General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation

14/1

Main operational management General Staff Armed Forces Russian Federation(unofficial abbr. GOU General Staff of the RF Armed Forces) - the main body of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia, whose tasks include planning military operations of the different levels. His role in the system combat control The Armed Forces are traditionally so large that it is often people from the GOU who occupy the post of Chief of the General Staff, as was the case, in particular, in the cases of generals A. V. Kvashnin and Yu. N. Baluevsky.

Main activities of the State Educational Institution:

participation in identifying the sources of military threats to Russia's security and preparing proposals to the military-political leadership of the state on issues of military development;
organizing the development of the Defense Plan of the Russian Federation;
determining the main directions for the construction of the Russian Armed Forces, coordinating the development of plans for the construction of other troops, military formations and bodies;
strategic and operational planning for the use of the Russian Armed Forces;
operational control of troops (forces) in peacetime and wartime;
organization of interaction between the Russian Armed Forces and federal executive authorities, which include other troops, military formations and bodies;
organization and control of the implementation of anti-terrorist activities in the Russian Armed Forces;
control of operational training activities of the Russian Armed Forces;
operational support of military cooperation events in the CSTO, CIS and SCO formats, meetings of their statutory bodies;
participation in the formation of proposals for the draft State Armament Program.

Heads of the Operational (Main Operations) Directorate of the General Staff

Slim centralized system The quartermaster service developed over the years Northern War(1700-1721). After the unsuccessful Battle of Narva, the commander-in-chief of the army in Livonia, Field Marshal General B.P. Sheremetev, sent a report to Peter I, in which one of the reasons for the failure indicated the absence of the Quartermaster General as his assistant on all issues relating to the location and movement of troops. “It’s necessary, it’s necessary, you can’t stay without it”, he wrote to the king. On February 9 (20), 1702, by the highest resolution, the position of Quartermaster General was established in the Russian army, to which Prince A. F. Shakhovskoy was appointed. This marked the beginning of the creation of a system of operational command and control bodies, the main tasks of which were and remain the preparation of proposals for planning the use of troops and ensuring their control during combat operations.

After the famous Battle of Poltava, Peter I, in February 1711, approved the first “Staff Regulations of the General Staff,” which established the establishment of the position of Quartermaster General as the head of the Quartermaster Service.

Job responsibilities quartermasters - from the company fourier (from German führen - to lead) to the quartermaster general under the commander-in-chief - were enshrined in Peter the Great's Military Regulations of 1716. They were entrusted with studying theaters of military operations, organizing the deployment and movement of troops in peacetime and war, collecting information about the enemy, maintaining maps, compiling reports on military operations, etc. Simultaneously with the charter, new “Staffing Regulations of the General Staff” were approved: quartermaster positions were introduced in all military units from company to army.

Initially, quartermaster bodies were created only at the headquarters of the active army (for the period of hostilities). In peacetime, little attention was paid to the training of quartermasters. Yes, myself General base was then understood not as a military administration body, but as a collection of senior military officials. This situation had a negative impact on the state of control of the Russian army during the Seven Years' War (1756-1763), despite a number of victories won by Russia.

Catherine II, having ascended the throne, appointed a military commission to develop measures to reform the army. The commission proposed to reorganize the General Staff into a special body of military command, “so that it, in common with the quartermaster generals, as the main classes in that headquarters, during times of peace would be under the sole authority of the chief over the entire ... army.” The proposals also outlined the main tasks of the General Staff: in peacetime, collecting information about a potential enemy, maintaining maps of the deployment of troops, planning military campaigns, determining routes of movement and supply of troops, and in wartime - the allocation of quartermaster officers in the army and corps, so that lead troops in accordance with developed plans.

On January 14 (25), 1763, Catherine II approved the proposals of the military commission and the staff of the General Staff. For the first time in the history of the Russian army, a permanent military command and control body was created, which was charged with the responsibility in peacetime to deal with issues of preparation for future wars.

The entire subsequent history of the quartermaster service is connected with the General Staff, of which it invariably was a part during all reorganizations, and sometimes took upon itself the full implementation of its functions (during the abolition of the General Staff from 1796 to 1827).

Initially, the General Staff consisted only of ranks of the quartermaster service. Subsequently, a secret expedition was created in it (to transmit combat control orders to the troops), a drawing bureau (to conduct cartographic work), and also science Library- for “studies” of quartermaster officers.

Historical fact. Until 1770, M. I. Golenishchev-Kutuzov, the future Field Marshal General, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army in the Patriotic War of 1812, served as chief quartermaster in the General Staff. So, the officers of the Main Operations Directorate consider this outstanding commander to be their colleague.

Upon the accession of Paul I to the throne in 1796, the management of the quartermaster unit was changed. The General Staff was abolished, and in its place a Quartermaster Suite subordinate directly to the Tsar was created. Unlike the General Staff, the retinue had neither a permanent staff nor a special uniform; it represented a collection of military officials, sometimes poorly versed in issues of military administration. Russia's participation in the wars against Napoleonic France (1799-1804) revealed this deficiency to the fullest.

Emperor Alexander I began to take steps to strengthen the military administration. True, the Quartermaster Retinue retained its independence even after the creation of the War Ministry in 1802. In May 1810, General P. M. Volkonsky, a great expert in military affairs and staff culture, was appointed to the post of Quartermaster General of the retinue. The day before Patriotic War In 1812, with his direct participation, an important statutory document was developed - “Institution for the management of a large active army”, which detailed the rights and responsibilities of the ranks of the quartermaster unit for the management of troops in wartime.

