ profession"Comes from the Latin word" profession", Which translates as" I declare my business. " Americans also occasionally use the word “professional” in relation to their occupation, but only as a contrast to amateurism, mainly in sports (“professional football”). Its main meaning is different, not used in Russian, and Latin “ profession"American dictionaries are interpreted in a completely different way, namely as a" public solemn declaration "," vow "". - Cm.: Shlykov V... Russian army and world experience:
One Hundred Years of Solitude // Polity. No. 2 (20). Summer 2001 - Note. perev.
The author has found only one work by an English-language author that examines the officer corps as a professional corporation: Michael Lewis, British Naval Officers: A Story of the Naval Profession. More typical are the usual historical studies of professions in the UK, which do not mention the military, "because the service that soldiers are faithfully trained to perform is such that one has to hope that they never have to do it." For a detailed list of references, see the electronic version of the journal Otechestvennye zapiski.
This refers to the Du Pont family, which moved to the United States from France at the end of the 18th century and founded there one of the world's largest companies (Du Pont Company), which first specialized in the production of gunpowder, and then - synthetic fiber and rubber, chemicals, cellophane and dyes. - Note. transl.
The National Bureau of Standards is a division of the United States Department of Commerce. In 1989, by the decision of the Congress, it was renamed the National Bureau of Standards and Technology and its functions include the promotion of the improvement of the technological level in small and medium-sized businesses. - Note. transl.
Term officership usually translated as 1) officer rank, 2) officer position, 3) officer service. On the other hand, one of the main meanings of the suffix -ship is the designation of a profession or social status. Therefore, further in the text of the book, the term officership will be translated as "officer service" or "officer". In this case, the term "officer" is used not in the traditional meanings 1) officers or 2) officer rank, but in the meaning military / officers' professional corporation. - Note. perev.
Loading ...