In a sense, the modern world is not much different from the world it was 200 or more years ago. It's not about progress, high technologies and achievements, in the field of democracy development and human rights protection, etc. No one can deny that the wars continue as before. And in this regard, the world has not changed - it is still at war. There is a constant danger of new armed conflicts emerging. In this situation, Russia needs a highly efficient army to defend its territorial integrity and its national interests. Such that it would correspond to the words of the great Russian commander Alexander Vasilyevich Suvorov: “For a scientist, they give three non-scientists. Three is not enough for us, give us six. Six is not enough for us, give us ten for one. We will beat everyone, knock them down, take them to the full. " Russia had such an army in the last quarter of the 18th century, under Catherine the Great. Chancellor Bezborodko said eloquently about those times: "Not a single cannon in Europe dared to shoot without our permission." We need the same, small, but very strong, superbly equipped and impeccably trained army to ensure the defense capability of modern Russia. The article will focus on some historical facts.
TWO ALLIES
The words of Emperor Alexander III, spoken more than 100 years ago, are more relevant today than ever. For greater accuracy, you can make a small amendment to them. Now Russia has three allies - the Aerospace Forces have been added to the army and navy.
The Western media have recently been quite active in analyzing the possibility of a war between Russia and NATO. Vox magazine was especially successful in these "investigations". The main messages were: clear technical, technological, fire and other superiority of the NATO armed forces over the Russian armed forces. Of course, Western journalists take into account the presence of nuclear warheads in the Russian Federation, and they are considering the possibility of using them. Simply put, Russia's nuclear shield still serves as a reliable deterrent against attempts to unleash a third world war by Western hawks. But Russia is not immune from the emergence of small wars along its borders, which can be waged by non-nuclear powers with the support of the West. Assessing the military-political situation at the borders of our fatherland, Chief of the General Staff General of the Army Gerasimov said about a year ago: “We assess the current military-political situation as unstable … This concerns the settlement of the crisis in Syria, the Iranian nuclear program, events in Ukraine, creation in Europe of a positional area of the American missile defense system and other key problems of global security”. In the year that has passed since this speech, the situation has become even more tense. Now we can say with a high degree of confidence that the threat to Russia's security is clearly visible from Ukraine (the political leadership of this country speaks about this openly), Georgia (which is building up its military power for this purpose), from the Middle East region in connection with the activities of Daish (Arabic acronym IS) and in Central Asia in connection with the activity of Islamist organizations in Afghanistan. In addition to these areas, there are also areas where, under the confluence of unfavorable circumstances, armed conflicts with neighbors may arise. And these are the southern islands of the Kuril ridge, which Japan claims. Moreover, in the event of unleashing an armed conflict in this region, the United States will deny the Land of the Rising Sun direct military support, that is, it will provide an opportunity to fight on its own. America pledged to enter the war on the side of Japan only in the event of a threat to its territorial integrity, within the boundaries that exist at the moment. Recently, the West has shown increased interest in the Arctic Ocean, competitors in the dispute over its natural resources are not only the countries of this region: Russia, Great Britain, Canada, USA, Denmark and Norway, but also states whose territories are located far from its cold waters., also show their interest. In this regard, it can be assumed that the Russian Arctic may also become an area of military tension. According to Clausewitz, whose ideas are highly revered by Western strategists, "war is an integral part of competition, the same struggle between human interests and actions."