During the Patriotic War, the Quartermaster General of the retinue, periodically traveling to the active army, was with the emperor as his chief military adviser. The officers of the quartermaster unit were almost all distributed among military units. During the war years, some of them, in recognition of their personal merits in the management of troops, were assigned to the guard and formed the Guards General Staff.

After the Patriotic War, a transformation of wartime government bodies followed. In June 1827, the Quartermaster Retinue was again transformed into the General Staff, headed by the Quartermaster General. In 1832, all military administration bodies that remained from the war, having received a different name, functions and organization, became part of the War Ministry. The General Staff was also included in the Ministry of War as a department.

Performing quartermaster duties required special military education. In this regard, the opening on November 26, 1832 in St. Petersburg of the Military Academy, specially designed for training officers of the General Staff (from 1855 it became known as the Nikolaev Academy of the General Staff) was of great importance. With the beginning of the academy’s activities, it was forbidden to assign officers without higher military education to the General Staff. An exception was made only for those with special military merits.

During the military reforms of the 1860-1870s, called “Milyutinsky”, the military command system was reorganized. The General Staff Department was transformed into the Main Directorate of the General Staff (GUGSH). Minister of War D. A. Milyutin, himself a former “quartermaster,” sought to turn the GUGSH into his own working body, covering all the main issues of leadership of the Armed Forces in peace and war. However, many of Milyutin's initiatives were rejected or forgotten by his followers as Minister of War.

After the unsuccessful war with Japan for Russia, a series of organizational changes followed. In 1905, the position of the Chief of the General Staff was restored as an independent military leader, subordinate directly to the Tsar. The GUGSH became its working body. However, already in 1908, the Chief of the General Staff was again subordinate to the Minister of War, and the GUGSH was included in the Ministry of War.

In 1910, new structure and regulations on the Main Directorate of the General Staff were adopted. The leading body of the GUGSH was the department of the Quartermaster General, and the Quartermaster General himself, according to the regulations, was “the closest collaborator of the Chief of the General Staff on all issues and matters relating to the deployment, movement and service of troops, their combat training and mobilization readiness.”

With the outbreak of the First World War, thanks to the activities of the GUGSH, the mobilization, concentration and deployment of troops in theaters of military operations was carried out within the planned time frame. By the way, some fragments of this work are figuratively revealed in the famous historical novel “I Have the Honor” by V. Pikul.

The Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief was formed from the leadership of the GUGSH. Two-thirds of the Headquarters staff were officers from the Quartermaster General's department. The head of the department, Major General Yu. N. Danilov, became the Quartermaster General under the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

The day before October revolution The quartermaster general's department was divided. The department of the 2nd Quartermaster General was entrusted with issues of military intelligence and counterintelligence. Only issues of an operational nature remained under the jurisdiction of the department of the 1st Quartermaster General.

Since the October armed uprising of 1917, the Soviet government began to create its own military command and control bodies. In 1918, under the leadership of Leon Trotsky, the Red Army began to form. It was Trotsky who came up with the idea of attracting tsarist officers to create the Soviet Armed Forces and to conduct civil war. The experience and organizational skills of many “old-regime” military experts were in demand by the new government and laid the foundations for the staff culture of the operational control bodies Soviet period. Suffice it to say that almost all created Soviet power operational control bodies were headed and staffed by graduates of the Academy of the General Staff. Among them are the commanders-in-chief of the armed forces of the republic I. I. Vatsetis and S. S. Kamenev, the chiefs of the All-Russian Main Staff and the Field Headquarters of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic, generals N. I. Rattel, F. V. Kostyaev, A. A. Svechin, M. D. Bonch-Bruevich, P.P. Lebedev, heads of operational departments, generals N.A. Suleiman, S.N. Kuznetsov, V.I. Mikhailov, colonels S.A. Mezheninov, B.M. Shaposhnikov. Total in 1918-1920. The corps of the General Staff of the Red Army consisted of 639 officers, including 252 generals. These facts give the right to talk about the historical continuity of the Red Army staff culture and traditions of the old Russian army.

March 3, 1918 to direct the defense Soviet Republic and the organization of the Armed Forces, by resolution of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR, the Supreme Military Council was formed. Under the Supreme Military Council, a headquarters is created as a working body, the head of which is appointed Major General of the Russian Army N.I. Rattel. The operational department of the headquarters was also headed by former general N. A. Suleiman (initially the position of the head of the operational department was called “quartermaster general”), and the former colonel of the General Staff Shaposhnikov (later Marshal) was appointed his assistant for operational work Soviet Union, Chief of the General Staff of the Red Army).

In order to streamline the structure and work of the central bodies of military command, their reorganization took place in May 1918. The bodies of the former War Ministry, including the GUGSH, are disbanded, the All-Russian Main Headquarters (Vseroslavglavshtab) is established, which is entrusted with resolving issues of mobilization, formation, structure and training of the Red Army, as well as developing staff, charters, instructions and regulations for the troops.

An operational department was also created within the All-Russian Main Headquarters, whose employees developed plans for military operations and engineering defense of the country, prepared weekly operational reports on fronts, monthly reports on operations carried out, maps of the location of friendly and enemy troops, and statistical descriptions of military districts.

As a result, the operational command of the troops was decentralized and divided between several command and control bodies.

In order to unite the leadership of the Armed Forces in the hands of a single body of supreme military power responsible to the government, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee resolution of September 2, 1918 created the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic (RVSR) headed by Leon Trotsky and established the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic, to which I. was appointed. I. Vatsetis.

