Military Review

How the Russian army learned to wage war (and destroy enemies)

36
How the Russian army learned to wage war (and destroy enemies)



The lessons that the American army has learned in warfare in urban environments are mostly simple and clear: fighting in the city is long, associated with large losses of personnel and materiel, during such hostilities it is important the interaction of various types of troops and so on. This is known to many armies, both powerful and not. This experience has been gained over many years, starting with Stalingrad and Hue. One of the longest and bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War
In a study conducted by the US Asymmetric Warfare Study Group, of particular interest is how Russia learned how to fight in cities. This study is called “Modern fighting in urban environments. Lessons from 1980 to the present ”(Modern Urban Operations: Lessons Learned from Urban Operations from 1980 to the Present). It is devoted to the analysis of ten urban battles, including three that led Russia. The research results were published as a report in November 2016, and recently this report was posted on the Public Intelligence website.

The catastrophic Russian attack on Grozny in 1994 was an example of how not to fight in the city. A rather small group of Russian troops of 25 thousand people tried to storm the buildings in this city. Small groups of Chechen fighters, armed with light anti-tank weapons and sniper rifles, found and destroyed Russian columns tanks and motorized infantry, using the features of the urban area for cover and camouflage.

In the American study, Moscow blames the fact that it could not attract the Chechen population to its side and did not prepare the Russian people for this conflict. In the Russian columns, moving along the streets of Grozny, management was not properly established. Russian commanders used reconnaissance units, but did not support them, as a result of which the scouts were forced to fight instead of conducting reconnaissance and reconnaissance.

“The subunit commanders suffered from their own arrogance and scornful attitude towards the abilities of the Chechens,” says a study by ground forces. - The soldiers were not ready to resist, often fell asleep and poorly mastered the situation even during the offensive. Most of the crews of armored vehicles did not have the right maps and navigation tools to navigate in an urban environment. This often led to ambushes and dead ends. ”

The second battle for Grozny in 1999-2000 was fought quite differently. This time, Moscow concentrated the 100 numbering of thousands of people there and took information operations under its tight control. “By limiting negative media coverage, Moscow had the opportunity to strike indiscriminately, razed the city and broke the Chechen defenses before arriving in Grozny,” the report says.

Russia also actively used artillery and AviationHer troops were better trained and informed. The advancing group included more engineer-engineer and reconnaissance units. This time the tanks did not conduct street battles at a short distance, but supported the advancing fire. “Russian soldiers were better trained and equipped to maneuver on the streets of Grozny,” the study notes. - As a result, they better understood the nature of the battle in the city and correctly assessed the enemy. The commanders more often made tactical breaks, giving soldiers the opportunity to study maps, floor plans, and underground communication systems to understand the movements of Chechen fighters and correctly assess where the centers of resistance could be. ”

Due to high-quality training and effective tactics, the Russians did not suffer another and humiliating defeat on the streets of Grozny. After two months of fighting, the Chechen fighters left the city, and within two years the region was completely occupied, and the violence there began to wane. During this time, the Russians very effectively broke the resistance of the main Chechen forces, took control of the countryside, and only then began fighting in urban environments.

The US Army also carefully studied the second battle for Donetsk, which took place in 2014-2015. It was conducted between the Ukrainian troops and the Ukrainian separatists, who enjoyed the support of the Russian military and their firepower. American analysts point to this battle as a clear example of the Russian strategy of hybrid war as applied to urban conditions, in which both regular troops and irregular formations take part. “The upgraded optics, heavy armored vehicles, artillery and air defense weapons supplied from Russia enhanced the combat capabilities of the separatist forces, which turned into a new army,“ superior to their adversary. ”