WIN IN A SMALL NUMBER
The presence of such a large number of threats is a challenge for the Armed Forces, the military and political leadership of our country. Now, more than ever, there is an urgent need to prepare the army for victorious hostilities in conditions when the enemy has a significant superiority in forces, that is, to fight, as Generalissimo Suvorov did, not by number, but by skill. The theoretical legacy that we inherited in letters, reports, orders, dispositions and other documents that came out from the pen of the great commander is invaluable material for the formation of modern Russian military thought. In the art of war, there are unshakable, eternal, fundamental rules that must be followed in order to achieve victory in a war. And we are talking about these rules, which Alexander Suvorov implemented in his victorious battles. How significant the personality of the generalissimo is, one can draw a conclusion by carefully studying the legacy of the commander and comparing his military activities with what successes Suvorov's contemporaries were able to achieve. The most significant competitor in this regard for Alexander Vasilyevich was Napoleon Bonaparte. I'll make a reservation right away, I'm not going to consider Bonaparte as the leader of the nation or criticize his administrative talent, which, by the way, was grandiose, the French still live according to many laws written by Napoleon. It is only about his talent for leadership. Comparing Bonaparte and our great compatriot, some critics of Suvorov stated that he mainly fought against the Turks and Polish partisans. Well, I will operate only with facts, since there is something to compare with.
Napoleon also fought against the Turks. If we evaluate his campaign of 1798-1799, then we can say definitely that it was at least unsuccessful, but in fact this war was lost by the great French commander. His landing in Alexandria was a complete surprise for the Sultan, since before that Turkey and France had been allies for a long time. And, of course, the sultan perceived Bonaparte's actions as treachery. In Egypt, Napoleon fought against the Mamelukes. He encountered the Turkish troops a little later, but it must be borne in mind that the best troops of the brilliant Port were on its northern borders, and Napoleon fought with an incapacitated militia, which was assembled in a hurry. His campaign in Palestine ended with the siege of Acre (called Saint Jacques d'Arc in French military history literature), which lasted more than two months. Napoleon, having a two-fold superiority in forces over the Turkish garrison, made 40 attacks, but was never able to capture the city, whose fortifications cannot be called impregnable. Napoleon approached the walls of Acre with his troops on March 19, 1799. After lifting the siege from Akko, and this happened on May 20, the French commander was forced to ingloriously retreat to Egypt and from there to ask for peace from the Sultan. Bonaparte understood that the capture of Acre was the key to victory in that war, which is why he left from under the walls of the city only when it became completely unbearable to be there. For the second time, Napoleon demonstrated his amazing ability to lose the war as a whole, winning individual battles, in Russia in 1812.
On the contrary, Alexander Vasilyevich brought all the military campaigns that were led by him to a victorious end. As for the capture of impregnable fortresses by the great Russian commander, there is no need to go far for an example. On December 22 (11), 1790, Alexander Suvorov took Izmail by storm in one day, which was strengthened according to the latest military engineering art of that time and was recognized by all, mainly French and German, military specialists as absolutely impregnable. The number of regular troops at Alexander Suvorov did not exceed 15 thousand bayonets, and he had about the same number of irregular troops (Arnauts and other militias). Seraskir Aydozle Mehmet Pasha, who commanded the defense of Izmail, had more than 35 thousand soldiers under arms. The fortification of the city had several outlines, two citadels and 11 bastions, strong artillery, including heavy ones. At the disposal of the Russian commander was, though numerous, but only field artillery. It took Alexander Vasilyevich only six days to prepare. And then the stronghold was taken with triumph in one single attack.
Yes, undoubtedly, in Poland in 1770-1772 and later, Alexander Vasilyevich Suvorov fought both against regular troops and against partisans, but the latter's detachments also included many representatives of the regular armies of European states, in particular the French and Germans. In addition, the core of any partisan rebel detachment was the remnants of the regular army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It should also be taken into account that France provided serious military assistance to the rebels. Polish and Lithuanian partisans fought against Russian troops in the vast territories of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, teeming with water bodies and forests, and there was a place to hide. The rebels enjoyed the support of the population, and the local residents were hostile towards the Russian troops. And Alexander Suvorov showed an excellent example of how to effectively pacify partisans.
It is indisputable that Napoleon Bonaparte in 1810 in Spain and then in 1812 in Russia demonstrated his complete inability to fight the partisans. As a result, the enemy acted, albeit with insignificant forces, but very maliciously on his lines of operation. The defeat of his troops both in Russia in 1812 and in Spain in 1814 was to some extent determined by the partisan actions of his opponents.
