2585 replies · 37506 views

Recently finished the Geralt-Witcher Saga. Prior to this I finished the powerful and devastating book, Count of Monte Cristo. 6 Tolkien books. now halfway through GOT book 1.
Did Witcher 3 100% back in 2015-2016 (over 150 hrs)
In between, finished all 8 novels on audiobook (130 hrs)
And recently, did Witcher 1, 2, 3 in a row. W1 (50 hrs) W2 (40 hrs) W3 (over 150 hrs) and the mod expansion Farewell of the White Wolf (over 7 hrs).
This is officially my favorite thing in fiction, I can't imagine anything else surpassing it or having more impact on me personally.
I'd be surprised if anything matches it in the future.

Unfinished Tales will be my last Tolkien book before I watch Rings of Power.
IMHO Tolkien's contribution is mainly in establishing history, world building, character types, and story structure. The weakness of his writing is mainly in establishing memorable and deep characters outside of LOTR.
GOT/GRRM, Vikings show, etc. really blow it out of the water in terms of deep characters with CDPR/Sapkowski being the best.


Walking 1:30, 1:40 in the park really clears the mind better than shorter walks.


7:20, true insights on the appeal of fiction. "vicarious, peak experience":

| Baltic | 336th Guards Bialystok Brigade | Baltiysk |
| Pacific | 155th brigade | Vladivostok |
| 40th Krasnodar-Harbin brigade | Kamchatka | |
| Black Sea | 810th brigade | Sevastopol |
| North | 61st Kirkenes brigade | Sputnik |
| separate unit | Murmansk region | |
| separate unit | Arkhangelsk region | |
| Caspian Flotilla | battalion, 177th regiment | Kaspiysk |
| battalion, 177th regiment | Astrakhan | |
| Arctic | separate unit | Novaya Zemlya archipelago |
| separate unit | Novosibirsk Islands | |
| separate unit | Wrangel Island | |
| separate unit | Cape Schmidt |
Coastal troops moved to the organizational structure of army corps: three formations were formed in the North (SF), the Baltic (BF) and the Black Sea Fleet (BSF). This was reported 24 May 2017 by the Russian Federation General of the Army, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu at the "government hour" in the Federation Council. "In order to improve management of coastal defense troops are moving to the organizational structure of the army corps has already formed three army corps -. In the North, Baltic and Black Sea fleets," - said Shoigu. According to him, currently equipping the fleet with modern weapons and equipment is 47%. "The same results were achieved in the Airborne Troops only during the last year they received 188 new and upgraded armored vehicles.", - the Minister of Defense said.
In 2019, all marines were equipped with new amphibious armored personnel carriers BTR-82A (they replaced the outdated BTR-80, which had been in service for more than 30 years), and the troops received more than 100 units of military and special equipment. It differs from the previous vehicle - BTR-80 - with increased survivability. The BTR-82A is equipped with a new radio station, the TRONA-1 topographic orientation system with autonomous and satellite channels for receiving navigation information and a combined commander's observation device. The firepower has been increased due to the installation of a unified combat module with electric drives and a two-plane weapon stabilizer.
In parallel with the updating of the equipment, by 2020 it was planned that the brigade of the marines would receive a new staffing table. It would have six battalions. There were two of them in the formations: air assault and marine corps, plus a reconnaissance company and a number of smaller units. There will be another reconnaissance, one tank and two battalions of the marine corps. Tank units will increase both the firing and maneuverability of the Black Berets, which will allow for large-scale combat operations away from their native shores.
In addition, all brigades will be strengthened by two companies - sniper and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The replenishment of the Marine Corps units with unmanned aerial vehicles with the ability to conduct reconnaissance at a distance of up to 150 km, new parachute systems, communication and control equipment. It is expected that as part of the reform, separate tank battalions will be included in all marine brigades. In the future, marines can get their own aviation units.
Starting in 2020, future Marine officers returned to their five-year training term, and their disciplines have been adjusted. The changes are due to the reform of this type of troops. The Black Berets can now be used not only to protect the Russian coast and conduct local landing operations, but also as expeditionary forces that are capable of performing tasks anywhere in the world. Which, in turn, requires not only a change in combat manuals, but also special skills of military personnel. An additional year of training is needed to acquire specific skills - during actions in local conflicts, the evacuation of Russian citizens and several others.
The naval infantry force employed normally would be a battalion, company, or platoon. The Naval Infantry can be expanded quickly in wartime by mobilizing trained reservists and reserve equipment. The Naval Infantry is organized into units which are subordinate operationally to fleet commanders. The organization of naval infantry units is similar to that of motorized rifle units.
The Navy's coastal rocket and artillery troops consist of regiments and independent battalions. They are equipped with both stationary and mobile rocket launchers and with artillery weapons. Their task is to cover the approaches to principal naval bases and ports.
Towards the end of the Cold War, each Fleet had Marine Infantry contingents, consisting of regiments and brigades. In their organisation, these regiments are similar to the motor-rifle regiments of the Land Forces. They differ from the latter in receiving special training for operating in varying conditions and also in being allocated personnel of a higher calibre. Generals from the Land Forces who watched exercises carried out by the marine infantry often said with some envy, that a regiment of marine infantry, with the same equipment as that issued to the Land Forces, was the equivalent in its operational potential of one of the latter's motor-rifle divisions.
The Soviet Navy had only one brigade of marine infantry. This belonged to the Pacific Fleet. It consisted of two tank and five motor-rifle battalions and is equipped with especially heavy artillery. This brigade was sometimes mistakenly taken for two independent regiments of marine infantry.
A Naval Infantry Regiment, equipped with the PT-76 and BRDM-2, consisted of 1 Tank Battalion and 3 Naval Infantry Battalions. A Naval Infantry Brigade, equipped with the PT-76 or T-80 and BRDM-2, consisted of 2 Tank Battalions, and 4 to 5 Naval Infantry Battalions. A Tank Battalion had 9 PT-76 or 6 PT-76 plus 3 MBT. A Naval Infantry Battalion had 9 BTR-60/706, 9 Infantry, 1 120mm Mortar w //truck, 1 AT-4 stand w //BTR. At least one infantry battalion was parachute trained, while all of the remaining infantry battalions were trained to be able to carry out air assault missions. In the 1990s Russian naval infantry no longer used PT-76 amphibious tanks, but had not yet received a large number of T-80s. A full-strength Naval Infantry Brigade may have up to 70-80 MBTs. APCs are BTR-80s (in Assault Landing Battalions) or MT-LBs (in Naval Infantry Battalions). While the Naval Infantry was supposed to receive BMP-3 IFVs, few had been delivered, and it was far from certain such re-arming will take place. BMP-3s may equip one company per battalion.
The shortcomings of the BTR-80 and BTR-82A, which were in service with the Russian "black berets," regularly led to losses of equipment during the exercises. The military record of Kazakhstan was set at the Center-2015 exercises on the Caspian Sea. In windy weather, of the six BTR-80 landed from the ship, only two reached the shore. In the sunken fighting vehicles killed four conscript soldiers. There are emergency situations with armored personnel carriers in the Russian army. Only in 2019, one BTR-80 drowned near Kaliningrad, and a communication vehicle based on it - in Primorye. In the incidents, one soldier was killed.
Naval Infantry / Coastal Defense Divisions. During the Conventional Forces in Europe [CFE] negotiations the Soviets converted three motorized rifle divisions into “coastal defense” units and claimed that equipment deployed with such naval infantry divisions was not covered by the CFE treaty. The Soviet Union gave in on the three "naval infantry" divisions, and the United States gave in on the armored personnel carriers associated with the Strategic Rocket Forces. As for the coastal defense, its armored personnel carriers were to be converted to Light Armored Vehicles and not counted against the CFE limits.
The Soviet High Command was insistent on the legitimacy of resubordinating the three motorized rifle divisions to the naval infantry and the coastal defense forces. This position alone meant that on February 14, 1991, the date when the Soviet Union submitted its updated data, the CFE Treaty was at an impasse. Some believed that the Soviet High Command wanted to stop the CFE Treaty ratification process cold and substitute for the treaty a "status-quo" military relationship of the Soviet Union with Central and Western European nations. If this were true, the Soviet military's vision proved to be shortsighted in view of subsequent events.
Then in late May 1991 a breakthrough occurred. President Gorbachev sent General Moiseyev to Washington for a two-day meeting with the president, senior military leaders, and treaty negotiators. He brought with him new proposals. General Moiseyev stated the Soviet Union's final position: all equipment in the Soviet naval infantry and coastal defense forces would remain in their units, but they would be counted against the USSR's overall CFE Treaty ceilings.
Specifically, the Soviets pledged to destroy or convert 933 tanks, 1,725 ACVs, and 1,080 artillery pieces. They would reduce one-half of the 933 tanks and 1,080 artillery pieces from forces within the ATTU and the other half from forces east of the Urals. The Soviets also stated that they would modify 753 of the 1,725 ACVs to become MTLB-AT types. These were "look-alikes" and thus, not limited by the treaty.
The Statement by the Government of the Union Of Soviet Socialist Republics in Vienna, 14 June 1991, explained that "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics shall hold within the area of application of the Treaty conventional armaments and equipment in the Treatylimited categories not to exceed: in Coastal Defense forces 813 battle tanks, 972 armored combat vehicles and 846 pieces of artillery; in Naval Infantry 120 battle tanks, 753 armored combat vehicles and 234 pieces of artillery; in the Strategic Rocket Forces 1,701 armored combat vehicles, each being an armored personnel carrier as that term is defined in the Treaty.