In Donetsk were heavy fighting for the airport. “The tactics of small units in the limited space of the airport terminal became an example of what problems may arise in modern combat in urban environments. The Ukrainian military used any airport capabilities to achieve advantages in the conduct of defensive operations. In response, Russian troops stepped up their artillery and tank fire. ”
Author:
Originator:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-the-russian-army-learned-wage-war-kill-its-enemies-23247
36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 24 November 2017 06: 01 New
    +6
    What a deep thought. Figured it out myself? Well done.
    1. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 24 November 2017 06: 07 New
      +4
      Studied, unfortunately, from their own experience. But if you have learned, then you need to save, accumulate and transfer the experience to young officers so that the lessons of the same Grozny, the first campaign, are not repeated! There can be many soldiers, but everyone has one life!
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 24 November 2017 12: 44 New
        +4
        Quote: Starover_Z
        the lessons of the same Grozny, the first campaign

        That’s a honest word, as soon as it comes to the “storming of the city” in the first Chechen, such an author can immediately be written in the verbiage.
        Anyone who knows a little bit, who was interested in what was happening then, knows very well that they did not go to storm the city, they went "to show the flag"
        Actually, in an article from a finger in the form of initially incorrect initial information, the author sucked out a bunch of propaganda nonsense.
        1. Old warrior
          Old warrior 26 November 2017 12: 17 New
          +1
          Guys, there is a Battle Charter, everything is painted there and laid out on shelves. Our First Chechen Army was vilely betrayed. And, mind you, no one has been punished for this.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 26 November 2017 12: 50 New
            +2
            Quote: Old Warrior
            Guys have a Battle Charter

            There is. But they didn’t go there to fight. Therefore, where does the combat charter?
            Quote: Old Warrior
            Our First Chechen Army was vilely betrayed.

            It was already much later.
            At the time of the entry of troops into the city, firstly, Moscow Palkovodists underestimated the readiness of the Chechens to fight, and overestimated the psychological impact of large masses of troops on them. This is a failure, but not even of military intelligence, which did not work there, but of state bodies. security. Secondly, they didn’t bring to the participants what happened in November - the failure of the entry of Avturkhanov detachments into the city, when the arrowhead tankers participating in the White House were still captured. And the fact that the FSB leaked about this epicheyle to the press was presented to the military as an insignificant case, everything was explained by the insufficiency of the forces of the Provisional Council. And only some did not believe it, for example, Rokhlin, who dragged with him all the artillery he could reach. For then there was still the trust of the military on the ground in Moscow.
            As a result, they entered the city in columns, approximately the same as during the putsch in Moscow. Expecting no more local resistance. There was no assault.
    2. RASKAT
      RASKAT 24 November 2017 08: 10 New
      +4
      Bullshit, what about Chechnya, what about Donbass.
      Briefly about Chechnya, when gathering troops from all possible troops and departments, such a vinaigrette was created. And each has its own leadership and its own tactics and weapons. It’s ridiculous to recall now, but police units were thrown into battle. Moreover, both special units and companies, as well as ordinary operatives, etc.
      Now Donbass
      “The tactics of small units in the limited space of the airport terminal
      Rave. Almost all the forces that were in the DPR at that time, almost all of the Artillery and Tanks, were thrown into the direction of the Airport. What small groups are there? And all successes should be connected more likely with the complete stupidity and incompetence of the Ukrainian generals.
      1. LiSiCyn
        LiSiCyn 24 November 2017 09: 20 New
        +1
        Quote: RASKAT
        Rave. Almost all the forces that were in the DPR at that time were thrown into the direction of the Airport

        The article talks about Ukrainians .. And that, just the militia, had to use artillery and tanks, direct fire.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 24 November 2017 09: 45 New
        +2
        Well, in terms of the number of soldiers, tanks, guns, etc., dill should easily have won in the middle of the summer of 2014.
        1. LiSiCyn
          LiSiCyn 24 November 2017 10: 49 New
          +1
          Quote: EvilLion
          by the number of soldiers, tanks, guns

          Yes ... But, this does not negate the fact that DAP defended it, not very large forces. Yes, with the support of artillery and armored vehicles, but there was no more company, there were losses. There were huge losses on both sides .. Do not forget that the best, Sparta, Somalia, Pyatnashka and others, were thrown at the DAP. And so far, the tower they didn’t overwhelm and didn’t drag them onto the roof of the amonite, so that they could “fold” the new terminal. Could not take ...
          1. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 24 November 2017 11: 18 New
            +2
            Quote: LiSiCyn
            Yes ... But, this does not negate the fact that DAP defended it, not very large forces. Yes, with the support of artillery and armored vehicles, but more than a company, it was not there ..

