The Academy of Military Sciences (AVN) was established by presidential decree No. 173 of February 20, 1995 in connection with the intensification of public life in the country. In the 90s, a number of other academies appeared, also functioning on a voluntary basis. A remarkable thought on this score was expressed in the Program of Action of the President of the Russian Federation: "Russia needs science not as a subordinate and controlled substructure, but as an independent social partner of the state." In his Address to the Federal Assembly, Vladimir Putin concretized this idea, emphasizing that it is necessary to finance not science in general, but specific scientific research.
Of course, we must strive for a significant increase in subsidies for the scientific sphere, but at the same time we must be aware that due to the current economic situation in the country, this is possible only to a limited extent. And without the proper level of development of science and technology, Russia will not be able to revive and take a worthy position in the world.
There are two ways to get out of this situation. First, by improving and increasing the efficiency and scientific activities of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), universities and other scientific state organizations. Secondly, the interests of the state, society and science itself require all-round stimulation of the activities of public organizations and individual scientists who, for various reasons, are not part of state scientific structures. They should also be able to join forces and collaborate in the scientific field.
This problem is especially acute in the field of defense sciences, since the RAS does not have a department or sector designed to systematically deal with defense problems. And they should be, especially now, when wars are waged both by military means and with the use of non-military means.
Recently, one newspaper published an article by Doctor of Military Sciences, Professor Alexei Sinikov, where the words of Kliment Yefremovich Voroshilov were quoted: "Military science as such does not exist, there is military science, which is based on scientific data from all areas of knowledge."
Such statements are made by some scientists today. But any new branch of science appeared when such objective phenomena arose that none of the sciences could already fully cognize. For example, such theoretical foundations of military affairs have arisen, such as the formation of troops for battle, their control in battle and operations, and much more, which no other science can learn except military science. Of course, in the theory and practice of military affairs, one has to deal with other sciences, for example, mathematics, physics, etc., but this does not mean that on this basis they can be included in military science. For example, in order to understand the essence and origin of war, it is necessary to study not the war itself, but the economic structure of society. And this is a subject of political economy.
Some scientists propose to call this whole set of sciences "General theory of war" or "Foundations of the general theory of war." But this can be done within the framework of a certain academic discipline, and not in the order of classification of sciences, as it was done, for example, when creating "Natural Science", "Social Science", where excerpts from different sciences are taken during the initial training - and it is impossible to do when classifying sciences, which is carried out on the basis of the specifics of the object and the subject of cognition.
SCIENTIFIC POTENTIAL OF THE ACADEMY
The objective necessity of establishing the Academy of Military Sciences was determined by the following circumstances. Firstly, on the one hand, in connection with the radical change in the geopolitical situation, it became necessary to scientifically study many new problems of organizing defense, on the other hand, due to the collapse of some research organizations, the departure of a large number of military scientists and specialists, the scientific and military -technical potential of the country. Secondly, until now, military-scientific and military-technical activities were carried out mainly through state institutions, the monopoly position did not stimulate competition, scientific competition in order to more effectively solve scientific and technical problems. Third, it is abnormal that the military sciences, despite their extremely large role in the country's defense, are essentially excluded from fundamental academic science. Therefore, scientific research on defense issues is conducted separately and is not properly coordinated on a national scale. The creation of the AVN, to some extent, made it possible to organize systemic research covering the entire complex of military knowledge.
The Academy of Military Sciences consists of 12 Moscow scientific departments and 19 regional ones. Established by presidential decree, AVN has the state status of a scientific organization, but operates on a voluntary basis, uniting leading scientists from the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, the Ministry of Emergencies, the military-industrial complex and other law enforcement agencies. Its activities make it possible to attract an additional detachment of military scientists, veterans and military leaders to military scientific work, to solve research tasks more economically, without special government subsidies, and also creates an opportunity to express objective, independent judgments and develop alternative proposals on topical defense problems.
Currently, the AVN consists of: 839 full members, 432 corresponding members, 2201 professors, 91 honorary members of the academy, of which 70% are generals, admirals and officers in retirement and reserve, 30% are military scientists who are in the military service … In recent years, 120 major research projects have been carried out on the instructions of the Security Council, the Federation Council, the State Duma, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Defense and other departments, 65 theoretical works and more than 250 other scientific works have been developed and published. Expert assessments were made and detailed conclusions and proposals were given on 85 bills.