"The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics shall reduce, in addition to the reduction liability established for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics under the Treaty on the basis of information it supplied, its holdings of conventional armaments and equipment in the Treaty limited categories within the area of application of the Treaty by the number which it had as of the date of the signature of the Treaty in Coastal Defense forces and Naval Infantry, that is, by 933 battle tanks, 1,725 armored combat vehicles, and 1,080 pieces of artillery.
"Fifty percent of 933 battle tanks and 972 armored combat vehicles shall be destroyed or converted within the area of application of the Treaty and 50 percent of 1,080 pieces of artillery shall be destroyed within the area of application of the Treaty, within the time limits and in accordance with procedures established by the Treaty. The remainder of these conventional armaments and equipment shall be withdrawn from the area of application of the Treaty; an equivalent number of conventional armaments and equipment shall be destroyed or converted outside of the area of application of the Treaty within the time limits established by the Treaty ..."
In August 1994, the 332nd Separate Marine Battalion was formed within the Caspian Flotilla (renamed in 1998 into the 600th Guards), and in 1999 - the 414th Separate Marine Battalion. In September 2000, the 77th Independent Guards Moscow-Chernigov Order of Lenin, the Red Banner Order of the Suvorov Brigade of the Marine Corps was deployed on their base. In 1995, as part of the Novorossiysk naval base, the 382nd Separate Marine Battalion of the Black Sea Fleet was formed. In 1996, the Marine Corps Training Center in the Black Sea Fleet was disbanded and transferred to the Baltic Fleet.
Naval Infantry Regiment. The naval infantry regiment consists of three naval infantry battalions, a tank battalion, and several specialized support companies. It has a strength of about 2,000 men. Its organization is similar to the motorized rifle regiment except that the tank battalion has a mix of medium tanks and PT-76 amphibious light tanks. the naval infantry regiment does not have an organic artillery battalion, but does have a multiple rocket launcher battery. It also receives artillery support from the naval gunfire ships of the amphibious task force.
Naval Infantry Battalion. The basic unit of the naval infantry regiment is the naval infantry battalion. The battalion is made up of three naval infantry companies, a mortar platoon, an antitank platoon, and supporting supply and maintenance, medical, and communications units. In all, the battalion numbers about 400 men. This unit, reinforced, constitutes the basic amphibious attack force in the assault landing-the battalion assault force (BAF).
Naval Infantry Company. The naval infantry company is made up of a small company headquarters and three naval infantry platoons. The company headquarters consists of the company commander, political officer, technical officer. first sergeant, messenger/clerk, medic, three SA-7 gunners, and the driver and gunner of their BTR-60 armored personnel carrier. Each platoon consists of three squads of ten men each. Each squad consists of the squad leader, a machine gunner, an RPG gunner, an assistant RPG gunner/rifleman, four riflemen, the APC machine gunner, and the APC driver.
Tank Battalion. The naval infantry tank battalion has a mix of PT-76 light amphibious tanks and medium tanks. Each of the tank companies has three platoons of four tanks each with the company commander's tank bringing the total to 13 tanks. While the medium tanks are not amphibious, they can disembark in shallow water as a follow-on landing force behind the PT-76 and BTR-60 first or second wave. In task organizing a landing force, one platoon of tanks normally supports a naval infantry company.
Reconnaissance Company. The reconnaissance company may be task organized to provide a platoon of at least one PT-76 and three BRDMs to the battalion assault force for the amphibious landing. The Soviets consider this platoon to be one of their amphibious assault advance teams. These teams also include combat engineers and hydrographic personnel who report beach conditions. In certain instances, reconnaissance vehicles may swim to shore under their own power. Conditions permitting, they may he landed by air cushion vehicles. Some reconnaissance teams also may be air-landed by helicopter or dropped by parachute behind defended positions. The reconnaissance platoon has two objectives: To provide information to the main landing force about enemy defensive positions and enemy reinforcements on the march toward the beach. To screen forward and to the flank of the amphibious landing teams.
Multiple Rocket Launcher Battery. With the exception of the three mortars organic to each naval infantry battalion, the regiment's six BM-21 multiple rocket launchers constitute the sole organic artillery assets of the naval infantry regiment. BM-21s provide fire support for amphibious landings and also may be used by the naval infantry in a coastal defense role. Each launcher can deliver considerable firepower with its forty 122-mmhigh-explosive rockets.
Antitank Battery. The naval infantry regiment's six BRDMs of its antitank battery are formidable antitank weapon systems. These weapons augment the man-pack antitank guided missiles (ATGMs) and SPG-9 recoilless guns employed at battalion level and generally constitute the regimental antitank reserve. The ATGM / BRDMs normally are employed to protect the flanks of the landing force from counter attacking tanks and against enemy weapons emplacements.
Air Defense Battery. Besides the three SA-7s at infantry battalion headquarters, air defense is provided to regimental units by the four ZSU-23-4 self-propelled antiaircraft guns and four amphibious SA-9 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) of the air defense battery. Supporting naval ships provide air defense throughout all phases of the landing operation.
Engineer Company. The engineer company contains three combat engineer platoons. Normally, a combat engineer platoon is provided to support each battalion assault force. It clears obstacles and mine-fields along the approaches to the shore, on the beaches, and on routes leading inland from the beaches.
Signal Company. The signal company of the naval infantry regiment consists of a headquarters and service section, a radio platoon, and a wire/telephone platoon. The headquarters and service section provides courier service and limited signal and vehicle maintenance support for the company The radio platoon provides vehicles, radios, and operators for the regimental commander and staff. The wire/telephone platoon installs and operates switchboards for command posts and the message center, and lays wire when directed.
Chemical Defense Company. The regimental chemical defense company consists of a company headquarters, a decontamination platoon, and a chemical and radiological reconnaissance platoon. The decontamination platoon is organized into three squads with one ARS decontamination vehicle each. The chemical and radiological reconnaissance platoon consists of three squads with one BRDM in each squad. The chemical defense company of the regiment normally provides one reconnaissance squad to the battalion assault force to determine and report levels and types of contamination in the landing area and to mark cleared lanes for advance of the main force. If the regiment is not conducting similar landings elsewhere, the remaining two reconnaissance squads also can be employed to check alternate advance routes. Decontamination vehicles normally set up on the far side of the contaminated areas to spray the advancing naval infantry vehicles on the march. One or more squads can be employed, depending on regimental requirements.
Rear Service Units. Rear service units (transportation, supply, maintenance, and medical) are small in keeping with the limited scope and duration of mission assigned to naval infantry. Principal supply is from the ships offshore. Service units may provide platoon-sized units to support battalion assault forces. Casualties are evacuated in returning empty supply trucks and other service vehicles.
NAVAL INFANTRY COMBAT FORMATIONS
NAVAL INFANTRY SUPPORT UNITS
NAVAL INFANTRY COMBAT UNIT TO&E
1 A Naval Infantry Regiment is very similar to a BTR Regiment of a Motorized Rifle Division, while a Naval Infantry Brigade has two additional infantry battalions, one additional tank battalion, and Rocket Launcher Battalion.
2 A Naval Infantry Regiment has 1 Artillery Battalion. A Naval Infantry Brigade also has a Battalion of BM-21Rocket Launchers (3 Batteries, each 1 BM-21)
3 There is only one AA Battery per Naval Infantry Regt or Brigade
4 In the Tank Battalion, the MBT Company is either a T-55 or a T-72. If the T-55 company is present, one tank is equipped as a flamethrower.
5 At least one infantry battalion is parachute trained, while all of the remaining infantry battalions are trained to be able to carry out air assault missions.
6 The Soviet Naval Infantry had not yet been equipped with the BTR-80.

The Motorized Rifle Troops have been mechanized infantry since 1957.
The Soviet Union fielded a new model of armored personnel carrier (APC) every decade since the late 1950s, and in 1967 it deployed the world's first infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). Similar to an APC, the tactically innovative IFV had much greater firepower, in the form of a 73mm main gun, an antitank missile launcher, a heavy machine gun, and firing ports that allowed troops to fire their individual weapons from inside the vehicle. In 1989 the Soviet Union had an inventory of over 65,000 APCs and IFVs, with the latter accounting for almost half of this inventory.
The German and Soviet battle for Stalingrad in late 1942 and into early 1943 illustrates how a tactical urban area defense integrates into a larger mobile defense. An encirclement requires an initial penetration of the enemy defense, exploitation of success, and subsequent link up of the exploitation forces to complete the circle. The Soviets set the conditions for a mobile defense by positioning powerful Soviet armor forces in open terrain outside the urban area against quantitatively inferior German allied forces. In OPERATION URANUS, the mobile defense's strike force destroyed the enemy outside the urban area and trapped the greater part of the best enemy formations inside the urban area. In Operation URANUS the Red Army relied heavily upon its tank forces. However, it is significant that URANUS saw the first employment of the new mechanized corps, containing three mechanized brigades and a tank brigade. This represented a more balanced approach to the force structure, and one that exhibited a better distribution of mechanized infantry able to operate effectively with armor.
Armored personnel carriers or infantry fighting vehicles are either tracked or wheeled vehicles that are designed to transport soldiers to the battlefield and support them with a range of weaponry including heavy machine guns, guns, and anti rockets. They differ significantly in design from "armored cars". During World War II, "half-track" vehicles were widely used. However, by the late 1960's, half-track vehicles became obsolete and were replaced by more efficiently designed tracked and road-wheel type vehicles.
After World War II, the Soviet Union began to mechanize their entire army. Infantry began to ride in armored personnel carriers. The first carrier was a six-wheeled armored truck that entered service in 1950. It was open-topped, lightly armored, sluggish, and had limited cross-country mobility. The BTR-152A eventually carried dual-mounted 14.5mm heavy machine guns - though more for antiaircraft fire than for tank support. Production of the BTR-152 series ceased in 1959.