The working body of the RVSR and the commander-in-chief, through which operational and strategic leadership of the army and navy was carried out, became the headquarters of the RVSR, formed on the basis of the abolished headquarters of the Supreme Military Council. N.I. Rattel remained his boss.

On October 2, 1918, the headquarters of the RVSR was renamed the Field Headquarters of the RVSR. At the same time, the operational directorate of the All-Russian Main Headquarters is disbanded. From this moment on, the operational management of the Field Headquarters of the RVSR becomes the only body for the operational command of troops. Its first boss was an experienced General Staff officer, former Russian Army General V.I. Mikhailov.

Operational management was entrusted with: developing strategic plans as directed by the High Command, directives and operational assignments to the fronts; keeping records of the Armed Forces, their groupings at the fronts and deployments within the state; organization of operational transportation of troops; leadership of military intelligence; collecting and processing information about the enemy; organization of military topographic service; generalization of combat experience; maintaining correspondence with the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs on military-diplomatic issues.

From October 1919 to February 1921, the Operational Directorate of the Field Headquarters was headed by Shaposhnikov. While in this post, he took an active part in developing a plan for a counteroffensive against Denikin's troops in October 1919, the 1920 campaign on the Southwestern, Western fronts and in the Crimea. Along with developing strategic plans for defeating the internal counter-revolution and interventionists, Shaposhnikov did a lot to implement them, while showing initiative and firmness in command and control of troops.

During the military reform of 1924-1925, military command and control bodies were again subject to reorganization. In accordance with the order of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR in 1924, three independent bodies were created on the basis of the Red Army Headquarters: Administrative Headquarters - Directorate of the Red Army; Troop Training Headquarters - Inspectorate of the Red Army and Operational Headquarters - Headquarters of the Red Army. “The operational headquarters,” noted its chief and commissar M.V. Frunze, “must become not only the brain of the Red Army, it must become the military brain of our entire Soviet state.” Contents of this catchphrase Shaposhnikov perfectly revealed in his fundamental work “The Brain of the Army”.

Very soon it became clear that the reorganization was unsuccessful. The search for the optimal structure of senior military command took almost all of the pre-war years. By resolution of the Council of People's Commissars of September 22, 1935, the General Staff of the Red Army was created instead of the Red Army Headquarters. This transformation made it possible to concentrate all issues of managing the Armed Forces in one hand. Thus, in the Operations Directorate, in addition to the five theater departments, aviation and air defense, maritime, operational training, communications, and encryption departments were formed.

The main issues in the work of the Operations Directorate of the General Staff in the pre-war period were the issues of increasing the combat effectiveness and combat readiness of troops (forces). Its employees had to closely monitor the development of the international situation and draw appropriate conclusions when developing operational plans, and take measures to strengthen both the western and Far Eastern borders of the state.

In 1938, the Development and Reorganization Plan of the Red Army for the Third Five-Year Plan (1938-1942) was adopted. The plan provided for strengthening the striking power and operational maneuverability of the Red Army by increasing rifle troops, artillery (military and reserve of the High Command) and air force, creation of large automobile formations of the RGC for operational purposes, further motorization of the rear. The territorial system of army construction was abolished.

After the plan was approved, the Operations Directorate began developing the foundations for the strategic deployment of the army. This work was directly supervised by the Chief of the General Staff Shaposhnikov. It was carried out under conditions of the growing threat of a new world war. Potential opponents included the states of the fascist bloc and their allies in the west, and militaristic Japan in the east.

Work on this most important strategic document was very difficult. Dynamic changes in the military-political and strategic situation against the background of the growing threat of aggression from Germany and its satellites required more than ever concentrated and professional work of officers-operators to clarify operational-strategic planning documents, while the ongoing struggle against “enemies of the people”, repression against the leaders and senior officials of the General Staff created an atmosphere of nervousness, uncertainty and doubt about the correctness of the decisions made. Suffice it to say that in the four pre-war years, four chiefs of the General Staff were replaced (Marshals A.I. Egorov, Shaposhnikov, Army Generals K.A. Meretskov, G.K. Zhukov) and eight (!) Chiefs of the Operations Directorate. This revealed a certain underestimation by J.V. Stalin and People's Commissar of Defense K.E. Voroshilov of the role of the General Staff as the main working body of the High Command for operational-strategic planning and leadership of the armed struggle. Only with the appointment of Army General G.K. Zhukov as Chief of the General Staff in February 1941 did the attitude towards the General Staff begin to change in better side.

Despite the unfavorable conditions, the Operational Directorate developed and approved in October 1940 the “Plan for the Strategic Deployment of the Armed Forces of the Soviet Union in the West and East for 1940-1941.” At the same time, private plans for possible military operations against Finland, Romania and Turkey were developed, which gave flexibility to the overall plan and provided the possibility of deploying groupings of troops depending on the developing situation.

Strategically, the concept of the plan was correct: it was based on the inevitability of an armed clash between the Soviet Union and Germany, adequately reflected the state and development trends of the military-political situation, and was based on the theoretical principles of Soviet military art regarding the nature of possible war and ways to repel enemy attacks.

At the same time, the plan contained serious miscalculations regarding the beginning, timing and sequence of the enemy’s deployment of military operations in initial period war. The General Staff was unable to calculate the possibility of a sudden transition of German troops to the offensive with all available and pre-deployed forces in all strategic directions.