The main efforts of the AVN team are now focused on analyzing the threats that arise for Russia, including during the further expansion of NATO, researching ways to prevent wars and conflicts, on national security problems, predicting the prospects for the development of weapons, military equipment, and on finding ways of a more economical and effective solution. defense tasks, on the study of the nature of the armed struggle.
Recently, we all see the increased role of political and economic factors in information warfare, the role of "indirect strategic actions." In the development of military doctrine and other conceptual documents, we seek greater openness. Historical experience shows that military doctrine, like military reform, takes root in society and the Armed Forces and becomes vital if it is not simply imposed from above, but is prepared and internally accepted by those who will implement it.
First of all, it is important to understand that, taking into account the changes in the nature of armed struggle, the content of military science and military art, including strategy, operational art, and tactics, cannot but change. They should be enriched with new ideas and provisions. In accordance with this, the content of the work, the functions of the General Staff and other command and control bodies should also change so that they cover new phenomena and issues, including information warfare.
Much attention is paid to the military-historical aspects and, above all, to the study of the greatness and uniqueness of the military leadership art of outstanding military leaders, the lessons and conclusions of their military heritage for modern conditions. It should be noted the active work of the members of the Academy on military history issues. They came out with a number of articles on problematic issues of the Great Patriotic War, actively opposed various kinds of falsifications of the history of the war. Members of the Academy of Military Sciences are actively involved in the preparation of a 12-volume fundamental work on the history of the Great Patriotic War. Participated in international and other scientific conferences. In this respect, the most instructive was the conference dedicated to the 70th anniversary of the Belarusian operation "Bagration", held in Minsk. And in April of this year, together with the leadership of the Armed Forces, it is planned to hold a military scientific conference dedicated to the 70th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.
The works of scientists - members of our Academy on military, technical, legal, medical, educational and educational problems are counted in dozens. The editors of the magazines and newspapers "New and Newest History", "Voennaya Mysl", "Voenno-Istoricheskiy Zhurnal", "Krasnaya Zvezda", "Nezavisimoye Voennoye Obozreniye", "Military-Industrial Courier" and others actively contribute to our work.
The staff of the Academy of Military Sciences, having accumulated 20 years of experience in scientific, creative and research activities, is determined to persistently continue this work. But it must also be admitted that efficiency largely depends on how military scientific work is treated in the Armed Forces and how much it is in demand.
As Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu noted, a radical improvement in scientific work, even with existing financial difficulties, is fraught with great additional opportunities to increase the efficiency of solving defense problems. On the whole, scientific work in the Armed Forces has been launched, a number of important studies are being carried out on a broad aspect of the urgent problems of the organizational development and training of the Armed Forces. At the same time, one cannot fail to see that its effectiveness does not fully correspond to the increased complexities of modern defense tasks. What measures should it be taken to remove the brakes holding back the development of military science?
WAYS TO IMPROVE MILITARY SCIENTIFIC WORK
It is necessary to decisively change the attitude of the military leadership to science, bearing in mind that genuine scientific work is not something abstract, but the most important component of the main work related to deep analysis and thinking through urgent problems, creative search for non-standard ways to solve them. What is especially important in military affairs, because in this area practically any new scientific position, any undertaking can be carried out only with the consent and approval of the senior commander. You can have the greatest scientific achievements and discoveries, but if the leader is not at the top of modern scientific knowledge, he is not able to perceive, let alone put them into practice.
In addition, a systematic approach to the consideration of military scientific knowledge and planning of scientific work is required. To do this, it is important to imagine in its entirety the modern system of knowledge about war and the country's defense. Any system of knowledge should reflect real life, the needs of objective reality.
The Academy of Military Sciences has developed and published in the newspaper "Nezavisimoye Voennoe Obozreniye" priority topics for fundamental research in the field of defense security. But they provide only general guidelines for the direction of scientific research. Now they need to be concretized by branches of science, by types of the Armed Forces and combat arms. At the same time, we proceed from the unity of military science, within the framework of which naval, aerospace and other private sciences are legitimate by type of armed forces.