In 1959, the Soviets decided to develop two types of infantry personnel carriers: tracked infantry fighting vehicles that would serve in tank divisions and cheaper wheeled armored infantry personnel carriers that would serve in the more numerous motorized rifle divisions. The tracked chassis of the BMP offered better mobility and a better chance to keep up with the tanks. However, the tracked vehicles were more expensive to produce, operate, and maintain.
The BMP was designed to serve as more than a mere battle taxi. Its armor protected the crew and infantry from bullets and radiation and its armaments and firing ports effectively without dismounting the infantry squad. The BMP allowed the tanks and mechanized infantry to function as a mutually supporting team. There were three main types of Soviet BMP produced between 1966 and 1991. The basic BMP-1 is armed with a 73mm low-pressure cannon, an AT-3 Sagger antitank guided missile launch rail, and a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun. It has a one-man turret and all weapons can be reloaded from inside the vehicle. The BMP-2 entered service in 1980. The basic model has a two-man turret and is armed with a 30mm automatic cannon, a 7.62-mm coaxial machine gun, and a launch rail for either the AT-4 Spigot or AT-5 Spandrel antitank missiles. The BMP-3 entered service in 1987 and has a 30mm automatic cannon, a 100mm cannon, a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun, and two 7.62mm bow-mounted machine guns. The BMP-2 and BMP-3 have a significant antiaircraft capability against helicopters and low-flying, fixed-wing aircraft.
After the Soviet tank divisions were equipped with the BMP, the Soviets examined the composition of their motorized rifle divisions. The wheeled BTR infantry personnel carriers were lightly armored and only carried a 14.5mm heavy machine gun. Clearly, they were not the optimum vehicles to fight in coordination with tanks, and each motorized rifle division had a regiment of tanks. To upgrade the capability of the motorized rifle division, each division was re-equipped so that one of the three motorized rifle regiments had BMPs in lieu of BTRs. The tanks and BMPs always fought together on the main attack. Self-propelled artillery and self-propelled antiaircraft weapons, such as the ZSU 23-4, accompanied the tanks and BMPs to provide a lethal, integrated combat team where each system provided mutual support.
Lightly armored vehicles (LAVs) are intended for a wide range of combat missions and engagement of a variety of targets. Along with a necessity to transport the assault landing groups and weight limitations, this determines specific requirements to the armament. However, a wide variety of missions can not be accomplished by a single weapon type. This accounts for equipping the LAVs with complex armament: 20-30 mm cannons and guided weapon systems (Russian BMP-2 and Bradley, USA).
Being a developer of weapon systems for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3, KBP is a world leading company in the sphere of LAVs armament, offering various in terms of weight and weapon composition combat modules based on a uniform day-night fire control system. The automatic fire control system ensures high-precision day and night firing with all types of ammunition, including the newly developed ones, both from stationary position, and on the move. Further development of BMP-3 product line resulted in the "Bakcha" combat module created by KBP and weighing 3.2-4.0 tons, designed for installation on the 13 tons or heavier vehicles (BMP-3, BMD-3). The combat module is equipped with satellite navigation system, allowing for firing from indirect firing positions.
The guided missile of increased lethality with tandem warhead and firing range up to 5.5 km effectively engages armored and soft-skinned ground and low-altitude targets. The 100 mm HEF projectiles of increased lethality with precise ballistics successively engage personnel armed with anti-tank weapons, as well as materiel and fortifications by direct and indirect firing from the range up to 7.0 km. The 30-mm automatic gun ammunition can effectively engage lightly armored and soft-skinned vehicles, air targets. Due to such composition of the weapon system the motorised infantry and landing troops can act in combat missions without employing artillery and tanks.
The combination of gun projectiles' flat trajectory and lofted trajectory of grenade launcher serves for successful engagement of personnel armed with anti-tank weapons, soft-skinned vehicles. Armored targets are engaged with a single launch of Kornet-E ATGM within the range up to 5.5 km.

The Russian Airborne Troops or VDV (from "Vozdushno-Desantnye Voiska", Air-landing Forces)
is a military branch of service of the Russian Military, on par with the Strategic Rocket Forces and the Russian Space Forces. The word desánt, as used in the Vozdushno-Desantnye Vojska, is a borrowing of the French descente (‘debarkation’ or ‘landing’). The airborne, air-assault, and amphibious troops of all services are referred to as desantniki, which literally means ‘those who land’.
In every respect, the VDV’s institutional power exceeded that of any foreign airborne force and compared favorably with the Marines’ status in the United States. By the end of the Cold War, there were thirteen formations in the world that can be called airborne divisions. The U.S., West Germany, France, China and Poland each had one. The remaining eight belonged to the Soviet Union. at the end of World War II, outstanding American successes in airborne assaults had been accomplished by a mere five airborne divisions, which were soon whittle down to on [the 82nd, the 101st being "airmobile" with helicopters]. By 2015, with four airborne divisions and many separate brigades, Russia retained a larger force than the rest of the world combined [a similar claim may be made for the US Marine Corps].
Of all great powers, the Soviet Union’s record of airborne operations during the Great Patriotic War was so disastrous that rational calculations should have led the High Command to abolish airborne forces. Having begun the Second World War with the world’s largest (10 divisions) airborne force, Soviet generals naturally expected paratroopers to contribute substantially to Red Army operations. However, Soviet airborne operations were particularly unsuccessful. All of the Soviet Union’s three large-scale operations failed catastrophically and the vast majority (75 percent) of participating paratroopers were either killed or wounded.
The Airborne Forces, the highly mobile Arm of the RF Armed Forces, are designed to cover the enemy in the air and conduct combat operations in its rear. The Russian Airborne Forces are the means of the Supreme High Command of the RF Armed Forces and may form the basis for mobile forces. The Airborne Forces report directly to the Commander of the Airborne Forces and consist of the airborne divisions, brigades, units and facilities.
Because of the critical role that pre-war planners hoped paratroops would play, they endowed airborne forces with a special airborne administration, the Vozdushno-Desantnaya Voyska. In an effort to find solutions to the problems of employment, the Soviets switched control of the airborne forces from one command organization to another and increased the available firepower. In 1946, command of the airborne was switched from the Air Forces to the Ministry of Defense, in 1956 to the Soviet Ground Forces, and finally in 1964, back to the Ministry of Defense. Subordinated directly to the Soviet High Command, the VDV enjoyed the status of a separate service, rather than a mere branch of the army or air force.
In the early 1960's airborne units began to practice moving into areas that had just been hit (simulated) by nuclear weapons. The Soviets considered airborne landing forces the sole means for taking immediate advantage of results obtained with nuclear strikes against an enemy.
Marc R. DeVore argues that "Unable to airdrop more than a single division and probably incapable of penetrating NATO airspace, Soviet airborne operations were even less feasible in the 1980s than they had been prior to the VDV’s creation of mechanized airborne divisions. In fact, the VDV’s flair for innovation only solved the narrow problem of giving airborne forces more firepower, but ignored the broader issue of whether mass paratroop combat drops were even possible in high-intensity wars. In this context, the institutional autonomy accorded the VDV produced a sort of bounded rationality whereby the strength and inventiveness of airborne forces was maximized, but the transcendent question of what role these forces would play lay unexamined. As a failed innovation, airborne forces not only soldiered on, but innovatively pursued their organizational essence at great cost to the Soviet Union and the rest of its armed forces."
The mission of the Airborne Assault Troops is to make possible a quick response to national emergencies. The airborne troops are considered an elite force because they are individually selected from volunteers based on physical fitness, intelligence, and loyalty. By traditional military standards, the airborne troops are not a powerful force. Each division is assigned about 6,000 lightly armed troops with lightly armored vehicles. Their value is that they have special training and have operational and strategic mobility provided by long-range aircraft. Their parachute assault capability means that they can be deployed anywhere within airlift range in a matter of hours without the need for an air base in friendly hands. However, resupply and support by heavy ground troop formations are necessary in a matter of days because the airborne troops lack the self-sustaining combat and logistical power of regular ground forces.
As of 1995 the core goal of the Russian Army was to establish a mobile force with two main elements: the Immediate Reaction Force and the Rapid Deployment Force. The Immediate Reaction Force was composed of mostly the VDV. In contrast, the Rapid Deployment Forces were the heavy portion, based on tanks, motorized rifle, and heavy artillery.
During the Cold War each Soviet Airborne Division normally comprised nearly 8500 men, including artillery and combat support elements. Since 1930, the Soviet Army maintained the world's largest airborne force. As of 1980 the USSR was believed to have eight active-duty airborne divisions. Today's Russian airborne is still the world's largest. As of 2003, the Russian Army had four airborne divisions, and three independent airborne brigades. Each division is assigned about 6,000 lightly armed troops with lightly armored vehicles. Their value is operational and strategic mobility provided by long-range aircraft in a matter of hours.
The Soviet Union was the first state to constitute airborne forces, the first to drop airborne forces into battle, the first to include a major airborne drop in a major field exercise, and the first to totally mechanize its airborne forces. Yet, when Westerners think of the great airborne operations of history, they think of the German drops on Crete and Fort Eban Emael, the Anglo-American drops at Normandy and Eindhoeven-Nijmegan-Arnhem and the American drop at Corregidor. The large Soviet airborne operations are largely unknown or ignored in the West.
While problem areas in training and support of airborne units did exist, the Soviet Union possessed a considerable potential to employ airborne forces in a variety of missions. Soviet military doctrine stressed the primacy of offensive operations aimed at stunning and preventing organized resistance by opponents. While the offensive role of Soviet airborne forces was of paramount importance, defensive antiarmor operations and associated problems in forces training and employment remained issues of continued close interest and concern.