The Operations Directorate became the leading organ of the General Staff, its main working core, the “master generator.” Not a single issue was resolved by the Chief of the General Staff if it was not agreed upon with the Operations Directorate. In turn, the Operations Directorate constantly sought the opinion of other departments of the General Staff and the People's Commissariat of Defense and only after agreeing on all issues on a specific problem reported them to the Chief of the General Staff for a decision. During the war years, the department was headed by such outstanding military leaders as A. M. Vasilevsky, N. F. Vatutin, A. I. Antonov, S. M. Shtemenko.

The Operations Directorate has accumulated a wealth of experience in solving many problems of planning and organizing combat operations of troops. Suffice it to say that during the war years, with his participation, over 300 operations of fronts and groups of fronts were developed, of which more than 50 were classified as strategic. Many of them formed the golden fund of world military art.

After the war, a new reorganization of the highest bodies of military command was carried out. On March 23, 1946, in accordance with the order of the Chief of the General Staff, the Operations Directorate was reorganized into the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff. Colonel General S. M. Shtemenko was appointed the first head of the GOU - Deputy Chief of the General Staff.

Having undergone repeated reorganizations in subsequent years, the Main Operations Directorate retained and strengthened its role as the leading force control body in peacetime and wartime.

Since 1992

In 1992, the State Educational Institution was headed by Viktor Barynkin. On June 25, 1996, a group of high-ranking employees of the Ministry of Defense, including the head of the State Educational Institution Barynkin, was dismissed. Those fired were accused by Alexander Lebed of attempting to organize a conspiracy (GKChP-3) with the aim of “pressuring” President Yeltsin to reinstate Pavel Grachev.

In 1996, Yu. N. Baluevsky became the acting head of the State Educational Institution, and in August 1997 he was confirmed in this position. In 1999, Baluevsky took part in planning and supporting the forced march of the Russian combined battalion of the Airborne Forces, part of the international peacekeeping contingent in Bosnia and Herzegovina, to the city of Pristina, in order to establish control and prevent the seizure of Slatina airport by NATO troops. In August 2001, Baluevsky was relieved of his post as head of the State Educational Institution.

Throughout the history of its existence, the structure of the State Administration has experienced several reorganizations. According to available open sources According to the data, the structure of the Main Directorate consisted of 13 main directorates and 8 auxiliary departments and directorates.

Basic controls:

· First Directorate - countries of the European Commonwealth (except Great Britain);
· Second Directorate - countries of Northern and South America, UK, Australia, New Zealand;
· Third Directorate - Asian countries;
· Fourth Directorate - African countries;
· Fifth Directorate - Operational Intelligence Directorate;
· Sixth Directorate - radio-technical intelligence directorate;
· Seventh Directorate - NATO;
· Eighth Directorate - sabotage (SpN);
· Ninth Directorate - Directorate of Military Technologies;
· Tenth Directorate - Directorate of War Economy;
· Eleventh Directorate - Directorate of Strategic Doctrines and Weapons;
· Management Twelve Encore - information war;

Auxiliary departments and departments:

· Office of Space Intelligence
· Human Resources Department
· Operational and technical management
· Administrative and technical management
· External Relations Department
· Archive department
Information service

General military training of officers of the Main Directorate is carried out at the Novosibirsk Higher Military Command School, in the following specialties:

1. use of military reconnaissance units
2. use of special reconnaissance units

Special training for officers of the Main Directorate is carried out at the Military-Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. Training is carried out at three main faculties:

1. Faculty of Strategic Human Intelligence
2. Faculty of Agent-Operational Intelligence
3. Faculty of Operational-Tactical Intelligence

The structure of the Main Directorate also includes two research institutes located in Moscow, known as the 6th and 18th Central Research Institutes.

The current deputy chiefs are:

1. Kondrashov, Vyacheslav Viktorovich (2011 - present)
2. Gizunov Sergey Alexandrovich (2015 - present)
3. Lelin Igor Viktorovich (2014 - present)

The head of the Military Academy of the Russian Ministry of Defense has the rank of deputy head of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

4. Objectives of the intelligence activities of the Main Directorate
1. Support for the President of the Russian Federation, Federal Assembly, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation with intelligence information they need to make decisions in the political, economic, defense, scientific, technical and environmental fields;
2. Providing conditions conducive to the successful implementation of the policy of the Russian Federation in the field of defense and security;
3. Assistance economic development, scientific and technological progress of the country and military-technical security of the Russian Federation.

In many sources, besides the phrase: “Chief of the Main Staff of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces - Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Colonel General,” there are no other facts from the biography of Sergei Rudsky. Yes, and some on the Internet Interesting Facts from the life of a military leader are missing. Therefore, we will try to piece together the mosaic of the biography of General Rudsky. And let's start, of course, with his name.

Hero name

Many sources call General Sergei Rudsky somewhat differently. Referring to those close to the Ministry of Defense and announcing the elevation of a new candidate to the post of Chief of the Main Staff of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, they do not even bother to clarify the correct spelling of his last name.

Perhaps this confusion is connected with the name of another military leader - the hero of the USSR, retired aviation major general, and the latter), former Kursk governor Alexander Rutsky.

These individuals - Rudsky and Rutsky - are not connected by kinship and a common surname, as someone thought. There is nothing in common between them except love for the homeland and duty to the country. And Sergei Fedorovich, unlike Alexander Vladimirovich, has not yet risen to the rank of general. Rudskoy’s father is an outstanding military leader, like Rutskoy, a hero of the USSR, but not Yeltsin’s first close general.