By the way, the war against the partisans was and remains the Achilles heel for many Western military leaders of past wars and modern ones. During World War II, the Wehrmacht was powerless against the partisans both in the western (France, northern Italy) and in the eastern theater of operations (the western territories of the USSR, which were under occupation at that time), especially in the eastern. American generals outright lost the war to the Vietnamese guerrillas. NATO's recent actions in Afghanistan have not been victorious, and as a result, the alliance leaves the country in a state of unfinished civil war, without pacifying the Islamists, that is, the guerrilla rebels. The same can be said about the actions of government forces against the armed Islamist opposition in Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Mali, Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon and other African countries of the Sahara-Sahel zone. And, of course, the military actions in Syria and Iraq are an eloquent example of the inability of regular armies to fight against guerrillas.
But back to our topic. Tactically, the preference that Napoleon gave to the infantry battle formation - the column, one of the other options, ultimately played a cruel joke with him at the Battle of Waterloo.
Alexander Suvorov showed exceptional flexibility and insight, reasonably and effectively used all the combat formations used at that time: line (including ledges), square, column, depending on the need and the situation. The infantry met the attack of the enemy cavalry with bayonets, forming a square. When necessary, he lined up his troops in a line, sometimes imitating the old Fritz using an oblique line. Suvorov completely abandoned infantry volley fire in battle. He used only aimed fire and preferred the bayonet strike due to the imperfection of small arms in that era. He paid great attention to reconnaissance and engineering support of the battle. He skillfully used the advantages that the Russian field artillery of the 18th century possessed, we are talking about unicorns. The great Russian commander carefully studied the dispositions of the best European commanders of the 17th – 18th centuries: Turenne, Conde, Eugene of Savoy, Frederick II and others - and willingly applied their experience in practice. About which he eloquently wrote in his teaching: “Field battle. Three attacks: the weaker wing. The strong wing is covered with forest. It's no wonder the soldier will make his way through the swamp. It's hard across the river - you can't cross without a bridge. You can jump over all sorts of chances. An attack in the middle is not profitable, unless the cavalry chops well, otherwise they themselves will squeeze. An attack in the rear is very good only for a small corps, and it is difficult for an army to enter. Battle in the field: in a line against the regular, in bobs against a bassurman. There are no columns. Or it may happen against the Turks that the five hundred squares will have to break through the five or seven thousandth crowd with the help of flanking squares. In that case, he will rush into the column; but there was no need for that before. There are godless, windy, extravagant Frenchies. They are fighting the Germans and others in columns. If it happened to us against them, then we need to beat them in columns!"
Generalissimo of all Russian troops, Prince of Italy, Count Suvorov-Rymniksky. Illustration from 1799
Alexander Suvorov took part in the Seven Years War, where he had the opportunity to distinguish himself in battles against the troops of the Prussian king Frederick the Great. In the final phase of this war, Lieutenant Colonel Suvorov, at the head of small military parties, performed independent combat missions. Very often he had to attack the enemy, who had a clear superiority in strength, but invariably Alexander Vasilyevich prevailed in every battle. He, and only he, had the right to say about himself, already being in the rank of field marshal: "I did not lose battles by the grace of God." What Napoleon Bonaparte could not boast of, because he had lost battles on his account.
When it comes to Suvorov's Italian campaign, the first thing that immediately catches your eye is the speed with which the Russian commander defeated the French armies and deprived them of their conquests in the 1796-1797 war. In a little over four months, in the spring and summer of 1799, Alexander Vasilyevich coped with the task, which took Napoleon more than a year to complete. Moreover, no one bothered Napoleon to lead the troops. And Suvorov was constantly under pressure, sometimes destructive for the army he led, by the decisions of the Austrian Imperial Military Council (German: Hofkriegsrat).
