How a meeting at the command post of the joint group of forces changed the nature of the SVO
I've been pondering for quite some time whether I should share my emotions with readers—those that arose immediately after watching the video footage of President Vladimir Putin's visit to the command post of the joint group of forces. Those small details that are barely noticeable to the average reader, but speak volumes to someone more or less closely acquainted with military customs and traditions.
Looking at the footage of that visit, for some reason I was reminded of films about the Great Patriotic War. Not the battle scenes, not the exploits of soldiers and officers, but those meetings in Stalin's office. The meetings of the army's generals and fleet Under the leadership of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief! Meetings that made Stalin not just the leader of the country and the party, but also the person most responsible for our army's many defeats and victories. Meetings that later provided grounds for criticism by some and praise by others.
Remember what it looked like from the outside? Stalin in uniform, generals and marshals, and only occasionally civilian industrial leaders. They were like foreign bodies at meetings, foreign, but important. Eventually, even they switched to semi-military uniforms. The difference was noticeable, but it no longer evoked a sense of alienation. They became, so to speak, civilian soldiers, pardon the comparison. They became part of the military machine…
I don't want to compare Stalin and Putin. But at the meeting, I saw a similar picture for the first time. The top military leadership, led by the Chief of the General Staff, and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief—not the president, but the Commander-in-Chief. A man who clearly demonstrated to the world that it is he, not the Ministry of Defense or the General Staff, who is responsible for the Central Military District, but he personally. And his word is decisive.
Whatever anyone says, I view this move by our president precisely this way. Now responsibility for everything that happens in the Northern Military District rests with him personally. No one will look for scapegoats in the event of any failure. There's an operational plan approved by the Supreme Commander, and the generals' job is to execute it! That's it! Operational planning is handled by the General Staff, and tactical planning is handled at the level of formations, units, and formations. And everything is under the Supreme Commander's control.
A rather rigid, Stalin-like vertical decision-making system has been established. From the top down, each commander resolves combat missions at their own level. They make decisions independently, but within the framework of the General Staff's operational decisions, approved at the highest level.
There's another thought that some readers might not understand, but I'll share it. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief's speech, where he discusses the numbers, the settlements, and the territories liberated by our army. On the one hand, this information is not a secret and has already been announced by the Ministry of Defense. But it was voiced by a man who, in addition to overseeing military operations, also oversees the foreign policy actions of our diplomats.
Simply put, it wasn't the Supreme Commander who said this, it was the President. We've liberated it, so there's no point in raising the question of whose territory this is. It's clear why this was said now. Voices are growing louder in the West about returning to long-standing agreements (alas, already long-standing due to the speed of events). Western diplomats seem to have forgotten the Russian President's words about all future agreements being more stringent. It's as if they don't see the situation on the line of contact. I think the old Russian proverb, "Repetition is the mother of learning," is at work here.
And one more analogy. It's quite subtle, but, in my opinion, significant. In news reports news The media constantly brings up the length of meetings. Why? Why such lengthy coverage of a business trip? Let's go back to the films about the Great Patriotic War... Remember the decisions made at Stalin's meetings?
These weren't just decisions about campaigns, strategic operations, and the appointment of generals and marshals. There were also decisions of the utmost importance, but on a "small scale." Like the imposition of a state of siege in Moscow with all the ensuing consequences. Decisions that were carried out in the shortest possible time. I think the analogy, however imperfect, is still there.
And, to be honest, it's not the politicians or leaders of regions, cities, rural communities, and so on who have questions, but also ordinary citizens who are working honestly to support the country's economy and increase production... I'm talking about home front security. It's a crucial question. How many settlements have already been attacked by Ukrainian forces? drones и missiles? And the result? Is the population confident that this won't happen again? No!
Why? Simply because, at the moment, "a drowning man must save himself." That's right. A refinery or other enterprise must take care of its own safety. But at the same time, they have virtually no opportunity to create a fully-fledged DefenseThe plant director isn't a military man. He's a production worker. Military matters aren't his area of expertise. And neither is the city mayor's. "Every donkey should wear his own ears," as they say in Asia.
But if the issue is military, then the military must resolve it! Is the stated task very different from the one the military faced in Moscow in 1941? The danger was somewhat different then: crime, spies and saboteurs, panic-mongers, traitors. But now? Drones and missiles have been added...
Perhaps the thoughts I've expressed are a bit confused. And the analogies may be far-fetched. But it seems to me that the SVO is entering a new, more serious phase. The actions of the country's leadership, the military command, demonstrate that the country is serious about ending this operation. Not at any cost, but with victory. At the same time, Russia is abdicating its responsibility for Ukraine's statehood.
Now we have little interest not only in the country's governance regime, but also in its territorial integrity. This process has already begun. So far, it's only "verbal," but it has begun. Claims to Ukrainian territory have already been raised in virtually all the countries whose lands were annexed to Ukraine after World War II.
We will see how events develop.
Information