Parents

Literally everyone predicted the future general, Sergei Fedorovich Rudsky, a brilliant military career. After all, Sergei’s father, Fyodor Andreevich, is an important figure in military history Russia, he has many orders and medals, including: Lenin, Nevsky, Patriotic War, 1st degree, Red Star. Fedor Rudsky also has many medals, including the Golden Star.

Sergei Fedorovich’s father was born in the Ukrainian village of Avdeevka in the 20s of the last century. At the age of 18, in 1939, he decided to enlist in the Red Army. General Rudsky's father was a simple peasant. Before him, the men in the family had not even thought about a military career.

Inspired by his service in the Red Army, Fyodor Rudskoy decides to continue it and in 1941 he graduates from Saratov Tank Military School No. 3.

There is no information about the mother in the biography of Lieutenant General Sergei Rudsky.

Father's career

The pages of history carefully preserve the memory of Kursk Bulge- one of the most powerful battles in the history of the Great Patriotic War. It was thanks to the events that unfolded in the summer of 1943 that the initiative passed into the hands of the Red Army. It was one of the largest tank battles- about 6 thousand cars defended the independence of the country, and with them two million people and 4 thousand aircraft. General Rudsky's father took part in the Battle of Kursk.

Fyodor Andreevich’s company held back the onslaught of the Nazi invaders for an hour. The soldiers selflessly waited for the arrival of the main opposing forces. In this battle, Fedor Rudskoy personally destroyed three indestructible Royal Tiger tanks.

The heroic pages in the biography of Fyodor Rudsky do not end there.

Another source states that Fyodor Andreevich destroyed an entire company of Wehrmacht soldiers, or rather, all that was left of it after the battles in what is now Kaliningrad. Fedor Rudskoy blocked the retreat route. On both sides he cut off the path of the Fritz retreating from Koenigsberg. The fate of the hostages was this: Rudsky’s platoon drove through them with tanks. About one and a half kilometers... This feat turned out to be a “Hero of the USSR” for Fedor Andreevich.

Post-war years

The family of General Rudsky was lucky - his father returned home safe and sound. Except for the wounds left by the war.

Upon his return, Fyodor Andreevich decides to continue his military career. His regalia is complemented by 2 diplomas - the Military Academy of Armored Forces and the Military Academy of the General Staff. A few years later, Fyodor Rudskoy himself took the helm of military education in the USSR - he headed one of the military educational institutions of Belarus.

In 1969, Fyodor Andreevich was invited to become the head of the Minsk Suvorov Military School. The same one where your first steps in military life his son, the future General Rudskoy, will do it.

Until his death, which befell the brave military man in 1982, he devoted himself to serving his Motherland. Graduated 13 courses, raising excellent military personnel. Many of them, thanks to their amazing education, received the rank of generals, and the courage and courage instilled in them from childhood allowed many of them to become heroes.

In honor of Fyodor Rudsky, a memorial sign and a memorial plaque.

His son, Sergei Rudskoy, Colonel General and future chief of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, will not betray military affairs - the life’s work of his father. However, he will still choose a different field.

Education

The military career of the future General Sergei Fedorovich Rudsky began at the Minsk Suvorov Military School. According to sources, in particular, the book by Nikolai Zygmuntovich Kunz “The Pride of the Cadet Brotherhood”, the future Colonel General took his first step into the military field in 1977. It was this year that he became a graduate of the educational institution.

It is known that the next stage of training for Sergei Fedorovich was the Moscow Higher Combined Arms Command School.

However, information about the time he spent at the educational institution is not publicly available. It is only known that he was one of his students. In addition to Sergei Fedorovich, the highest military positions in the Russian Federation are occupied by at least 3 MVOKU graduates with the rank of colonel general: First Deputy of the General Staff Bogdanovsky, Chief of Staff of the CSTO Sidorov, Commander of the Western Military District Kartapolov.

Military career

The first mention of him as a military leader dates back to 1995. As a lieutenant colonel, Sergei Rudskoy was the commander of the 255th Guards Motorized Rifle Regiment, which took part in the first and second Chechen campaigns. The regiment itself has a rich past; it became the successor to the 7th Guards Separate Motorized Rifle Stalingrad-Korsun Red Banner Brigade. During World War II, Field Marshal Paulus himself surrendered to its soldiers. The regiment itself is referred to as the “255th Guards Motorized Rifle Volgograd-Korsun Red Banner.” He has many successful operations carried out during the Russian-Chechen wars. And in some of them the regiment was commanded by Rudskoy himself.

First award

For his valor in Grozny, Sergei Rudskoy was awarded the gold star “Hero of Russia”.

First of all, Sergei Fedorovich had to say “thank you” for the award to the commander of the North group of forces, Lev Rokhlin. It was he who nominated Rudsky for the award. According to sources, the main feat of then-Lieutenant Colonel Sergei Rudsky was a reverent attitude towards soldiers’ lives. Despite the harsh military situation (however, war is never easy or calm), the regiment emerged from the battles with minimal losses.

Starfall

The next important date in the biography of Sergei Fedorovich is December 2012. Based on the decree of the President of the Russian Federation, his title began to sound: Lieutenant General Sergei Rudskoy.

According to sources, the award might not have found its hero. The fact is that by decree more than 50 officers were awarded titles. Previously, the head of the Ministry, Anatoly Serdyukov, was against such generosity, so within a year the documents were subjected to thorough verification. However, Sergei Shoigu, who came to power, started the meteor shower.

Many believe that the delay was justified. In order to receive a new rank, a serviceman must hold the position for at least a year and have no comments. And when former minister they were everywhere. However, the global network does not have information about further advancement up the career ladder, for what merits the colonel general’s stars fell on his shoulder straps, or is diligently hidden.

