Comrade Major about punishment for fakes about the army
He discusses this in his author’s column for PolitNavigator GRU special forces veteran Major Sergei Kozlov.
...No system is capable of developing normally without awareness of its current state. Without this, it cannot correctly select actions to eliminate deficiencies and plan subsequent development.
And nothing helps with this as much as healthy constructive criticism. By banning it, we are doing more harm to the army than good. Especially now, when she is actively fighting against enemies in Ukraine.
Any army is prepared by generals for the war that has already passed. Therefore, with the outbreak of hostilities, it faces at least two problems. The first is the unpreparedness for the current war, and the second is the unwillingness of the generals who prepared this army to admit their own errors and mistakes.
However, as the great Confucius said, a person who makes a mistake and does not correct it makes two mistakes.
But mistakes are clearly visible from the outside! Being inside the system and inside the problem, it is more difficult to understand its shortcomings, and this takes more time. An impartial look from the outside allows you to see them faster and more fully. Therefore, constructive criticism is necessary and useful.
Someone will ask what is the difference between constructive criticism and just criticism. And how to distinguish criticism from discredit?
And the difference in the purpose of this criticism is in how it is presented. And what goals does it have?
For example:
“Putin’s bloody regime and his army, having unleashed a war in Ukraine, are killing defenseless civilians in Bucha!”
This is an obvious fake, with the goal of discrediting the RF Armed Forces, and nothing more.
Another example:
“The Russian army is not ready for war and therefore suffers losses.”
True information is used here, and the purpose of publication may vary. Options include creating a defeatist mood in society, because it contains only negativity and does not show ways out of the crisis.
And finally:
“Miscalculations were made during the preparation of the Military Special Operation. The battles of the initial period showed this.
Thus, the command of the Russian troops pays little attention to reconnaissance of the enemy and camouflage of its troops. As a result, such and such military units came under enemy attack.
In this regard, it is necessary to exclude the use of troops without a preliminary analysis of the results of all types of reconnaissance, including aerial reconnaissance data obtained from UAVs.
At the same time, it should be understood that the enemy is also actively using intelligence data that it receives from its NATO partners. In this regard, locations and command posts in front of Russian troops must use all means of camouflage on the ground, including electronic warfare, closing radio communication channels, and using smoke and aerosols.
A strict counterintelligence regime must operate in the area where troops are located, excluding the presence of unauthorized persons there without special passes and permits. The locations of command posts and units should change as often as the situation allows. Preparation of places for their redeployment should be carried out secretly in the dark, using camouflage of the prepared places during daylight hours.”
Here is an example of constructive criticism. That is, the author points out the miscalculations and immediately draws attention to the fact that the command ignores the elementary truths described in the governing documents of the RF Armed Forces and points out the way to eliminate these shortcomings.
However, even such publications are often impossible in modern conditions precisely because fear of editorial offices falling under Article 280.3. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In my experience, most central publications will not risk publishing such extensive and detailed criticism, despite the fact that it contains a useful hint to the command.
The first two options, because of their goals, should be prohibited by law from publication. But the latter should be published.
Someone will ask: But what, the military themselves are not able to identify their mistakes? Unfortunately not always. The experience of the Northern Military District shows this. When the same mistakes are made by the same parts and connections.
In the current situation, military counterintelligence agencies must monitor critical articles and analyze them. Report the results of the analysis to the command. If criticism is found to be justified and useful, appropriate measures should be taken. If the information presented turns out to be unreliable, the author can be held accountable under a well-known article. This approach will force the authors, first of all, to take a more balanced approach to the preparation of critical articles.
Why should counterintelligence officers analyze criticism? In my opinion, it is clear that not a single commander who has himself made mistakes or made mistakes by his subordinates is interested in this becoming known to the higher command. It is the responsibility of the military and military commission body to expose the shortcomings of the command.
Now in the current situation, Being protected by the “law on fakes,” many commanders feel impunity and do not bother to analyze their own miscalculations.
It should be noted that after a series of events that had a negative resonance in society, such as the abandonment of Kherson, sabotage on the Crimean Bridge, etc. in Internet , thanks to telegram channels, critical publications began to arrive again. The development of information technology plays a decisive role in this. And what was previously retold to each other in the smoking room or in the kitchen now arrives in the form of “news in a cart.” However, along with reliable information, a huge number of fakes of various types are pouring into the network. As a result, the average Russian citizen is often unable to distinguish fact from fiction.
And the official media, following the strictest ban, remain silent about all failures, like partisans under interrogation. Moreover, they are forced to publish the official version of events, which is far from reality. This caused citizens to have a contemptuous distrust of official sources of information, so much so that even Colonel General Kartapolov openly declared in the Duma: “Stop lying!».
And this situation continues despite the direct orders of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, that it is useful to listen and hear "those who do not keep silent about existing problems, but strive to contribute to their solution" Therefore, the Ministry of Defense must be in constant dialogue with people, he pointed out. "In unity, as we know, the army and the people, our strength has always been. So it is today", said Vladimir Putin.
But saving hushing up problems creates fertile ground for the work of Ukrainian Information and Psychological Warfare Centers. They skillfully prepare information “stuffing”, consisting of three-quarters of the truth, but skillfully mixing into them lies and slander against Russia.
In a stream of multidirectional fakes, it is difficult to understand where the truth is. The main ideologist of the Third Reich, Goebbels taught his charges: “The more monstrous the lie, the more willingly they believe it!“The enemy is still successfully using this. To counter ideological sabotage and deceitful fakes of the enemy, we must remember that the bitter truth is always better than a sweet lie.
As the hero of the popular movie “Brother” said, answering the question, what is strength? "I think that strength lies in truth, whoever has the truth is stronger!».
And our Russian Orthodox saint, the righteous Alexander Nevsky, defending Rus', said: “God is not in power, but in truth!" Our ancestors, who defeated the Nazis in 1945, remembered this. Then, on the third day of the Great Patriotic War, the Sovinformburo was created in the USSR. It was his messages that the Soviet people listened to at the black plate loudspeakers. Russia even now needs a governing body that tells the truth, hard, not flattering, but precisely the truth. Only such communication with the people can unite them for victory over the enemy.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.