            Maybe if you take only a new terminal. In general, in the area of ​​the DAP were several BTG ukrovermahta.
            1. LiSiCyn
              LiSiCyn 24 November 2017 22: 49 New
              +2
              Grind, it’s decent there ... Colonel of Kassad has a series of articles about the Armed Forces and the National Battalions .. Half in the DAP was noted and all have losses ...
        2. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy 24 November 2017 10: 53 New
          +1
          Quote: EvilLion
          Well, in terms of the number of soldiers, tanks, guns, etc., dill should easily have won in the middle of the summer of 2014.

          They won, Kiev defended and they did not let us in. Now they don’t know how to be captured.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 24 November 2017 11: 53 New
            +1
            Did we need Kiev?
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 24 November 2017 16: 15 New
              0
              Quote: EvilLion
              Did we need Kiev?

              And were we there?
              They say yes. The people still believe them.
  2. Cananecat
    Cananecat 24 November 2017 06: 02 New
    +2
    Yes, yes, yes ... immediately select a separate format and distribute manuals to all the star-striped soldiers for in-depth study after lights out. laughing
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 24 November 2017 06: 11 New
      +6
      Quote: Canecat
      for in-depth study after lights out.

      This is a diversion against our "partners"!
      But in general, our conduct of street battles was well studied during the Second World War, due to which losses during the capture of cities decreased.
      1. LiSiCyn
        LiSiCyn 24 November 2017 07: 14 New
        +4
        And then they safely forgot ... Before the storming of Grozny .. It was believed that in case of war, cities would be destroyed by poison weapons. A very, comfortable target.
        1. Mih1974
          Mih1974 24 November 2017 09: 41 New
          +9
          Nobody forgot anything, at the time of the "first Chechen" as it was correctly said above - the collapse of the army reached a critical level, instead of single divisions and concerted actions there were small groups with no coordination. There is just as much about the second one (but not all), just a more or less improvement in the Army allowed the second company to be conducted quite differently from the first.
          Well, the last thing is that we need to analyze how Russia acts in Syria and “we are not there” on the earth, but everyone understands that the rapid fall of Allepo and the “removal” of Der-zor are an achievement of the Russian army’s leadership. Whereas the “storms” concurrently led by the Americans in Mosul and Raqqa, with multiple superiority in the firepower (on those theater) of the Americans, everything came down not to Capture, but to primitive - obliteration from the face of the earth.
          Actually, this strongly reminded the actions of the Nazis in Stalingrad - until the troops in the city mixed up, tried to erase it, but then they really filled up the corpses of the fascist infantry. That is, the Americans did not even take the lesson from the Nazis, they did not develop either the methods or the algorithm of the Sturm of the city, for the war against a less comparable and motivated opponent (Russia, China) they are not completely ready. negative
      2. Cananecat
        Cananecat 24 November 2017 08: 27 New
        +1
        our well studied during WWII

        That's why in the German press you will not find such masterpieces. )))
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Ural resident
    Ural resident 24 November 2017 06: 14 New
    0
    And what about Aleppo, why were they silent?
    1. Mih1974
      Mih1974 24 November 2017 09: 42 New
      +3
      If we mention Aleppo, it turns out that the Americans are finished, because for months they washed powder Mosul and Raqqa, "captured" in fact stone rubble, and not the city.
  5. MOSKVITYANIN
    MOSKVITYANIN 24 November 2017 06: 45 New
    0
    How the Russian army learned to wage war (and destroy enemies)

    The author did not specify which war and which enemy. Only in the 08.08.08 war did the RF Armed Forces encounter the regular forces of another state, having superiority in all environments, at least in the second stage of hostilities ...
    In all other military conflicts in which the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and other military units participated, the Russian Federation was opposed by irregular units ....
    Small groups of Chechen fighters armed with light anti-tank weapons and sniper rifles found and destroyed Russian columns of tanks and motorized infantry, using the features of the urban area for cover and disguise.