In the biography of Lieutenant General Sergei Rudsky, his contribution to the fight against Serdyukov’s legacy is especially noted. Sergei Fedorovich devoted more than one year to solving these issues.

The fight against “Serdyukovism”

As the first deputy chief of the Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, Sergei Fedorovich stood at the origins of the fight against “Serdyukovism.” For people who associate the military garrison only with the filming location of the TV series “Mines in the Fairway” and “Goryunov,” it is worth explaining that “Serdyukovism” refers to the time of the rule of the armed forces by the minister of the same name. After his loud and dizzying “fall” from the government chair, his surname became a household name. And symbolizes the stage of the fall and plunder of the Ministry of the Armed Forces.

In 2013, at a round table with the loud title “The year after the change of leadership of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation - results and prospects,” Lieutenant General Sergei Rudskoy made a report in which he reported on the work over the past year and spoke about promising areas. These include: increasing the number of military personnel, restoring institutions and places of cultural recreation in garrisons, as well as developing measures to increase the prestige of the service. Within round table one of the participants inquired about the fate of the houses of naval officers, which Serdyukov planned to ruthlessly demolish. Lieutenant General Rudskoy assured those present that nothing like this would happen. And it’s worth noting that he kept his word.

Present tense

So far, the final page in the biography of General Sergei Rudsky has been his patronage at the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces. This happened on November 10, 2015. However, in some sources the date is defined as the 24th. But everyone agrees on one thing - it was in November.

First Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate (GOU) of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, spoke at the 7th Xiangshan Security Forum, which takes place on October 10-12 in Beijing, on the topic “Global layered missile defense system (BMD) The USA as a threat to the military security of Russia and China and strategic stability in the world."

“Missile defense is one of the key topics on which the prevention of an arms race and nuclear disarmament, as well as ensuring strategic stability and military security in the world currently directly depend,” stated Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir.

He noted that as a result of the unilateral withdrawal of the United States of America from the 1972 ABM Treaty in 2002, the cornerstone of the system of global strategic stability was destroyed. The Pentagon has launched large-scale work to create a national missile defense system capable of upsetting the existing balance of power in the world.

“Due to the possession of missile defense systems, the United States seeks to gain significant advantages in strategic weapons systems over Russia and China. This can lead to unpredictable consequences,” said the first deputy head of the State Educational Institution.

According to Victor Poznikhir, the illusion of invulnerability and impunity under the missile defense umbrella will encourage Washington to take unilateral steps in solving global and regional problems. This can objectively lead to a reduction in the threshold for use nuclear weapons to forestall enemy actions.

“For clarity, let’s imagine the following picture: in the arena there are two gladiators of approximately equal strength, each with a sword in his hand. They know the strong and weak sides both our own and the enemy. Both understand that if a fight starts, it will be bad for both of them, and it is unknown who will emerge victorious. This deters them from attacking each other,” said Lieutenant General Poznikhir. - If one of the gladiators picks up a shield, he will gain a significant advantage and will think that he is able to win, especially if he strikes first. What should the second gladiator do? Naturally, he will also take up a shield, as well as a longer and stronger sword. This is roughly what is happening today as a result of the deployment of the American missile defense system.”

As the first deputy head of the GOU emphasized, Russia, together with its Chinese partners, carefully analyzed the composition, deployment and combat capabilities of the US-created global system PRO.

“I would like to emphasize that Russian and Chinese assessments of her negative influence on strategic stability completely coincided. Using the thesis of the Iranian and North Korean “missile threats” as a pretext, one of the elements of the US strategic triad is being deployed in close proximity to the borders of Russia and China. At the same time, the missile defense system significantly changes the balance of power in the field of offensive weapons, as it allows for more effective planning of a disarming missile strike,” said Viktor Poznikhir.

According to him, the true goals of creating a global US missile defense system are: reducing the potential of Russia's strategic nuclear forces, and in relation to the Chinese nuclear missile potential - obtaining the opportunity to completely reset it; the covert creation of a powerful strike component for possible disarming and decapitation strikes on our countries; as well as expanding the capabilities to destroy artificial Earth satellites in low orbits.

The First Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation commented on what these conclusions are based on.

According to Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, the configuration and total anti-missile potential of the US global missile defense system are inadequate to the level of real and predicted missile threats cited by Washington.

“So, North Korea is currently only demonstrating its capabilities to create long-range ballistic missiles. I consider it generally inappropriate to talk about the missile threat from Iran after the agreements have been concluded on its nuclear program,” said the deputy head of the State Educational Institution.

However, the US missile defense system, according to the data stated by the Americans, by 2020 will include about 50 GBI anti-missile missiles, about 700 ground- and sea-based Standard-3 anti-missile missiles and more than 200 THAAD anti-missile missiles.

“Even with the calculation that several anti-missile missiles will be assigned to one target, it turns out - we're talking about about the potential ability of the missile defense system to intercept hundreds of missiles! - Victor Poznikhir emphasized.

According to him, more than forty missile defense ships will carry out combat service in various waters of the World Ocean, including the seas washing the shores of the Russian Federation and China.

Thus, under the pretext of countering the North Korean and Iranian “missile threats,” a system is being deployed, designed primarily to combat Russian and Chinese missiles, the speaker said.

Research institutions of the Russian Ministry of Defense carried out modeling of options for the combat use of US missile defense systems. It showed that the Standard-3 anti-missile missiles have the ability to intercept ICBMs and SLBMs not only in the middle, as claimed by the United States, but also in the initial part of the missiles’ flight path. This poses a more serious threat to the nuclear potential of Russia and China, since interceptor missiles will be capable of hitting Russian and Chinese ballistic missiles before their warheads separate from their sustainer stages. This fact was confirmed by a number of independent American experts.

