Disscusion: Political Commissars

[vadjimivanov]

I wish to incorporate a new category in the Colish Soviet Army, Fleet and Airforce:
The Pollitical Commissar. Why How And who
Why: That the red commander follows the policy of the party and the state. Good example is what happens with The Red Antilles Army. One person startted a war and a coalition without the knowing of the Antillian Soviet. When I brought it to attention they didn't believe their eyes. Isn't this just a game...No I replied this is serious and we are losing ground.
Another reason is to keep the army active and professional. Because both lead their army. Although the Red Commander decides on the execution of the strategy (tactics) and the political commissar decides on the exectution of the political line set by the party and the state.
How: for every red commander or soldier we appoint a political commissar. Now there are different Political commissars: the lowest is the Political Instructor appointed to red commanders in small formations ( anything smaller than a battalion), the higher commissars are called 'military formation' Commissar. From Battalion Commissar till Army Commissar.
Who: The General-Secretary or some one who is charged to appoints from its partymembers a commissar.

I sugest we discuss this in the party before I suggest this in our Supreme Soviet

[Vladimir Vova Ochiuriushka]

A very interesting idea. If this proposal were to go forward, however, I think it would be imperative to ensure that any Political Commissar that is appointed has a good knowledge of military strategy. Even though as you say it is the Red Commander's decision on military strategy, we do not want them advising in an adverse way, such as was experienced in the Red Army during WW2 as Commissars ensured their will was carried out even though it had no military stategy backing it. This is an important point I feel, however aside from that I am happy with this idea.

[vadjimivanov]

This is what I found from in a book called "Another view on Stalin" by Ludo Martens.

In July 1942, Rokossovsky, who had led with much success an army up to then, was named commander of the Briansk Front by Stalin. He was unsure of whether he was competent. He was warmly received by Stalin, who explained the position. Rokossovsky described the end of the interview.

`When I had finished and was about to leave, Stalin said, ``Don't go yet.''

`He phoned Poskryobyshev and asked him to call in a general just removed from the command at the Front. The following dialogue took place:

` ``You say that we have punished you wrongly?''

` ``Yes, because the GHQ representative kept getting in my way.''

` ``How?''

` ``He interfered with my orders, held conferences when it was necessary to act, gave contradictory instructions... In general he tried to override the commander.''

` ``So he got in your way. But you were in command of the Front?''

` ``Yes.''

` ``The Party and the Government entrusted the Front to you... Did you have a telephone?''

` ``Yes.''

` ``Then why didn't you report that he was getting in your way?''

` ``I didn't dare complain about your representative.''

` ``Well, that is what we have punished you for: not daring to pick up the receiver and phone up, as a result of which you failed to carry out the operation.''

`I walked out of the Supreme Commander's office with the thought that, as a new-fledged Front Commander, I had just been taught an object lesson. Believe me, I made the most of it.'

.

Rokossovsky, op. cit. , pp. 118--119.

-------------------------

Communication is the key to avoid such things...If we encounter that one person overrides the other then we must act. Now that I think of who is we? How is the Soviet Army planned in Col?