    The author "forgot" to mention where he got the weapons from, the main part of the B and VT, was obtained during the disarmament and capture of the Shali TP, the 142 CC of the USSR (142 training MSD), weapons of the ChISSR Ministry of Internal Affairs system, but there were also sniper rifles and means of communication of empirialist production, including USA...
    After two months of fighting, Chechen fighters left the city, and for two years the region was completely occupiedand violence there waned.

    Most touched, not a single "self-respecting" communist and cheers, said nothing about this, gee ....
    Improved optics delivered from Russia

    Does this mean the French procured by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and installed on our armored vehicles?
  6. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 24 November 2017 07: 18 New
    +1
    Given the one who conducted this study, its subtext is understandable. For servicemen of any army, experience comes with time and in the conduct of active operations. Theory is one thing (which is also enriched over time), and practice is another. But I liked the conclusion about the DNLR army
    ... which turned into a new army, "superior to their opponent"
  7. Handbrake
    Handbrake 24 November 2017 09: 02 New
    +2
    Another portion of delirium. I will not talk about the inconsistency of parts of the sentences - I think the author drank, smoked and poked ctrl + c, ctrl + v. In terms of style, it looks like nonsense mad frome the ist.
    I’m interested in another, even though no one remembers previewing articles before publication? And then we will wait for the treatises on genicology and methods of reaching Zen at the moment of deep hibernation ... mdaaa
  8. BAI
    BAI 24 November 2017 09: 03 New
    +1
    for two years the region was completely occupied

    Everywhere - just to spoil. Not occupied, but cleared of gangs.
  9. vlad007
    vlad007 24 November 2017 09: 38 New
    +2
    The main problem of the first Chechen war was that it took place against the backdrop of the general collapse of the state. Everything else was a consequence of this situation.
    1. Karen
      Karen 25 November 2017 20: 23 New
      0
      Quote: vlad007
      The main problem of the first Chechen war was that it took place against the backdrop of the general collapse of the state. Everything else was a consequence of this situation.

      I have a different opinion ... the first Chechen war is not "took place against the backdrop of the collapse of the state " - it was needed to distract the people from the grand theft of the state.
      ... By the way, I remember the video in Grachev’s office on 14.12.94/XNUMX/XNUMX.
      Grachev was indignant: "What are they doing ?! Tanks are good in the field, not in the city !!!"
      1. MOSKVITYANIN
        MOSKVITYANIN 27 November 2017 00: 33 New
        0
        Karen I have a different opinion ... the first Chechen war did not "take place against the backdrop of the collapse of the state"

        Of course, Armenia knows better (even more visible only from Israel), but only I remember the phrases from the “zombie box” about: “Krasnodar” and “Siberian” republics, about independent Tatarstan ....
        Theft was, but the consequences began a bit later, AMO-ZIL from which I was taken into the army at the end of 94, I was still working, and he got up in 95, the default was in 98 ....
        Grachev was indignant: "What are they doing ?! Tanks are good in the field, not in the city !!!"

        Is it the military man (known to all as the Pasha Mercedes) who promised to take the formidable one with the RPS?
        Tanks can be used in urban areas (how? Ask Israeli Jews), there would be brains and military knowledge .... and the peasants we especially never regretted, under any authority ....
        So with vlad007 I completely agree....
        1. Karen
          Karen 27 November 2017 08: 33 New
          0
          Quote: MOSKVITYANIN

          Theft was, but the consequences began a bit later, AMO-ZIL from which I was taken into the army at the end of 94, I was still working, and he got up in 95, the default was in 98 ....