According to Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, the Standard-3 anti-missile missile of modification 2A, fired from a ship from the water area Baltic Sea, is capable of shooting down a Russian intercontinental ballistic missile launched from European Russian territory. Interception occurs in the acceleration phases of missile flight.

In addition, the Mk-41 universal launchers located on missile defense ships, in addition to the Standard-3 anti-missile missiles, are used to launch Tomahawk high-precision long-range cruise missiles, said the first deputy chief of the Main Directorate of Defense.

“These launchers are used at missile defense bases in Romania and Poland. American arguments that they are not capable of using ground-based cruise missiles due to design features and software and algorithmic limitations are, to put it mildly, unconvincing,” said Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir. “As a rocket scientist by training, I authoritatively declare that any devices that allegedly do not allow placing a cruise missile in the containers of a ground-based complex can be easily dismantled, and software-algorithmic limitations are completely eliminated by pressing the program reset button.”

In addition, Viktor Poznikhir recalled that the very fact of using a ship-based cruise missile launcher in a ground-based version is a violation by the United States of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. This Treaty prohibits the deployment of ground-based systems with a cruise missile firing range of more than 500 km. And the reach zone of Tomahawk missiles is 2500 km.

Viktor Poznikhir emphasized that almost the entire European part of Russia could come under attack from American cruise missiles. At the same time, the re-equipment of Mk-41 launchers with Tomahawk cruise missiles at bases in Europe and on missile defense ships can be carried out covertly and in a short time.

“We also know about the work ongoing in the United States in the field of using Mk-41 launchers for the deployment of hypersonic weapons systems. And this is a different flight time to targets, much shorter and a much greater threat to Russia’s security,” said the lieutenant general. — And finally, who can guarantee that instead of the THAAD complex, the Aegis Ashore ground complex, similar to those located in Romania and Poland, will not be deployed in South Korea in the future? And in this case, a significant part of China’s territory will be under possible attack,” Victor Poznikhir posed the question.

According to the information of the first deputy head of the Main Directorate of Defense, in February 2008, the United States demonstrated the ability to destroy spacecraft with missile defense strike weapons. Then the American satellite at an altitude of about 250 km was destroyed by a Standard-3 anti-missile modification 1A launched from a US Navy destroyer from the Hawaiian Islands.

The capabilities of the promising Standard-3 anti-missile missiles, modification 2A, with an increased destruction zone, as well as the GBI anti-missile missiles, are much greater. This allows you to destroy spacecraft Russian and Chinese orbital groups. Moreover, given the global nature of the actions of ships with anti-missile defenses, the United States will be able to interfere in the space activities of any state.

“We have repeatedly drawn the attention of Americans to these factors, but our arguments are not accepted, obvious facts are ignored. In response, we hear unfounded statements about the “non-directionality” of the created missile defense system against Russia and China,” stated Viktor Poznikhir. “Our initiatives to conclude relevant international agreements that would relieve the Russian side’s concerns in connection with the creation of a US missile defense system were not accepted by the American side.”

According to the first deputy head of the GOU, “The United States refuses to provide legally binding guarantees that its anti-missile potential is not directed against the Russian Federation with the development of effective transparency and verification measures.”

In addition, the United States and its allies are blocking Russian-Chinese initiatives at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva in the field of preventing the deployment of weapons in space, the use of force and the threat of force against space objects.

Also, the United States and its allies actually refused to discuss the issue of creating a missile defense system in Europe, rejecting the options they proposed taking into account Russian interests.

In addition, despite the agreements reached with Iran on its nuclear program, the deployment of the European segment of the missile defense system is proceeding according to the previously planned plan.

According to Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, all of the above actions do not add credibility to US statements that missiles and satellites from Russia and China are not considered targets for the missile defense system being created.

“I would also like to draw Special attention that the US regional missile defense systems in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region are one of the echelons of the US national missile defense system. It is no coincidence that their management is under the exclusive jurisdiction of Washington, and the allies’ assets are being modernized to their standards,” said the first deputy head of the GOU.

According to Russian military experts, the United States hopes, by possessing it, to be able to launch a surprise nuclear missile strike with impunity in any region of the world, not excluding Russia and China.

“The logic here is simple: the means developed within the framework of the “global instant strike” concept are used to deliver so-called “decapitation and disarming strikes”; The missiles that survived from the attacked side, launched in the direction of the United States for a retaliatory strike, are destroyed by a multi-echelon missile defense system,” said Victor Poznikhir. “But hope for such a development of events is a dangerous illusion.”

According to him, Russia is forced to take adequate response measures aimed at ensuring that the missile defense plans of the United States and its allies cannot affect the existing balance of power in the field of strategic weapons. China acts in a similar way.

“I would like to emphasize that by hosting American missile defense systems, the governments of the respective countries are making their people hostage to American claims to the unpunished use of force,” said Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir.

“Before presenting conclusions based on the results of my speech, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that military experts from Russia and China are unanimous in assessing the true direction of the US missile defense system. We are working together on how to minimize possible damage to the security of our countries as a result of the creation of its segment in the Asia-Pacific region,” noted the First Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. “This year we have already conducted the first joint Russian-Chinese computer-based command post exercises on missile defense.”

During these exercises, we practiced various options joint actions to protect against missile attacks from a mock enemy who has deployed a group of missile defense systems near our borders. Similar events will be held in 2017.