The state should have a unified military strategy, within the framework of which it is possible to consider the naval and other aspects of the general military strategy. Such an approach to the system of military knowledge will make it possible to plan scientific research more systematically and purposefully, to determine the structure of scientific organizations, to develop scientific research, and also to develop educational programs in organizations providing training.
All this should be the basis for the development of a plan for the scientific work of the Armed Forces, where it is advisable to clearly define what problems need to be investigated.
Of course, all existing scientific problems cannot be solved in one year or even five years. Therefore, the plan of scientific work should include the most relevant of them, requiring really urgent research. This requires setting a number of major research projects, each of which should be permeated with a single concept, on the basis of which research is conducted on operational-strategic, military-technical, moral-psychological and other aspects of the problem and their component parts by type of the Armed Forces and combat arms. and close interaction between them. In doing so, focus on the most pressing issues.
WHAT IS THE ROOT SENSE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Much depends on how clearly and specifically the questions on a given problem are defined at the moment, what needs to be investigated, what specific questions to answer. A clearly defined goal largely determines the final result. However, this aspect of the matter is clearly underestimated. Often the topics, goals and objectives of research are determined by the performers themselves. At the same time, goals and objectives are set so vaguely and indefinitely that then, after the expiration of the term, it is impossible to ask for the results of research work (R&D).
Reports on scientific work usually list the number of completed research projects, conferences and other events held, a list of published works. But, in essence, nothing is said about what new scientific ideas, discoveries, conclusions or proposals have arisen. When you ask such a question in academies or research institutions, sometimes they are even offended and surprised that it seems that all this is not directly related to scientific work. Usually, in such cases, the names of the research projects that they perform are listed. Due to the lack of proper exactingness, some heads of scientific institutions and military scientists began to simply forget what the meaning of scientific work is. In many reports on research and development, many conclusions and provisions are repeated from year to year for 10-15 years. The law on science says: scientific activity is an activity aimed at obtaining and applying new knowledge.
There was a time when reports on research and development were discussed at the General Staff or in the main headquarters of the Armed Forces and returned several times for revision. This caused a lot of resentment and discontent, but in the end, the responsibility for the quality of work somehow increased. This practice could be revived.
To overcome this weakness, greater clarity and concreteness in the planning and formulation of scientific tasks is needed in order to increase accountability and implement a more stringent demand for research results.
EXPANDING THE SCIENTIFIC FRONT
To expand and deepen scientific research, it is necessary to more clearly delineate the functions and tasks of all bodies called upon to directly engage in scientific work. In addition, the interests of the case require not only improving leadership, but also expanding the front of scientific research led by the General Staff of the Armed Forces, commander-in-chiefs of the services and combat arms.
First of all, this is an increase in the proportion of scientific work in the headquarters of all degrees and other administrative bodies. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that some data, due to their increased secrecy, can only be held by the appropriate controls, and therefore only they can fully investigate the problems associated with them. On the other hand, the development of a new image of the Armed Forces or the foundations of preparation and conduct of operations in the General Staff is impossible without preliminary research and verification of their main provisions in exercises. All this requires that the governing bodies not only give assignments, but also carry out a certain part of the research themselves, which, except for them, no one can perform. This is especially important in connection with the increased importance of military-economic substantiation of scientific conclusions.
Another direction is to increase the role of military educational organizations in scientific research on both operational-strategic and military-technical issues. This will allow for more creative and educational activities in organizations providing training.
Taking into account what the authorities and academies will do in the scientific aspect, the tasks and structure of research centers and institutes should be clarified. Their main purpose should be to carry out specialized research, which requires the connection of specialists of various profiles, the use of powerful computer systems, the modeling of the investigated processes, the conduct of bench and field experiments and tests.
Therefore, it is permissible to note once again: if defense security is considered in a broad sense, then it is impossible to try to solve all scientific problems only by the forces of the Ministry of Defense. It is necessary to involve the Russian Academy of Sciences and other civilian scientific organizations in defense research more broadly. At one time, the Russian Academy of Sciences in Nezavisimaya Gazeta published a "List of Priority Areas of Fundamental Research". All branches of the humanities, natural and technical sciences are mentioned in this list, but nothing is said about their defense problems, military science is not mentioned at all. But in real life, all this exists and makes up a significant part of defense knowledge, thanks to which first-class weapons of the Great Patriotic War were created and strategic parity with the United States was achieved in the 70s.