HERITAGE OF SUVOROV
The military thought of Alexander Suvorov was ahead of its time, centuries later, many of his innovative ideas are relevant to this day.
On the contrary, from the military heritage of Napoleon, not so many ideas were borrowed by descendants. Of the most significant is the massive use of artillery and the gathering of international forces for a campaign to the east, that is, to Moscow. By the way, the Wehrmacht, whose first attempt in 1918 was interrupted by the revolution in Germany and the inglorious end of the First World War for the Germans, which undertook an eastern campaign in 1941-1945, to some extent repeated the expansion of Napoleon. The troops that fought in the USSR included Hungarian, Romanian, Italian, Finnish and others. Regarding possible invasions from the west, Alexander Vasilyevich prophetically said: "All Europe will move in vain to Russia: she will find Thermopylae, Leonidas and her own coffin there."
The great Suvorov gave many unsurpassed examples of military art, which were later copied by other commanders and taken as a guide to action. Particularly interesting in this regard is the Italian campaign of the glorious Russian commander, during which Alexander Vasilyevich improvised, covering the entire theater of operations with his attention, made decisions on the go, while always taking into account the existing operational situation and possible options for its development.
The plan of Alexander Suvorov in the battle of Novi was then, six and a quarter years later, repeated by Napoleon in the battle of Austerlitz. The irony of the situation was that under Novi, the French occupied the heights, and they were attacked from the lowlands by the allied Russian-Austrian army under the command of Suvorov, which won a crushing victory. Under Austerlitz, the allies (Austrians and Russians) initially occupied the heights, while the French attacked from the lowlands. As in the first case, the main blow of the victorious side fell on the left flank of the defeated, which was completely crushed, which became the key to the overall victory.
The next striking example of borrowing was the Battle of Borodino. During this battle, Napoleon for the most part repeated the disposition of Suvorov at the Battle of Trebbia. Bonaparte also struck the main blow on the enemy's left flank, planning to crush it, then turn the direction of the offensive to the left, push the Russian army to the Moscow River and destroy it (the description of the battle at Trebbia can be found in the article "One step - one and a half arshin, in the run - one and a half" in 31 -m issue of "NVO" this year). But Bonaparte's plan was shattered by the talent of the general from the infantry of Peter Bagration and the unshakable loyalty to the oath, desperate bravery, courage and fortitude of the soldiers led by him. During the Battle of Borodino, while the right flank of the Russian army was practically inactive, the left flank was subjected to massive shelling by enemy artillery and numerous attacks from a significantly superior enemy. What happened in the area between the advanced lunettes and the Semyonovsky ravine cannot be called anything other than a meat grinder. By noon, the entire battlefield was piled up with heaps of bodies so that the earth was nowhere to be seen, so much blood was spilled that it was no longer absorbed into the soil, but collected in large clots. One of the episodes of this battle is indicative, when Tuchkov IV led the Revel regiment into a counterattack, the first ranks of the battle formations of this regiment and the glorious young general himself were torn to shreds by densely flying buckshot. After that terrible battle, for many decades, the battlefield was littered with human bones.
Of particular interest in the Italian campaign is the Battle of Adda. Where is the situation, incredible for the XVIII century. The Adda River itself was a magnificent natural barrier, its left bank is gentle, below the right, steep, the current is strong, the channel is deep with few shoals. After retreating to the west, the French army occupied the right bank of the Adda from Lake Como to the Po River, advantageous for defense, a front line arose (for the first time in the history of wars) with a length of more than 120 km, and this was an unprecedented case in the battles of that era. The genius of Suvorov manifested itself here as well. He immediately assessed the situation and made the best decision in the appropriate situation. Just as Alexander Vasilyevich acted in that battle, the descendants fought only more than a century later in the First and Second World Wars. This is the first time in the history of martial arts that a general plans and delivers a variety of distracting blows, forcing the enemy to disperse forces. Suvorov also used the rokada for the first time to move his troops to support the offensive in areas where success was indicated. And, as the crown of the battle, the main blows were delivered in the main directions, which put a victorious fat point in the history of this battle.