According to Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, based on the results of the analysis of the actions of the United States and its allies in the field of missile defense, the following conclusions can be drawn:

First. The US decision to create a global layered missile defense system is not related to the response to Iranian missile threats and North Korea. It is determined, first of all, by the desire to gain military superiority over Russia and China.

Second. The American global layered missile defense system, with anti-missile, anti-space and strike potentials, is integral part US strategic offensive forces. The main task of its regional components is to serve cutting edge blocking the strategic nuclear forces and space group of Russia and China. US missile defense is not a means of defense, it is an element of the implementation of plans to achieve strategic dominance in the world.

Third. The US goal of involving allies in its own missile defense plans is not to build a joint defense, but to put a share of it on them financial costs and the use of their territories to protect the mother country. All control of the system is in the hands of the Americans. The Pentagon will decide who and when to defend. The population of Europe and the Asia-Pacific region is becoming hostage to the unpredictable actions of the United States in the field of missile defense.

The General Staff (General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces) is the unit commanding the troops of the Russian Federation. He also plans actions to protect the country from external invasion, establishes a hierarchy military units and performs other duties that are prescribed for this body by the Council of the Ministry of Defense.

The General Staff of the RF Armed Forces is a federal body and reports directly to the Ministry of Defense. The main task of the unit is considered to be the protection of state borders and intelligence activities.

History of the creation and reforms of the headquarters

The Ministry of Defense arose a year after the collapse of the USSR. It used the standards and part of the resources of the USSR Ministry of Defense. By decree of the Ministry, the General Staff was formed. However, the day of the formation of the modern General Staff is not celebrated as a holiday.

The official holiday of the General Staff employees is associated with an event from ancient history, when Catherine II founded the first General Staff in Russia on January 14 (old style), 1763. By order of the Minister of Defense dated January 30, 2002, this day is celebrated on January 25 annually.

In 2004, a reform was carried out within the ministry, as a result of which functions (administrative, economic) that did not correspond to its tasks were removed from the General Staff.

The military conflict with Georgia in 2008 accelerated the reform of the Russian Armed Forces, its goal was to optimize management. As part of the reform, two basic sets of tasks within the ministry were identified:

Planning for the use and construction of aircraft.
Economic and strategic calculations for providing military units.

A clear distinction was made between the administrative responsibilities of the General Staff units:

Training activities and training of fighters are the responsibility of the main command of the troops.
Operational work is the prerogative of the General Staff and the joint strategic commands.

The reform made it possible to rid the General Staff of secondary functions that were performed by other bodies. The General Staff became an exclusively strategic body aimed at solving military problems. A striking example of such a task is.

The Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces acts as Deputy Chief of the Ministry of Defense. Since 2012, the position of Chief Staff of the RF Armed Forces has been occupied by V.V. Gerasimov. This is the eighth chief since the formation of the modern General Staff. The NGSH has a deputy appointed in 2014 - N.V. Bogdanovsky.

Structure and tasks

After the reform, the headquarters was left with 12 tasks. The range of functions clarified as a result of the reforms can be briefly formulated as follows:

aircraft use planning;
organization of training of military forces;
management of the creation of divisions;
ensuring regular inspection and training campaigns;
mobilization of troops;
analysis of the situation in conscript army units, ensuring security in these units;
intelligence activities;
ensuring communications between different branches of the military;
coordination of the use of radio communications;
creation of radio and electronic obstacles in a situation of active hostilities;
training of personnel with the function of protecting state secrets;
conducting scientific research with a military focus (creation of research institutes and financing of military scientific projects).

All functions lie in 14 departments, which include centers, departments and services. There are four main departments:

The main thing is operational;
2 Main;
The main thing about mobilization;
The main thing is communication.

There are also lower-level departments with practical tasks:

counter-electronic communications department;
military topography;
eighth division;
operational and preparatory;
construction and development of UAVs.

The Eighth Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces is a unit for collecting information for the Ministry of Defense necessary to solve current problems of managing the country's Armed Forces.

It is interesting that the 8th Directorate of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces has its own insignia “For Merit”, which is awarded to the personnel of this unit for reasonable initiative, diligence and excellent service. Persons involved who assisted the work of the department are also awarded; these can be military figures from other structures or civilians.

The headquarters system includes a research center, the National Defense Center, an operational (special) unit, a personal archive, and an automobile and motorcycle base.

GOU, tasks and command

The Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces plans operations at various levels. In 2013 V.V. Putin approved a system for the defense of our state, including a complete set of documents on the defense of the Russian Federation. The GOU was given the task of developing documentation support for the defense program, ensuring the organization of units and mobilizing troops in the event of a military threat.

Other tasks of the State Educational Institution:

search for military risk factors for the state (including collection and analysis of intelligence information);
military construction planning;
development of strategic and operational plans for the use of armed forces;
management of operational departments at any time (military and peaceful);
ensuring communications for the army and federal agencies;
anti-terrorism activities, including monitoring their implementation and providing support;
verification of the preparatory activities of the Russian Federation;
ensuring international military cooperation
initiatives under the State Armament program (military development of weapons and equipment).

After the collapse of the USSR, nine department heads were replaced. The current head of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces is S.F. Rudskoy, who has held the position since February 2017.

VAGS of the Russian military forces

The structure of the General Staff includes the Military Academy. This educational institution intended for personnel training and retraining of officers. VAGS trains specialists to provide defensive military units. Academy graduates receive positions in the Ministry of Defense, the General Staff, intelligence, and secret units.