The Blue Berets of the airborne played a political role of praetorian guards and imperial storm troopers as they squashed rebellions in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, invaded and fought for ten years in Afghanistan and then returned home to counter the civil turmoil unleashed by Gorbachev's perestroika. In Afghanistan in 1979, as in Czechoslovakia in 1968, the Soviets used the surprise landing of airborne units at strategic centers, particularly around the capital, in conjunction with the speedy movement of ground units along strategic routes toward vital centers to gain the initiative.
The airborne's political role of praetorian guards and imperial storm troopers evolved as they squashed rebellions in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, invaded and fought for ten years in Afghanistan and then returned home to counter the civil turmoil unleashed by Gorbachev's perestroika.
The VDV participated in the rapid deployment of Russian forces stationed in Bosnian city Ugljevik, in and around Pristina airport during the Kosovo War. Streaming into Kosovo's capital, NATO found itself face-to-face with the Russian troops. American officials did, for their own reasons, publicly downplayed the significance of the confrontation, but it is impossible to deny that, this event points dramatically to an exacerbation of tensions between the major powers. About 370 Russian paratroopers in BTR-80 armored personnel carriers prevented the US from seizing control of Kosovo's key airport.
When the motherland calls, the VDV answers! VDV units were some of the first elements of the Russian retaliation in South Ossetia against Georgia In August 2008, the VDV troops participated in an operation to force Georgia to peace, acting in the Ossetian and Abkhazian directions. In particular, the two VDV divisions- 98th Ivanovo Guards Airborne Division, which in May of the same year was named the best in the winter training period, and the 31-th separate Ulyanovsk Guards Air Assault Brigade, which is part of the collective forces of operative response of the Collective Security Treaty (CSTO CFOR), were brought to the operation on the border with Georgia. The 76th "Chernigov" Airborne, and 98th "Ivanovo" Airborne division's took place in the liberation of Tskhinvalli and eventually pushed into Georgia itself, defeating every line of opposition until Georgia finally surrendered days later.
The troops retain the status of a reserve of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. Generally, their mission is to protect the interests of Russia and lives of its citizens both within and outside the country. The airborne troops fulfill their objectives under combined strategic command both independently and as part of ground force formations. These missions include: covering flanks and gaps in ground offensives, fighting tactical enemy landing parties, landing its own parties behind enemy lines and on the flanks, and discharging any tasks calling for high mobility and speed of deployment, particularly in local conflicts.
The Airborne Troops is a combat arm in the Armed Forces, subordinated to the Supreme Command. Their task is to envelop the enemy in the air and to conduct missions behind enemy lines aimed at disrupting command and control functions, seizing and destroying ground-based precision weapons, disrupting the advance and deployment of enemy reserves, and disrupting enemy logistics and communications, to provide cover for assigned areas and open flanks, to block and destroy landed airborne assault forces and enemy forces which have passed through friendly defense, and to perform other tasks. In peacetime, the Airborne Troops perform missions aimed at maintaining the combat and mobilization readiness at the level necessary for the successful fulfillment of their tasks.
The Airborne Troops are considered the most capable mobile assault forces in Russia. Various estimates put the personnel at about 48,000 troops as of 2009, deployed in four divisions and a brigade. The airborne troops numbered 35,000 men in 2010. In the course of the reform, the officer corps was trimmed by 40%, with 4,000 serving officers left, of whom 400 held sergeant posts due to a shortage of regular sergeants and to cuts in officers' posts.
According to Russia's military reform plans as of 2007, the Airborne Troops were to be fully manned with professional soldiers by 2011. "Priority tasks for the development of the Russian Airborne Troops include the improvement of their combat potential, upgrading of the current arsenal to advanced weaponry, and the introduction of automated battlefield command-and-control systems," defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov said at a meeting with senior Airborne Troops staff on 22 March 2007.
As of 2009, according to Russia's military reform plans, the Airborne Troops were to be fully manned with professional soldiers by 2011. As of August 2012 the number of professional servicemen in the Russian Airborne Forces was expected to reach 20,000 in the next five or seven years, more than double the current 9,500 troops, the airborne troops chief commander, Colonel General Vladimir Shamanov, said.
By 2010 there were 7,000 contract personnel with soldiers' and sergeants' duties, while the rest were conscripts. Later on, the number of contract servicemen will be doubled. It was planned to fill all junior commander and specialist posts with contract men - posts that are most demanding and require more education and training. The shortage of contract men is explained by the low pay: 12,000 to 18,000 rubles a month. Given bonuses and travel allowances, they can receive up to 18,000 or 25,000 rubles.
The airborne was seeing a rebirth in the institution of non-commissioned officers who made up the core of the old army. From 2012, a sergeant was drawing no less than 30,000 rubles, and with bonuses and travel money can earn more: 40,000 to 45,000 rubles. These wages were well over the average pay in the regions and will attract more and better-trained people. The standards sought are highly trained officers and sergeants and well-trained and hand picked soldiers - both contract and draftees able to act with daring and initiative.
In August 2010 the largest airborne military exercises since the collapse of the Soviet Union kicked off in central Russia. The exercises were held in the Kostroma, Yaroslavl and Ivanovo regions until August 28, featured over 4,000 servicemen and 300 hardware items. The exercises included airborne assault landings, assault river-crossings and the use of automated command and control systems.
According to resolution of Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the first open contest "Your choice" related to attraction of citizens to the Armed Forces was dedicated to professional service in the Airborne Forces. It was organized May 19, 2014 in the garrisons of the 98th (Ivanovo), seventh (Novorossiysk), 76th (Pskov) and 106th (Tula) divisions of the Airborne Forces. In a single day 1,500 people asked for contract service in the Airborne Forces.
The Airborne Division has two [formerly three] BMD-equipped airborne regiments.
Division-level support elements include an artillery regiment, an air defense battalion, an assault gun battalion, an engineer battalion, a signal battalion, a transportation and maintenance battalion, a parachute rigging and resupply battalion, a medical battalion, a chemical defense company, and a reconnaissance company.
The airborne division is almost fully equipped with motorized equipment. This significantly increases its combat power and mobility while retaining an airdrop capability for most of its equipment. The airborne division has the BMD AAICV in all of its airborne (infantry) regiments. An artillery regiment, an assault gun (ASU-85) battalion, and an antiaircraft battalion provide essential CS. The introduction of the 2S9 SP howitzer as a replacement for towed artillery will increase mobility. Also, the airborne division has other CS and CSS units that provide limited backup for combat operations.
The Airborne Regiment consists of three BMD-equipped airborne battalions, a mortar battery, an antiaircraft battery, and an antitank battery. Regimental support elements include an engineer company, a signal company, a transport and maintenance company, a parachute rigging and resupply company, a medical platoon, and a chemical defense platoon, and a supply and service platoon.
The airborne regiment has a nucleus of three airborne battalions and three fire support subunits. These fire support subunits include one mortar battery, one ATGM battery, and one AA battery. There are other elements that support the combat elements. Each regiment now has over 100 BMDs in three different configurations. The basic BMD-I is the standard squad vehicle. Air defense and automatic grenade launcher platoons within battalions use the BMD M1979/1. The BMD-1 KSh serves as a command vehicle at battalion and regimental headquarters. By adding the BMD to such an extent, the VDV upgraded troop protection, mobility, and firepower while retaining air-droppability. Only a few items within airborne regiments are not air-droppable (for example, several trucks).
The Airborne Battalion has three airborne companies. Equipping airborne companies with BMDs has eliminated the need for a battalion-level antitank battery. Furthermore, the wide distribution of man-portable, surface-to-air missiles has eliminated the need for a battalion air defense section. The airborne battalion is designed to provide command, control, and limited communication, supply, and medical support.
The Airborne Company consists of three platoons of BMDs. There are three BMDs in each platoon (one per squad). Besides the heavily-armed BMD, basic weapons of the airborne company include modern assault rifles, light machine guns, automatic grenade launchers, ATGMs, and numerous RPGs and shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles.
The airborne division's artillery regiment consists primarily of two firing battalions. The first is a 122-mm towed howitzer (D-30) battalion with 18 tubes. The other is a composite battalion with twelve D-30s and six 122-mm rocket launchers (BM-21V). The artillery regiment also has limited organic support elements.
After 2005, the VDV formed three components:
The Russian Federation also had four Separate Air Assault Brigades that belong to the appropriate military district/JSK commander, a holdover from a similar command and control relationship in Soviet times.
The main maneuver units of the Russian Airborne Forces branch consisted in 2013 of two Airborne Divisions, two Air Assault Divisions, and one Separate Air Assault Brigade.
The Russian military assigned an additional three air assault brigades to the Airborne Forces (VDV) in order to boost its rapid reaction capability in future conflicts, VDV commander Col. Gen. Vladimir Shamanov said 31 July 2013. “The Airborne Troops will become the core of Russia’s rapid reaction forces, and in order to ensure that…the paratroopers are capable of performing this task, I proposed to the Russian military leadership to reassign three air assault brigades from the Eastern and Southern military districts to the VDV,” Shamanov said. “My proposal was approved,” he said, adding the brigades could join the Airborne Forces as early as October or November 2013.
There are plans to create a fourth brigade. These units’ reconnaissance companies are being bolstered to the size of battalions, and independent regiments (special-operations and communications) are becoming brigades. The regiments are being given army aviation companies; at some point in the future the VDV service will have one or two army aviation brigades. The VDV units are also being given their own UAV companies, which will eventually become UAV squadrons. Finally, there are plans for each VDV division to get a third airborne (or airborne assault) regiment; they now have two such regiments apiece.
Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu told a meeting of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) board on 29 April 2020 that the Russian Airborne Forces would receive their ninth and tenth battalions of BMD-4M airborne infantry fighting vehicles in 2020. Unlike other mechanized units, which use a variety of APCs and IFVs such as the BMP series, BTR series, and MT-LB, the VDV uses BMD family vehicles exclusively [Boyevaya Mashina Desanta = Battle Vehicle Desant, "desant" = assault]. In March the Russian Airborne Forces received the eighth battalion kit of upgraded BMD-4M IFVs, two more BMD-4M battalion kits will be delivered before the end of the year.
By the middle of the 2020s, Russia will form airmobile brigades in four strategic directions to be better prepared for ‘grey zone’ conflicts. A critical fact about airmobile brigades is that Russia can use them for pre-emptive strikes, such as the destruction of critical targets or capture of strategic objectives. The ability to fight in so-called grey zones will become crucial in the future. The concept of grey zones does not only apply to geographical areas; it also has a temporal dimension.
In the future, it will be increasingly difficult to pinpoint the exact starting point of hostilities, define the boundaries of an area of operations, or identify the enemy. Airmobile brigades, whose tasks include supporting units that act separately from the main forces or partisan combat behind enemy lines, fit well into this pattern.
The formation of airmobile, or “new type”, assault units in the Airborne Forces is a major objective of the Russian armed forces during the 2020s. The army brigades and naval infantry already have a small number of airmobile units, but these are predominantly intended for reconnaissance operations and “small tactical episodes”. In contrast to the existing units, which do not have organic subunits with their own aircraft, the new airmobile units are more independent and, most importantly, are equipped with helicopters and do not depend on the support of other units for relocation.
Russia developed its concept of airmobile units in 2018, building on the experience of the US, China and other countries. Since 2018, airmobile units have been tested in all major exercises (Vostok 2018, Tsentr 2019 and Kavkaz 2020). The 31st Guards Air Assault Brigade based in Ulyanovsk is an experimental unit. The plan is to replace the existing units of the Airborne Forces with four airmobile brigades – one for each strategic direction. The 31st Airmobile Brigade in Ulyanovsk will cover the western strategic direction, while the brigade to be established in the Orenburg Oblast will cover the Central Asia strategic direction. The units to be set up based on the 56th and 83rd Guards Air Assault Brigades will cover the southwestern and eastern strategic directions, respectively.
Public sources are flooded with distorted information concerning the formation of airmobile units – from the deadlines for forming the new brigades to speculation about their composition and weapons. The formation of the airmobile brigades is unlikely to occur before 2025. Establishing new brigades is not easy. Currently, Mi-28N attack helicopters are used to perform fire support functions for airmobile units. Helicopters specifically designed for airmobile units should be introduced by the middle of the decade. The aim is also to replace the existing fleet of vehicles by adding amphibious capabilities and stronger armor and upgrading the weaponry on the vehicles. However, several parts of the Russian armaments programs have been stalled or suspended (partially due to sanctions). Russia’s ability to fully implement the armaments program for the airmobile brigades is therefore uncertain.
Another problem is the scarcity of human resources. Many units in the Russian armed forces, including critical units, are still understaffed. They are trying to conceal this fact. Each new airmobile brigade is likely to be 4,000 to 4,500 strong. While there are currently around 10,000 troops in the existing four guards air assault brigades, the new "brigades" are to have between 16,000 and 17,000 - these would be very large for Soviet/Russian divisions, much less brigades. Even if the existing helicopter squadrons are included, it is clear that more people need to be found for the new brigades. The cost of forming the airmobile brigades may be the liquidation of the 11th Guards Air Assault Brigade.
This shortage of people is aggravated by the outflow and bad quality of human resources, as well as a low motivation to serve. Competition for admission to Russian military academies (including the most prestigious ones) remains at a low level and will affect the officer corps’ quality in the future.

AIRBORNE SUPPORT UNITS
AIRBORNE COMBAT UNIT TO&E
1 There is one Airborne Artillery Battery in an Air Assault Brigade. This is the only organic artillery unit apart from the 120mm SP Mortar.
2 There is one Airborne AA Battery per Air Assault Brigade, one per Airborne Rgt, and 3 in the Airborne Div AA Btn. Towed ZU-23 AAA may be upgraded to ZSU-23-4 in 1990s.
3 Mounted in BMDs if attached to an Air Assault Brigade, foot mobile if part of a para deployed force
4 Airborne Division asset: 1 Battalion per division.
https://voinskayachast.net/vozdushno-desantnie-voyska/vch32515">104th Guards Air Assault Regiment VoinskayaChast.net
The location of the 104th Guards Red Banner Airborne Assault Regiment, or military unit 32515, is the village of Cherekha, Pskov Region. The unit belongs to the Airborne Forces performing combat missions of destroying and capturing the enemy from the air, as well as destroying ground weapons and covering or defending certain areas. For some combat missions, the Airborne Forces are used as rapid reaction formations. Since the beginning of 2003, it has been partially transferred to the contract basis of acquisition.
The formation of the regiment began in January 1948. It included units of the 346th, 104th and 76th Guards Airborne Divisions. The legendary 104th Guards Red Banner Airborne Assault Regiment was formed on September 24, 1948 on the basis of personnel from the 3rd Airborne Battalion, 346th Guards Airborne Landing Regiment, 104th Guards Airborne Order of Kutuzov Division, 38th Guards airborne corps, non-commissioned officers of the 104th and 76th guards airborne divisions and recruits called up in 1948. The formation of the unit continued until January 1, 1949. According to the formation, it was named the 104th Guards Airborne Landing Regiment. Guards Red Banner Airborne Assault Regiment - 104th Guards Airborne Troops - a military unit of the Airborne Troops of the Armed Forces of the USSR and the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. It is part of the 76th Guards Airborne Assault Chernihiv Red Banner Order of Suvorov Division.
In 1976, the regiment was awarded the challenge Red Banner of the Pskov regional committee of the CPSU and the regional executive committee, "for excellent success in combat and political training, military discipline." By the decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR "for great services in the armed defense of the Soviet Motherland, successes in combat and political training, mastering new equipment and in connection with the 60th anniversary of the Soviet Army and Navy" the regiment was awarded the Order of the Red Banner on February 21, 1978. For the displayed valor and courage in regimental tactical exercises, by order of the Minister of Defense dated November 26, 1979, the regiment was awarded the pennant of the Minister of Defense of the USSR "For Courage and Military Valor". In 1991, the regiment was awarded the second pennant of the Minister of Defense of the USSR "For courage and military prowess".
From 1979 to 1989, his personnel and officers carried out combat operations in Afghanistan. In February 1978 he was awarded the Order of the Red Banner for success in the development of new weapons. From 1994 to 1995, the regiment was among the units of the 76th division, which participated in the hostilities in Chechnya. In 1999 and 2009 he participated in anti-terrorist missions in the North Caucasus.
The regiment became widely known after the battle at height 776 during the second Chechen war. During the battle near Argun on February 29 - March 1, 2000, the 6th company of the 2nd battalion of the 104th guards airborne regiment entered into battle with a detachment of 2.5 thousand militants (data from federal forces), commanded by an Arab mercenary Khattab. Of the 90 paratroopers then killed 84 paratroopers.
In 2000, by decree of the President of the Russian Federation, for the courage and courage shown in the liquidation of illegal armed groups, 22 paratroopers were awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation (21 of them posthumously), 68 soldiers and officers of the 6th company were awarded the Order of Courage (63 of them - posthumously).
According to the results of combat training for 2005 and 2006, the unit was recognized as the best in the Airborne Forces. In the course of carrying out measures to reform the Airborne Forces, from December 1, 2006, the full name of the regiment: 104th Guards Airborne Assault Regiment of the Red Banner.
Since the beginning of 2003, the regiment was partially transferred to a contract basis. At the same time, the reconstruction of old and the construction of new residential premises, as well as facilities on the territory of military unit 32515, began. According to the results of the summer training period in 2017, by order of the Minister of Defense, the regiment became one of the first military units of the Russian Armed Forces to be awarded the title of "Shock". The command of the Airborne Forces awarded the regiment a heraldic badge.
The material and living conditions of service in the unit are satisfactory. The military personnel live in the barracks, with one shower room per unit and a storage closet in the hallway. The hostel has a lounge and a gym. The dining room is located in a separate room, officers and soldiers eat together. Catering, as well as work on cleaning the barracks and the territory adjacent to them, is assigned to civilian personnel. The soldiers of such a unit as military unit 32515 devote a lot of time to general physical and landing training, regardless of the time of year. The mandatory activities for paratroopers include obtaining and improving the skills of camouflage, forcing water and fire barriers.
A lot of time is devoted to the basic skills of fighters - jumping. At first, the soldiers of military unit 32515 train at the airborne complex on the territory of the unit. The first jump takes place from a five-meter tower. Then, in groups of 10, the paratroopers make three jumps from the AN aircraft, and then in the same composition from the IL.
There are no hazing and hazing in the unit. recruits of military unit 32515 live on a separate floor of the barracks, and old-timers and contract soldiers live on the floor above, but already in the same block.
Calls to relatives on a mobile phone are allowed only at a certain time - an hour before lights out. The rest of the time, the phones are kept by the unit commander and are issued to soldiers only after being marked in the appropriate journal.
Field exercises take place regardless of the season. Sometimes employees of such a unit as military unit 32515 can spend up to two months on the road (usually these are combined arms exercises). Mentally stable applicants with good physical fitness and a health certificate of at least form A-1 are accepted for contract service in military unit 32515. Preference is given to applicants with martial arts skills, who previously served in the Airborne Forces and were involved in parachuting.