Let me give you a brief description of the Battle of Adda. The French at that time were inferior in the forces of the allied Russian-Austrian army, but on their side there was an advantage in the advantageousness of the defensive position they occupied. By April 14, 1799, the commander of the French troops, General Scherer, positioned his forces as follows: on the left flank the Serrurier division, in the center the Grenier division, on the right flank the rearguard of Labusiere and Victor's division. The main forces of the allied forces were located in the center. Ott and Vukasovich were located in San Gervasio and were preparing for an offensive on Trezzo, Molassa's corps concentrated in the depths, in the Trevilio area, generals Hohenzollern and Seckendorf were with troops on the left flank, and on his right wing Suvorov placed Vukasovich's division and Rosenberg's corps. And in the foothills of the Alps (the rightmost edge), the vanguard advanced under the command of Bagration. First (April 14), Bagration struck a blow, drawing off Serrurier's significant forces. Then Suvorov pushed Vukasovich, the grenadiers of Lomonosov and the Cossack regiments of Denisov, Molchanov and Grekov on the road to the right, so that they were ready to support Bagration. By order of Suvorov, Rosenberg's troops, advancing from the depths, also took to the right in readiness to force Addu and attack the main forces of Serrurier. Bagration at some point found himself in a difficult situation, waging a battle against a superior enemy. To his rescue with a small detachment, allocated from the troops of Rosenberg, came his sworn "friend" and eternal rival General Miloradovich. Then Lieutenant-General Shveikovsky took over with two musketeer regiments. This action was successful, the left flank of Serrurier was forced to rush left and right in order to prevent the enemy from breaking through his positions. The French undertook a desperate maneuver, ferried to the infantry battalion in the hope of entering Bagration's rear, but met an artillery screen on their way, reinforced by a battalion of Russian grenadiers, and were forced to retire ingloriously to their shore.
The next day, Suvorov ordered Melass to move out of the depths and attack the enemy on the move at Cassano (the center of the allied army), and Sekerdorf to cross Adda to Lodi (the left flank of the allies). The Cossack regiments, by order of the commander-in-chief, made a transition along the rokada from the right flank to the center in the San Gervasio area.
On the same day, the French commander was replaced. Scherer was dismissed and replaced by the talented General Moreau. The new commander immediately made an effort to draw forces to the center of his positions. General Grenier was ordered to occupy the front section from Vaprio to Cassano, Victor's division was ordered to take positions south of Cassano. General Serrurier also had to shift the main forces of his division to the center. But at this time, Vukasovich began a crossing to strike in the Brivio area, which fettered Serrurier's actions. Realizing the difficulty of his position, Moreau began to pull to the banks of the Adda all the forces he had in the rear, including small garrisons and teams of foragers.
During the ensuing night (from 15 to 16 April 1799), Austrian pontoons, by order of Suvorov, were directing the crossing in the San Gervasio area. Early in the morning, still dark, Addu crossed the Allied vanguard (a hundred Cossacks up to a battalion of Austrian grenadiers) and took a bridgehead on its right bank.
Then Ott's division crossed, followed by the Cossack regiments of Denisov, Molchanov and Grekov, who arrived from the right flank. Zopf's division went ahead after the Cossacks. Suvorov struck the main blow at Trezzo, at the junction between the divisions of Serrurier and Grenier, where only one infantry battalion of the French held the defense.
