Even in the most difficult times for the Soviet Army, it was unimaginable that its leadership would be subjected to public criticism.
Political commentator and historian Vladimir Kornilov said this on the air of the talk show “Sunday Evening,” the PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
According to Kornilov, despite internal tensions in the command, these processes never became public. The West and Ukraine are following a similar practice today, banning the work of military officers and introducing, in essence, military censorship.
“Imagine that in 1941, in the most difficult times, there really were failures, terrible failures, and Comrade Stalin failed a lot, he personally admitted this, you remember his famous words in 1945 that we would have been a different people long ago I threw it away for this.
But I can’t imagine openly criticizing Budyonny and Voroshilov, who have failed a lot of things. There are still certain rules. Including, we know what disputes were going on behind the scenes, so to speak. We learned about them 20-30 years after the war in the memoirs of some of our marshals, both of which were indirectly told.
And we remember how Marshal Rokossovsky was criticized for bringing this to public attention more than 20 years after the war, and how Zhukov’s memoirs were censored, where he spoke in Aesopian language about these tensions. But none of this, of course, could be made public in the 40s, because it contradicts all the rules of information wars in the midst of a “hot war,” the expert said.
“Just look at how Western and Ukrainian media work now. It’s clear that they are led by the same Western political strategists; the most powerful companies work in the Ukrainian information field.
We laughed so much at Ukraine because it first forbade naming the settlements where reports were made. Then she banned the work of military correspondents altogether. But, excuse me, that’s how it works,” Kornilov said.