Paratroopers of military unit 32515 receive monetary allowance on the card of Sberbank of Russia. For contract servicemen, it is calculated twice a month (advance payment and salary), and for conscript soldiers - once a month. The ATM of Sberbank, like the ATM of the Baltic Bank, is located at the checkpoint of the part.
https://voinskayachast.net/vozdushno-desantnie-voyska/vch42091">108th Air Assault Regiment @ VoinskayaChast.net
The 108th Guards Airborne Assault Kuban Cossack Regiment of the Order of the Red Star, or military unit 42091, is stationed in the city of Novorossiysk, Krasnodar Territory . It is part of the 7th Guards Air Assault Division.
Throughout its existence - 70 years, military unit 42091 has been known as one of the best units of the 7th Guards Division among participants in combat exercises, military operations and testing of new weapons and heavy military equipment. In 1956, the airborne regiment took part in Operation Whirlwind (the suppression of the uprising in Hungary) and in the fighting in Budapest. In 1968, the fighters took part in operations on the territory of Czechoslovakia, and in 1979-1989 they went on combat missions to Afghanistan.
The fighters of the unit took part in the liquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. Many employees of the unit performed peacekeeping missions in Abkhazia, Dagestan and South Ossetia. From August 1994 to the present, military unit 42091 is stationed in Novorossiysk and is one of the formations of the 7th Guards Air Assault Division.
“The Airborne Forces are preparing real men” - those who have already served in military unit 42901 and those who cherish the dream of becoming a paratrooper agree with this statement. The air assault division is considered one of the most difficult to serve due to strict discipline. But at the same time, there are no hazing and factors that distract soldiers from the most important thing - real military training.
Only one thing is required from the recruits of the unit: to learn how to survive in the most difficult conditions, physical endurance and the ability to make decisions instantly. These qualities of employees in the Airborne Forces have long been legendary among forum visitors. Many recall the fact that during the recent armed conflict in Georgia, “their” military did not dare to engage in a firefight with the fighters of military unit 42091 and retreated, simply dropping their weapons.
The military unit stationed in Novorossiysk belongs to the elite troops, which is greatly facilitated by material and living conditions: clean barracks, good food, modern showers. Among the positive military support of some moments is the arrival of new types of weapons and modern military equipment.
For all soldiers, exercises are held at the Raevskaya training ground: skills of combat training and landing of technicians are practiced, classes are held at the airborne complex and physical training standards are passed. Interestingly, upon arrival at the unit, the recruits pass the standards for receiving a vest, however, it is issued only on the oath, and then refers to the dress uniform.
Among the fighters of military unit 42091 there are a sufficient number of contract soldiers, and eyewitnesses give only one explanation for this: Novorossiysk is the dream of every paratrooper. Meanwhile, contract employees are provided with good material and living conditions: several dormitories of the cubicle type, with fairly good furnishings, a shower room, a laundry room and rooms designed for three people. Now in the Novorossiysk garrison, work is underway to build a cultural and leisure center and a residential apartment building for military personnel with families. As long as they are allowed to rent housing within the garrison (in the city), compensation is paid for this depending on the number of family members. It is interesting that such a practice in military unit 42091 was adopted only among contract soldiers, but at the present time, housing is also being rented for employees on a permanent basis (ensigns and officers, in particular).
The most anticipated event for soldiers is parachuting. Not everyone is allowed to them, but only those who have been instructed and are not at the time of the exercise in the hospital. In addition to them, there is also mountain and assault training, which applies to all units of the 7th Airborne Assault Division.
As for the conscripts, the pay for their service is not so high. It is better for fighters to make money transfers to the card of Sberbank of Russia or VTB Bank. The terminal of the first is located next to the part, but employees can withdraw money only during dismissal.
Dismissals, as the employees themselves say, are granted several times a month (no more than 4). They can be given from 6 hours to 1 day, depending on whether the exercises are currently taking place or not. Leaves are not given when a soldier is on daily duty, on guard duty, on duty or in field exercises.
The Committee of the Council of Soldiers' Mothers of the South of Russia operates in the city (with the support of the command of the 7th Airborne Assault Division). Communication with relatives is allowed on weekday evenings and on weekends at certain times, but not more than twice a week. During the rest of the time, mobile phones are with the commanders.
In telephone conversation was intercepted by the SBU between a Russian military man and his passion, the girl called on her beloved orc to rape Ukrainian women and not tell her about it. It turned out that the names of the spouses were Roman and Olga Bykovsky. Roman and Olga come from the Oryol region of Russia. During the call, which Ukrainian law enforcement bodies in the Kherson region in the country’s south said they intercepted before publishing it earlier this month, a woman can be heard giving permission to a man to rape Ukrainian women. “Yes, I allow it. Just wear protection,” the woman says between laughs.
The occupant previously served in the regiment of the Russian Guard. Apparently, the occupier signed a contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense no later than February 2018. The Conflict Intelligence Team helped journalists find out where Bykovsky served. According to the emblem on the chevron, this is the 108th Guards Air Assault Regiment - the Kuban Cossack Order of the Red Star. He, in particular, participated in the occupation of the Crimea. While they may have been joking during their call, the publication came amid a growing number of allegations by Ukrainian women that they had been raped by the invading Russian soldiers.
https://voinskayachast.net/vozdushno-desantnie-voyska/vch41450">137th Guards Airborne Regiment
In Ryazan , to date, all conditions have been created for the training of employees in the units of the Airborne Forces: here is the Ryazan Higher Airborne Command School. Margelov, and the 137th Airborne Kuban Cossack Regiment of the Order of the Red Star, that is, military unit 41450. The highly awarded Guards Parachute Regiment is rightfully considered one of the best in the Airborne Forces.
The personnel of the Ryazan Airborne Regiment was the first in the troops to receive a battalion set of the latest models of military equipment BMD-4M and BTR-MDM "Rakushka" for equipment. It was the servicemen of this regiment who had the honor of representing the Airborne Troops as part of mechanized parade crews at the Victory Parade in Moscow. As of 2018, about 80% of the regiment's units are fully staffed with contract servicemen. The competition among candidates for contract service is up to 7 people per place.
Employees are trained at the Ryazan Higher School. This educational institution, known among the locals as the school of the Airborne Forces, has its own, no less interesting, history. The Ryazan Higher School began its work back in 1918 - then the first infantry courses for the red commanders of Ryazan were opened there. In 1959, this educational institution was merged with the Alma-Ata Airborne School. In the 1960s, the school was given the name of the higher, and in the 1990s - the name of V. Margelov. In 2013, the command of the airborne troops of the Russian Federation began to manage the Ryazan Higher School.
On 13 August 2015 the parachute regiment of the Airborne Forces stationed in Ryazan was given the honorary name "Ryazansky". A solemn ritual of conferring the honorary name "Ryazansky" on the parachute regiment of the Airborne Troops (VDV) took place. The honorary name was given to the military unit by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation - Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2015 No. 379 "for mass heroism and courage, fortitude and courage shown by personnel in combat operations to protect the Fatherland and state interests in armed conflicts and taking into account merit in times of peace”. The certificate of honor of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces on conferring an honorary name on the regiment was presented by the Commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel-General Vladimir Shamanov.
The 137th Airborne Regiment traces its history back to November 1948. It was then that the 137th Guards Landing Airborne Regiment was formed on the basis of the 2nd Battalion of the 347th Guards Airborne Regiment. In May 1949, he was reorganized into the 137th Guards Airborne Regiment, known today as military unit 41450. In 1955, the regiment participated for the first time in a major exercise with practical landings.
He was awarded the titles of Kuban Cossack and the Order of the Red Star at the end of 1997. The servicemen of the unit took part in the fighting in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as in the first Chechen war. Servicemen of the famous military formation had a chance to take part in the counter-terrorist operation in the North Caucasus. In 1999, fighters of military unit 41450 were part of the battalions to combat criminal groups in Dagestan. Five paratroopers of the regiment were awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation. In April 2008, the regiment was awarded the St. George banner of a new type.
Both conscripts and contract employees notice that the Ryazan landing force is one of the best in Russia. Material and living conditions in military unit 41450 are good. The soldiers do not live in the barracks, but in the Kubrick-type dormitories, the rooms in which are designed for 4-6 people. For two blocks-kubricks there is a separate bathroom and shower room. There is a canteen and a laundry in the hostel building. Military personnel of the unit who have families are allowed to rent housing on the territory of the garrison and receive monthly compensation depending on the composition of the family. Fighters who have entered into a re-contract can use the mortgage savings system to obtain their own housing.
On the territory of military unit 41450 there is a House of Culture, an airborne complex with jumping towers, a gym, a museum of the Airborne Forces and a library. There is also a store with a cashless system. The infrastructure of the city in which military unit 41450 is located is traditional for the Russian regional center - shops, pharmacies, clinics, cafes, cinemas, educational institutions, hairdressers, etc. When entering military service, paratroopers receive not only a uniform and blue berets, but also a tracksuit with training shoes.
Checks in military unit 41450 are carried out monthly: not only the combat skills of paratroopers and their knowledge of the military specialty, but also living conditions are controlled. Employees of the commissions of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation have the right to check the accounts of soldiers in social networks, the mobile phone gallery, calls, SMS and MMS messages.
On March 5, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree on a one-time payment of 5 million rubles to families of servicemen who died in Ukraine. In addition, they are entitled to benefits in the amount of 7.4 million rubles and monthly cash compensation.