The nature of the research depends on the approach to it. If, for example, ways are being developed to improve the organization of military service and strengthen discipline, based on existing conditions. Is applied research. If you try to penetrate into the deep essence of these phenomena, to find out how the very fundamental foundations of military service and military discipline should change under the new character of Russian society and state, you will inevitably face the need for serious fundamental research.
First of all, it is necessary to unite in organizational and scientific-methodological terms the efforts of those RAS members who are already working on defense issues, to include in addition to the lists and research plans some important fundamental defense problems, without solving which it is impossible to purposefully solve other specific problems. The expansion and deepening of scientific research on defense issues can also be facilitated by the involvement of public scientific organizations.
ON MAIN DIRECTIONS
A more decisive concentration of efforts is needed on the study of the most pressing, key problems that are of decisive importance for determining the prospects for the development of the Armed Forces and defense security as a whole. One of these problems was put forward by the President of Russia in his Address to the Federal Assembly: “Russia … gives priority in preventing wars and armed conflicts to political, diplomatic, economic and other non-military means. But to protect the interests of the country, we must be ready to use the Armed Forces and the entire defense power of the state."
These problems are interdependent, and the amount of defense power required is largely determined by how timely and effective the first part of the conflict prevention task is accomplished.
Last year, at a scientific conference of the Academy of Military Sciences, ways of solving this problem were discussed. It is necessary to continue its study, as well as on defense security on a national scale, through joint efforts of the Russian Academy of Sciences, TsVSI GSh, VAGSh, RARAN, AVN, analytical centers of other law enforcement agencies and expert communities.
In the field of the theory of military art and the construction of the Armed Forces, the most acute problem is how to resist possible aggression in the conditions of the overwhelming technological superiority of potential aggressors, especially in high-precision weapons, what and how to oppose it to non-contact operations. There are two ways: the first is the accelerated creation of our new types of weapons, so that we, where possible, use such operations, and the second is the development of methods of operational and strategic actions that would neutralize the enemy's advantages and impose on him what he avoids., namely, decisive and swift contact actions. Both of these areas require in-depth research followed by the development of specific proposals.
Operational-tactical units have been eliminated in many research institutes. For example, even in previous years, it was very difficult for us to create automated control systems, and one of the reasons for this, along with a general technological lag, was that we tried, with our backward management methods, with cumbersome documentation, to get into automated control systems. control systems. While the development of new controls must be combined with a simultaneous process of radical improvement of the organizational structure of controls and methods of their work.
In this regard, a systematic approach to scientific research is especially important. It is necessary to talk about the problems of electronic warfare. Indeed, in the same formulation, this problem was repeatedly considered in earlier times. But if, even then, when there were incomparably large financial and production opportunities, a radical improvement in the state of affairs was not achieved, then how do we intend to solve this problem in the current disastrous situation, and even with the old approaches. And here it is necessary to especially emphasize - the issues of electronic warfare, communications, reconnaissance and guidance, automated control systems and others should be considered and resolved not in isolation from each other, but in a common system.
The main reason for our weakness in all these areas is the same - a general lag in the element base and technology for its production. This means that a major government decision is required to overcome this lag with the same decisive concentration of scientific forces and financial resources, as was done in the 1940s and 1960s when developing nuclear missiles. Hence, one of the priority tasks for the development of scientifically grounded proposals together with representatives of the defense industry.
There are many such problems that require systematic consideration in the study of the nature of armed warfare, the combat use of types of the Armed Forces in the new organization of information warfare, moral and psychological, operational, logistic, technical support, etc.
SCIENCE AND PRACTICE
Further improvement of the organizational structure of scientific research institutes, the system of incentives and financing of scientific work is required. To do this, it is necessary to define research tasks and, based on them, establish what kind of organizational structure, personnel, material and technical support and funding are needed for this.
