A great groan stands on the Russian land. The damned reformers from the Ministry of Defense did not confine themselves to the defeat of our glorious army, they now encroached on the sacred - on the system of military education. A terrible thing happened: it was announced that neither this nor next year military universities would accept cadets. Moreover, last year, approximately 25 percent of those who graduated from military schools were offered not officer, but non-commissioned positions. It seems that this year already half of the 15,000 graduates of military universities were offered to become sergeants. In addition, the reformers allowed the discipline of future officers to fall below the plinth. The cadets were given the right to freely leave the territory of the military university whenever they please. Thus, the exhilarating adventure of the AWOL cadet may become a thing of the past. It's just that the glorious traditions of our Armed Forces are being destroyed before our very eyes. What, one wonders, will the wise gray-haired colonels remember over a glass of vodka ?!
Speaking seriously, it is now that the reformers have approached one of the main, if not the most important, issue of modernizing the Armed Forces. Because everything that has been done so far - the elimination of incomplete units, a sharp, more than two-fold reduction in the number of the officer corps - all this is more or less meaningless, unless cardinal changes take place in the system of officer education.
As I have written more than once, if there is any sense in the ongoing reform, then it is in rejecting the concept of mass mobilization, on the basis of which the country's defense was built for the last 150 years. several million reservists, and then to fight certainly in numbers, not skill. With such a system of military development, it was possible to fight for decades to increase the initiative of officers, but in the end nothing was achieved. For one simple reason: when troops are supposed to be used in huge masses, any initiative of the unit commander is unnecessary and even harmful. Therefore, an officer, especially a junior officer, is doomed to be an insignificant screw, whose personal knowledge and abilities are not needed by anyone.
I do not think that the suspension of the admission of cadets is explained only by the fact that there are no posts for young officers, since the number of military units and formations has decreased several times (in the Ground Forces - as much as 11 times).
Today, the Russian military leadership finally realized the need to create a professional sergeant corps and began training qualified junior commanders. But as soon as they decided to train sergeants properly, it immediately became clear that Russian junior officers were out of work. Because (it is necessary to call a spade a spade, even if it is very offensive) our officers' higher military educational institutions have so far trained not professionals, but military artisans who could only feel professionally wealthy in the mass conscription army and in the absence of a real sergeant.
Therefore, the most important area of military reform is a radical change in the military education system and the conditions of service. Education in most military universities is still structured in such a way that the future officer receives knowledge only "in the part that concerns him." That is, exactly as much as is necessary to be able to master one or two samples of specific military equipment. To make our officer a true professional, the entire education system must be drastically changed.
I remember well what surprise (mixed with disdain) caused the first acquaintance of our generals with the programs of all three US military academies. It turned out that neither West Point (which trains army officers), nor Annapolis (Navy), nor Colorode Springs (Air Force) give any serious attention to the disciplines that make the cadet a specialist in one or another type of weapon. Instead, the curriculum is roughly halved into natural sciences and humanities. Mathematics, physics and chemistry teach a person to learn. Thanks to them, graduates of American military academies can easily master specific military specialties: pilot, ship navigator, platoon commander. Moreover, all these specialties are graduates of West Point, Annapolis and Colorado Springs (as well as graduates of civilian universities who decide to become officers) after graduation exams - in special training centers. And the humanities give officers an understanding of their place in such a complex modern world (and at the same time the ability to command, manage people without resorting to assault).
It is to such a system of education that the reformers from the Ministry of Defense are probably going to move. If so, then a two-year pause with the admission of new listeners is simply necessary. In order to radically restructure the curriculum. The only question is who will do it. It is not yet clear who will teach the teachers. To be honest, the current situation does not inspire much optimism. Twenty years ago, the former departments of Marxism-Leninism in military schools were quickly renamed into departments of political science. With the preservation of both the mentality and the level of training of teachers. Several times I have come across textbooks made by such, if I may say so, political scientists. These works were a wild mixture of primitive nationalism, Marxism, thickly seasoned with humilaty with lengthy discourses on the passionarity of nations.
Optimists, however, hope that a turnaround in military education will take place due to the fact that a considerable place in future curricula will be given to foreign languages, and this will open up avenues for self-improvement for young officers. In this sense, our reformers strictly follow the course of Scharnhorst and Clausewitz, who reformed the German army at the beginning of the 19th century. They demanded that any officer must read special literature in foreign languages. I'm not sure that the same scheme will be implemented 200 years later: today's Russian cadets are still different from the Prussian cadets.
One way or another, the Ministry of Defense clearly focused on building a system in which a person who consciously chose a military profession would enter a military university. A person who does not need to be forced to learn. That is why the reformers allow the future officer to plan his studies himself, but at the same time they forbade the retaking of twos. A failed exam must be followed by expulsion.
However, all this will be useless if the rules of service are not radically changed. All calls for intellectual growth and self-education look like sheer hypocrisy, if we bear in mind that the career of the Russian military is entirely dependent on the personnel officer and the immediate boss. And whether an officer is even seven inches in the forehead, he will not advance anywhere if the personnel officer and the chief do not want it. To change the situation, it is necessary to conduct all appointments to higher positions through an open and public competition. Nothing has been heard about this yet.