Nenets Autonomous Okrug reported that the son of Vice-Governor Alexander Dudorov Georgy, who was the political officer of the reconnaissance company of the 137th regiment of the 106th Tula Guards Airborne Division, died in battles in Ukraine. On March 14, the Investigative Committee of Russia announced the death of the deputy commander of the reconnaissance company of the parachute division Georgy Dudorov. According to the agency, the military came under artillery fire on 06 March 2022. Georgy Dudorov, deputy commander of the reconnaissance company, who died during a special operation in Ukraine, was the son of Alexander Dudorov, vice-governor of the Nenets Autonomous Okrug. The administration of NAO RBC confirmed that Georgy Dudorov is the son of the deputy governor. According to the website of the regional administration, Deputy Governor Alexander Dudorov oversees the work of the department of internal control and supervision of the Autonomous Okrug, as well as the department of civil protection and fire safety. The official, born in 1972, was appointed to the post of deputy governor in 2021.
The ministry said in a statement that the military man "tragically died while performing a combat mission during a special operation." Dudorov served as deputy commander of the reconnaissance company for military-political work of the 137th regiment of the 106th Tula Guards Airborne Division. “On March 6, he came under artillery fire and was mortally wounded, but “honorably fulfilled his military duty to the Fatherland,” the agency noted.
On 26 May 2022, a farewell ceremony was held in the Ryazan region for the soldiers who died heroically during a special military operation in Ukraine: Guards Major Alexander Denisov, deputy commander of the parachute battalion of military unit 41450, guards senior sergeant Kirill Belov, commander of the communications department of military unit 41450, guard senior warrant officer Dmitry Krivosheev, commander of the commandant platoon of military unit 06017. Funeral events were held with all military honors in the city of Ryazan and the Ryazan region. They were attended by representatives of the Government of the Ryazan region, the administration of Ryazan and the Ryazan region, the command of the Airborne Forces, the Ryazan military garrison, the Ryazan Diocese, public organizations, veterans, relatives and friends of military personnel. Pavel Malkov, Acting Governor of the Ryazan Region, expressed his condolences to the families of the fallen soldiers.
The 217th Guards Order of Kutuzov III Degree Airborne Regiment military unit 62295 (Ivanovo, Ivanovo Region) is a unit of the 98th Guards Airborne Svir Red Banner Order of Kutuzov 2nd Class Airborne Division. Field exercises are held twice a year, not far from Kostroma. In addition to this settlement, soldiers of military unit 62295 can be sent to Luga, Yeysk or near Yaroslavl. Field exercises last the least time for employees of the 3rd battalion (approximately 1-2 weeks of field exercises).
Candidates whose relatives have been convicted are not accepted for contract service. For the first 3 months, recruits take the course of a young fighter. During the KMB, mobile phones can only be used on weekends. Parcels are picked up not at the city post office, but at the post office of the unit, the fighters also do not go to the store. After completing the course of a young soldier, employees of such a unit as military unit 62295 take the oath. The servicemen live in well-maintained Kubrick barracks. There is a shower room and a bathroom for two cubicles. The barracks has a rest room, a room for ironing and drying clothes, as well as a sports corner. Bathing day, as well as park and economic - on Saturdays. The bath is located on the territory of the unit.
|
The regiment, in turn, consists of three battalions: the 1st battalion is a combat battalion, the 2nd battalion is a rapid response, staffed by contract servicemen, the 3rd battalion is a drill battalion. Military unit 62295 pays monetary allowances to servicemen on the VTB-24 card. There are no ATMs of this bank on the territory; an ATM of the Moscow Industrial Bank is installed at the checkpoint. For withdrawing money from the card, a commission of 100 rubles is charged. For each jump, the paratroopers receive cash surcharges, if there is a complication factor for the jump, the payments increase. Contract soldiers have a slightly higher salary and jump payouts than conscripts.
On September 25, 1948 in the village. Galenka, Molotovsky District, Primorsky Territory, the formation of a regiment began on the basis of the 2nd Guards Airborne Order of Kutuzov III degree regiment, the 98th Guards Airborne Svir Red Banner Division. On October 1, 1948, the formation was completed, the first order No. 1 of 10/1/48 was issued. 1st Guards Svir Airborne Red Banner Corps. On February 11, 1949, the 217th Airborne Regiment was renamed the 217th Guards Airborne Regiment.
On the basis of the decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the deputy commander of the 37th Guards Airborne Svir Red Banner Corps, the 217th Guards Airborne Regiment, on February 20, 1949, was awarded the Red Banner. On the basis of the order of the Minister of Defense of the USSR of October 31, 1949, in commemoration of the day of the formation of the regiment, October 1 was established as the day of the unit's annual holiday.
From May 27 to June 3, 1951, the regiment was relocated to the city of Kuibyshevka-Vostochnaya, Amur Region. In March 1955, the regiment, in connection with the disbandment of the 13th Guards Airborne Division, was transferred to the 98th Guards Airborne Division of the 37th Guards Airborne Corps. From July 25, 1969 to August 11, 1969, the regiment was relocated to the city of Bolgrad, Odessa region. During this period, the regiment was actively involved in combat training. He began to master new equipment, learn to jump from VTA aircraft: An-2, An-12, An-22.
For the exercises "South-71" and "Spring-72", by order of the Minister of Defense of the USSR, gratitude was announced to the personnel of the regiment. In 1972-74. The regiment received a BMD-1 airborne combat vehicle. March 18, 1975 by order of the Minister of Defense of the USSR, the 217th Guards Airborne Regiment was awarded the Pennant of the Minister of Defense "For courage and military prowess", for high results in field training, courage and military prowess shown during the exercise "Spring-75".
On December 15, 1982, by order of the Minister of Defense of the USSR, the regiment, one of the first in the Airborne Forces, was awarded the second Pennant of the Minister of Defense "For courage and military prowess", for high results in field training, courage and military prowess shown at the "Shield-82" exercise, which took place on the territory of Bulgaria.
In June 1984, the personnel of the paratrooper battalion, self-propelled artillery battalion and communications company, together with the troops of the Red Banner Odessa Military District, took part in the Soyuz-84 large-scale exercises. High patriotic enthusiasm, pride in belonging to the Airborne Forces made it possible to demonstrate high field training.
Since March 1988, the personnel of the 217th RPD 6 times participated in ensuring public order in the republics of Transcaucasia. On February 20, 1990, by order of the Minister of Defense of the USSR, for the courage and military prowess shown in carrying out the tasks of the Soviet government, in connection with the declaration of a state of emergency in certain regions of the Transcaucasus, the regiment was awarded the third pennant of the Minister of Defense of the USSR "For courage and military prowess".
Many of the officers and ensigns of the regiment have combat experience gained while participating in combat operations in Afghanistan. In April 1993, the 217th Guards Airborne Regiment, as part of the division, was redeployed to the city of Ivanovo. In December 1994, the combined battalion of the regiment left for Chechnya to carry out a special task of the Government of the Russian Federation to restore constitutional order in the Republic of Chechnya. For several months of combat operations, 355 paratroopers were awarded orders and medals, and three servicemen were awarded the title of Hero of Russia: Guards Major Viktor Omelkov (posthumously), Guards Captain Alexei Tyagachev and Guards Lieutenant Andrei Timoshenko
From July 1998 to April 1999, the combined battalion of the regiment carried out peacekeeping tasks in the zone of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. For the courage and heroism shown in the performance of military duty in the zone of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, Guards Private Dmitry Mironov was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation.
From September 1999 to March 2000, the personnel of the parachute company of the regiment, as part of the regimental tactical group of the Kostroma paratrooper regiment, performed combat missions in the North Caucasus. Also, the personnel of the regiment took part in the operation to force Georgia to peace in August 2008 in South Ossetia.
https://voinskayachast.net/vozdushno-desantnie-voyska/vch74268:>234th Airborne Assault Regiment VoinskayaChast.net
The place of deployment of the 234th Guards Black Sea Order of Kutuzov named after Alexander Nevsky Airborne Assault Regiment, or military unit 74268, is the city of Pskov, Pskov Region . The formation is part of the structural units of the 76th Guards Airborne Assault Division, located in Pskov and is subordinate to the command of the Western Military District.
According to the Department of Information and Mass Communications of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, on June 19, 2020, on the territory of the [234th] Guards Airborne Assault Black Sea named after Alexander Nevsky Regiment of the [76th] Pskov Guards Airborne Assault Division of the Airborne Forces (VDV ) under the leadership of the deputy commander of the formation for weapons of the guards, Colonel Alexei Zaitsev, a solemn ritual of transferring the latest models of military equipment to the personnel of the military unit took place. The battalion set of equipment for the Pskov paratroopers includes about 40 airborne combat vehicles of the new generation BMD-4M and BTR-MDM "Rakushka".
In a solemn atmosphere with the participation of the command and military personnel of the guards unit, as well as veterans of the unit, the new equipment was handed over to the personnel of one of the air assault battalions of the famous regiment. As the deputy commander of the Pskov formation of the guard, Colonel Alexei Zaitsev, noted in his speech, the combat vehicles created by the designers increase the power of the Airborne Forces, which stand guard over Russia's national interests.
Equipping the troops with modern equipment and control means helps to increase the combat capabilities of the Airborne Forces units, and the implementation of the tasks of the state defense order in the interests of the Airborne Forces makes it possible to increase the share of new and modernized models. All military personnel of the airborne assault battalion, which received new equipment, underwent a two-month training course and retraining for new types of weapons in Omsk on the basis of the 242nd training center (training of junior specialists of the Airborne Forces).