In the most rational organization of scientific work, the quality of staffing with personnel capable of carrying out scientific research at a higher level will be of decisive importance for its effectiveness. In such cases, the question is immediately raised about the level of leadership in scientific work, from the organizational point of view, about the staff categories of employees in military scientific bodies and research institutions. This, of course, matters, and this issue must be resolved taking into account who will go to work there and what we want to get from them.
In this regard, one could recall once again that the highest level of leadership in military scientific work was during the time when the Minister of Defense, Marshal of the Soviet Union Georgy Zhukov. He established the post of First Deputy Minister of Defense for Military Science, appointing Marshal of the Soviet Union Alexander Vasilevsky to this post, and created the Main Military Scientific Directorate headed by General of the Army Vladimir Kurasov.
Heads of directorates were colonel-generals and lieutenant-generals, heads of departments and even leading researchers - major-generals. They were assigned 10-15 commanders and corps commanders who had left the war. It would seem that there is nowhere higher.
All of this has been beneficial. The Main Military Scientific Directorate has done a great job of generalizing the experience of the war, describing the most important operations and developing new combat manuals.
But the most interesting thing from this experience for us today is that the Main Military Scientific Directorate, despite being staffed with knowledgeable experienced personnel, did not fully justify the hopes placed in the study and development of the problems of armed struggle of the future. And the main reason for this was the isolation of the Main Military Scientific Directorate from the practice of strategic planning and operational command of troops, operational and combat training. After G. K. Zhukov employees of the department ceased to give data on new types of weapons and equipment. And without all this, any military scientific or research body, even with the most conscientious work, is doomed to engage in very far from the case, abstract military theoretical research.
In any organization, the main work is carried out by officers, researchers, and they need to be interested. Now, according to the staff position, captains, majors, lieutenant colonels can go to the military scientific body, that is, from the post of commander or chief of staff of a battalion, officers of the brigade headquarters. To work in military-scientific bodies, in the centers of operational-strategic research of the General Staff, services of the Armed Forces, it is necessary to attract experienced officers from operational, organizational mobilization and other directorates, to extend their service life and to appoint higher salaries.
All recognize the importance of defense issues in the social, natural and technical sciences. Indeed, it is more profitable (in terms of economy and efficiency) to order the necessary research work on this issue from the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences or other civilian research institutes than trying to solve all scientific problems on our own. This means that it is necessary to provide for the appropriate articles to pay for these works. On military-technical issues, it is scanty, but some kind of payment for custom-made R&D is provided. But on operational-strategic, military-political issues, there is no such possibility. Thus, improving the financing system is one of the most important conditions for increasing the efficiency of scientific work.
According to the experience of a number of research centers abroad, it is desirable to make the organizational and staff structure of research institutions more flexible so that research teams can be created to solve certain major problems. The tasks have changed, and the organization of scientific subdivisions for conducting new complex research must also change.
In a word, in all these matters it is necessary to remove the shackles that have accumulated over the years and to achieve great flexibility and rationality.
For the timely assimilation of new scientific knowledge, it is also necessary to establish systematic information about new military knowledge; organize full-fledged operational and combat training.
If we talk about the information side of the matter, then we get systematic military-theoretical information from Krasnaya Zvezda, our military journals. At the same time, the Military Publishing House has not published almost any military theoretical literature in recent years. Even what individual military scientists write has to be published in private publishing houses.
Once we had the opportunity to get acquainted with the translations of foreign military literature. Now this work has stopped, and not only for financial reasons. Each academy and research institute has a translation agency, but they are scattered and their activities are not coordinated.
At one time, the VNU and TsVSI General Staff sent analytical reports on the latest military science to the leadership of the Armed Forces, which we have not seen in recent years.
All this suggests that there is a great need to eliminate the noted shortcomings and organize systematic military-scientific and military-technical information and organize work for officers to master new knowledge in universities, troops and fleets.
In the US Army and some other countries, there is a practice when, by order of senior commanders, they recommend 20–25 books, which everyone must read during the year. Then the officers are interviewed on the books they have read. Something like this must be done with us.
In the proposals presented, all issues are interdependent, and they must be resolved as a whole. If, for example, the issue of stimulating scientific work is not resolved, other proposals will not be implemented either. All these issues require their solution in a common system.