          The 95th year separates from the 94th only December ...
          What did Pashka say there? Maybe the puppeteers told him to say that? After all, he knew very well how many weapons the Chechens Shaposhnikovs left. And knowing how many RPGs there are in the city, the Jews will not tuck into the city like that.
          The authorities set a specific goal for the military - to create chaos, which was necessary as an information background to cover up the privatization ...
  10. EvilLion
    EvilLion 24 November 2017 09: 44 New
    0
    The bottom line is. If a soldier is deliberately not sent to slaughter, to provide overwhelming fire superiority, and a regular army over gangs with light weapons and a small amount of armor with artillery, provides him easily, and does not violate the technology of military operations, then the war is quickly and confidently won with minimal losses.
    Your cap.
  11. groks
    groks 24 November 2017 18: 46 New
    +1
    Is all this water poured for the penultimate paragraph?
  12. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 25 November 2017 11: 12 New
    0
    This is not a report on the tactics of urban battles, but simply Russophobic propaganda ...

    There was no first assault, the troops simply led the city purely as a psychological measure, they were ambushed, since the militants of Dudaev were really underestimated ... And the level of the commanders of that period was no like the most supreme - Yeltsin ...

    Chechnya gained independence by the results of the Khasavyurt agreements, but Wahhabism immediately swept it, so the leaders of the Chechen people Akhmad Haji Kadyrov and a number of others took the side of Russia and also took part in the storming of Grozny ... Yes, the battles were fierce, but they made corridors for the population and then the militant strongholds were stormed ... Everything was different, in the city the tanks were fighting from the second line, covering the infantry and working on its target designation, suppressing the enemy firing points, in the field the infantry was following the tanks, hiding behind its armor. .. Tanks finally equipped DZ, and sensible commanders appeared, as well as the supreme - Putin ... So here the militants and Wahhabis already had no chance ...

    And in the Donbass, everything was different in general, the punishers of the Kiev junta tripled the population’s terror, got into the boilers, and just threw the equipment and fled, because they realized that they would have to answer for crimes against their own people ...
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 25 November 2017 14: 09 New
      0
      the troops were purely a psychological measure, they were ambushed, since the militants of Dudaev were really underestimated ... Yes, and the level of commanders of that period was no as the most supreme-Yeltsin ...

      Not at all. Most of the commanders of forces and units and formations passed Afghanistan ...
      The defense of Grozny was organized by a former artillery officer of the SA Maskhadov, whose units under the Union occupied the first places among the units of the South Army.
      There were no fools on either side, in fact, the students of the Soviet military school fought among themselves ....
      Chechnya Gains Independence Based on Khasavyurt Accords

      What a fright? Have you read the text of the Agreement?
      Russia was defeated. The outcome of the agreement was the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of federal troops from Chechnya, and the issue of the status of the territory was postponed. until December 31 of 2001 year.
      So Putin was supposed to come to power no later than this date .....
      Tanks finally equipped DZ

      Those. In your opinion, all the burned tanks of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation were without DZ, and the DZ was a panacea for the TCP, google the burned tanks on the background of Tskhinval or in the SAR with this very DZ ....
      punishers of the Kiev junta tripling terror to the population fell into boilers, and just threw equipment and fled

      Punishers (volunteer battalions formed by the Oligarchs and consisting of people of the "Right Sector") are not capable of anything without independent military units, as independent combat units, their task is to clean the area in the rear of the Ukrainian armed forces on the occupied territory of the LPR, the organization of "guard units" behind the back of the Ukrainian armed forces and protection of the rear area of ​​the Armed Forces. ... Punishers have a minimum of heavy equipment, therefore they had nothing to throw except for vehicles ....
  13. shura7782
    shura7782 25 November 2017 23: 02 New
    +1
    The Ukrainian military used every opportunity of the airport to achieve advantages in conducting defensive operations. Russian troops in response increased the fire of artillery and tanks direct fire. "
    I really liked this place.
    Nonsense!
    1. AllXVahhaB
      AllXVahhaB 27 November 2017 00: 01 New
      +2
      What is the article about? About nothing !!!
  14. shuravi
    shuravi 22 March 2018 14: 36 New
    0
    Well and nonsense. Obviously, the author did not come into contact with the realities of the first Chechen one.