Grenier put forward Keneel's brigade to meet Ott, then sent Kister's brigade there. For some time, the Allied offensive was stopped. But the forward battalions and squadrons of hussars of the Zopf division and three Cossack regiments under the general command of the marching chieftain Denisov entered into action. General Grenier's subordinates could not withstand the onslaught, at first they backed away, and then ran. The French defense in the Cassano area was hacked by the Austrian divisions of Brand and Frohlich (from the Melas corps). Victor threw part of his troops to meet them, a heavy battle ensued, at about five o'clock the French held back the enemy's onslaught. Melas, obeying the orders of Suvorov, moved 30 field artillery pieces and additional forces of infantry and cavalry to his leading edge. Unable to withstand the new natis, the French wavered and retreated, the troops of Melas were able to enter the rear of the Grenier division. Seeing the difficulty of the position of his troops, Moreau ordered the entire army to withdraw in a westerly direction. The allies began pursuit. By six o'clock in the evening, the Austrian units, tired of the battle, stopped the offensive, and only the Cossacks continued to pursue the enemy.
The left flank of the Republicans, due to poor communication, hesitated somewhat, as a result, Vukasovich, with the support of Rosenberg, managed to surround the main forces of Serrurier's division, and they surrendered, led by the division commander. And the French detachment of General Soye, occupying positions in the foothills of the Alps, was partially dispersed, and those who remained in the ranks retreated in disarray into the mountains. By the end of the 17th, the allied army had completely cleared the right bank of the Adda from French troops and with part of its forces continued the offensive in the western direction.
The next commander, who repeated 117 years later a similar operation in design, was General Brusilov. Of course, the offensive operation of the Southwestern Front, which took place in the summer of 1916, known as the "Brusilov Breakthrough", was carried out by both other forces and other weapons, with longer preparation and timing of execution, the offensive was carried out to a much greater depth, but the very essence remained the same. Another idea of Suvorov is not to dissipate forces on the siege of citadels, but first of all to be the enemy in the field, in an open battle, and to take the fortifications only later, when the enemy's field army is finished - which he brought to life precisely in the Italian campaign, in further, more than 140 years later, was used by the commanders of the Wehrmacht during the Second World War. As Karl von Clausewitz wrote, "Great examples are the best mentors."
COMPONENTS OF MILITARY SUCCESS
Alexander Suvorov himself explained his invariable victories in battles by adherence to three martial arts: "the first is the eye, the second is speed, the third is onslaught." 215 years have passed since the day of his death, and the eye, speed and onslaught are still the basic components of victory on the battlefield and the distinctive qualities (along with many others) of the Russian military school, whose superiority has been proven on the battlefields. Modern Russian soldiers, descendants of Suvorov's "miracle heroes", are worthy of the glory of their ancestors. I would like to remind the reader that, according to the definition given back under Peter the Great, “a soldier is a common name, everyone who is in the army is called him, from the first general even to the last musketeer, horse and foot”.
The best training for any army is war. A non-belligerent army either replaces combat experience with constant intensive military training to maintain a high level of combat capability, or loses combat capability. Russia, unlike the United States and its allies, does not pursue a policy of global military expansion; therefore, the possibilities for obtaining combat experience for our army are very limited. We must pay tribute to the country's commander-in-chief, President Vladimir Putin, Russian Defense Minister General of the Army Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, Army General Valery Gerasimov, they pay a lot of attention to the comprehensive integrated combat training of the fleet, troops and headquarters. More than 80 major exercises are planned for this year alone, and this plan is being implemented without a single disruption. The army cares about the morale of the soldiers, which is no less important than combat training.
The military-political leadership of the country is updating the arms and technical fleet of the army and navy, introducing the latest control systems, and improving the support structure. Thus, by 2020, in addition to those in service, up to 100 warships, about 600 new and up to 400 modernized military aircraft, and about 1,000 helicopters should be at the disposal of the military department. The main attention is paid to air defense and missile defense systems; in the same timeframe, the troops will receive 56 divisions of S-400 air defense systems and 10 S-500 air defense systems. The President of the Russian Federation set a task for the military and the military-industrial complex - to equip the Russian Armed Forces by 70% with new types of weapons and military equipment, now their number does not exceed 33%, but this is enough to ensure the country's defense capability.