This is the second battalion set of BMD-4M airborne combat vehicles and BTR-MDM Rakushka airborne armored personnel carriers, transferred to the 234th Guards Airborne Assault Regiment of the 76th Guards Airborne Assault Division in Pskov. The first battalion set of BMD-4M and BTR-MDM was transferred to the 234th regiment on January 17, 2020. The battalion set of BMD-4M and BTR-MDM transferred to the 234th regiment on June 19 became, according to known data, the ninth battalion set of these vehicles transferred to the Airborne Forces from industry. The battalion kit now includes 31 BMD-4M airborne combat vehicles and eight airborne armored personnel carriers BTR-MDM "Rakushka" (previously, in some battalion kits, the number of BTR-MDM was 16 units). Deliveries of battalion sets of new airborne combat vehicles BMD-4M (including armored personnel carriers BTR-MDM Rakushka) to the Russian Airborne Forces have been carried out since 2016.
The forerunner of the formation was the 221st Rifle Regiment, formed in the winter of 1926 and immediately included in the 74th Taman Rifle Division. For military merit in the pre-war period, he received the name of the Black Sea. In August 1939, it was detached from the division as an independent unit and reorganized into the 157th Rifle Division. The structural subdivisions of the headquarters and one of the battalions became the basis for the formation of the 384th rifle regiment, relocated to Novorossiysk. The regiment itself, among the combat units of the 157th division, defended Odessa (September 1941) and was involved in the Kerch-Feodosia operation (December - May 1942). The regiment was reorganized into the 234th at the end of the Battle of Stalingrad (1943), at the same time received the rank of Guards. After the Great Patriotic War, he was relocated to Kirov, and in June 1946 to Kingisepp. The final location of the then 234th Guards Rifle since 1947 was the city of Pskov.
In the summer of 1946, there was another reorganization of the unit - it became known as the 234th Guards Landing Airborne Regiment and became part of the collapsed 238th Guards Rifle Regiment. The 234th Guards Airborne Regiment was renamed in the autumn of 1949. It is worth noting that during the war the unit was awarded the Order of Kutuzov 3rd degree for participating in the liberation of Danzig (May 1945).
Connection from 1948 to 1950 was under the command of V. Margelov and was the first to undergo tactical exercises, including the combination of landing and ground combat operations, as well as ground attack in small groups. After the military reform in 2008, it was renamed the 234th Guards Airborne Assault Regiment. Before the reform (in 2004) it was transferred to the contract basis of configuration. To date, the unit is the only one in the Russian Federation that bears the name of Alexander Nevsky (assigned in 1996). The image of the saint is on the banner and sleeve patches of the unit. In the second half of the 1980s, the regiment participated in operations in Baku and Yerevan, as well as in the aftermath of a natural disaster in Armenia. He was part of the UN peacekeepers and participated in missions in Abkhazia, Transnistria, as well as Yugoslavia and North Ossetia. Participated in two Chechen wars (1995-1996, 1999 and 2004).
The material and living conditions of the servicemen of military unit 74268 are called good. So, recruits and old-timers are placed on different floors of the Kubrick hostel (the Kubricks are designed for 12 people), which excludes hazing, although conflict relations between old-timers and recruits were previously noted. To prevent such situations, a nightly physical examination of the soldiers is carried out. The barracks is equipped with showers, a relaxation room and a sports corner. The dining room is located on the first floor: personnel and officers eat together.
Soldiers can go to the store on the territory of the garrison only with accompanying officers. It is noteworthy that the chip has a terminal for replenishing the account. In addition, the garrison has a club, a medical unit and a bath and laundry plant. Cleaning of the surrounding area and the first floor of the barracks is carried out by civilian personnel. The fighters carry out the cleaning of the cockpits on their own (for this, an outfit is assigned).
The management of the unit allows the independent purchase of new shoes to replace old-style shoes. Army clothing, footwear and equipment stores are located at : "Splav" on the street. Pushkina, 16. Open until 18.00; "Camouflage" on the street. Yubileinaya, 22. Open until 18.00; "Sturmer" on the street. Jan Fabricius, 3-a/13. Works until 19.00.
It is forbidden to use mobile phones before taking the oath - they are seized by the command, but the SIM cards remain with the soldiers. After the recruits have taken the oath, you can call home on Sundays from 16.00 until lights out. It is recommended to purchase SIM cards of all Russian telecom operators with tariffs for Pskov and the Pskov region. Military unit 74268 pays monetary allowances to conscripts once a month, and to contractors twice. Such an accrual system is adopted in all military units of the Russian Federation. Calculation of monetary allowance is made on the card of Sberbank of Russia.
https://voinskayachast.net/vozdushno-desantnie-voyska/vch54801">247th Guards Air Assault Regiment @ VoinskayaChast.net
Military unit 54801 is the 247th Guards Airborne Assault Caucasian Cossack Regiment, Airborne Troops (VDV) of the Russian Federation, military unit 54801. In general, military unit 54801 is small - one regiment (which is about 1500 people). Hazing is absent here. Relations between colleagues and commanders are good. There are many contractors, in some units - the majority. As the newspaper notes, the 247th regiment is unofficially called the "forge of divisional commanders": those who served in the regiment often later became commanders of airborne formations.
It is deployed in the city of Stavropol, Stavropol Territory. The 247th regiment has two main holidays: on March 18, 2023, it celebrated its 50th birthday, and on August 2, every year in military unit 54801, celebrations are held in honor of the Day of the Airborne Forces of the Russian Federation. By the way, in 2020 the Russian Airborne Forces celebrated their 90th anniversary.
|
The 247th Airborne Assault Caucasian Cossack Regiment was formed on the basis of the 21st Separate Experimental Airborne Assault Brigade. The formation of the brigade began on February 19, 1973 in the city of Kutaisi, Georgian SSR. March 18, 1973 is considered the founding day of the unit. On August 1, 1980, the brigade was awarded the Battle Banner and a letter of commendation.
From the first days of the existence of the brigade, its units and subdivisions were repeatedly involved in various exercises. The brigade acted in the exercises "Snow Pass" in 1973, experimental tactical exercises under the leadership of the Chief of the General Staff in 1974, in the exercises "West-81", "Kavkaz-85", "Kavkaz-87".
In 1983, the personnel of the brigade made the first parachute jumps. In 1986, units of the brigade took part in the liquidation of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. From 1989 to 1992, the personnel took part in establishing constitutional order in the republics of Transcaucasia. In 1989, the brigade was awarded the transient Red Banner of the Military Council of the Transcaucasian Military District, and in 1990 - the pennant of the Minister of Defense of the USSR "For Courage and Military Valor".
In 1990, the brigade was renamed from a separate airborne assault brigade into a separate airborne assault brigade and became part of the Airborne Forces. In 1992, the brigade was relocated to Stavropol, and in 1994 it was given the name "Stavropol Cossack". Since January 1998, the brigade became part of the 7th Guards Airborne Division and from May 1 it was transformed into the 247th Stavropol Cossack Parachute Regiment, and from September 12, 1998 into the 247th Airborne Assault Caucasian Cossack Regiment.
The 247th regiment is constantly involved in the implementation of various tasks in peacetime and wartime: in 1986, the military personnel of the then brigade were involved in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident; in 1988-89 - in Armenia and Georgia, they eliminated the consequences of earthquakes; in 1989-1992 - participated in the resolution of conflicts in the Transcaucasus, and in 2000-2004. - participated in the hostilities in Chechnya.
For courage and heroism shown in the performance of military duty, many military personnel were awarded orders and medals, and Colonel V. Nuzhny (posthumously), Senior Lieutenant Vorozhanin O. (posthumously), Lieutenant Colonel Pegishev A., Captain Dumchikov A., Captain Khomenko I. (posthumously), Sergeant Chumak Yu. (posthumously), Private Lantsev M., Captain Minenkov M., Colonel Em Yu. Awarded the high title of Hero of Russia.
The honorary title of "Guards" regiment received in 2013, by decree of the President of the Russian Federation. This is only the second case in the Russian army when a part of the Airborne Forces receives such a "title" in peacetime.
The military camp of military unit 54801 is located in a residential area of Stavropol. The contractors and their families are provided with medical services, there are no problems with places in kindergartens, schools and other institutions. Military unit 54801 accepts women for contract service.
Military personnel of military unit 54801 often and for a long time (sometimes for several months) leave the location of the unit. Fighters go on business trips, for jumping, shooting, field exercises, tactics classes, for "mountain" training. Paratroopers learn to overcome heights from 1500 to 2600 m above sea level, cross mountain rivers, move on ice; master parachutes, armored vehicles, walkie-talkies, regular and secret weapons. They run 1 - 3 km daily, if not in a dress (and there are a lot of outfits here).
For a year, each paratrooper needs to complete a program for parachute jumps from Il, An, etc., as well as helicopters. Compliance with jumping standards significantly increases additional payments and bonuses, as well as length of service.
Military unit 54801 does not issue driver's licenses. But all drivers and driver-mechanics who already have a driver's license can get a driving category "D" and "E" during the service. Retraining takes place at the expense of the state.
In addition, each serviceman, if desired, can receive a referral to the Training Center - a training center for the training of junior airborne specialists. The course of study is from three months to six months. Excellent students can continue their studies at the school of sergeants of the airborne troops (they study for 2.5 years). Those who aspire to higher education are sent to the Ryazan Higher Airborne Command School (RVVDKU) or other educational institutions of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
Soldiers of the military unit 54801 regularly guard. The guard consists in the protection of especially important objects on the territory of the unit and beyond. Not everyone is taken on guard duty, but only those whom the psychologist recommends for this combat mission. In some companies, mechanics are not sent to guards, as they are constantly "with equipment." Newly arrived youth are also not put on guard. In addition, the soldiers of military unit 54801 regularly participate in the May 9 parade, patrol the streets of the city, participate in city public events, and much more.
It is clear that the workload is large, so discipline and regulations are strictly observed. And they compensate for the increased workload with good food: they cook delicious dishes in the dining room, there is a choice of dishes, there is a buffet. Sweets are also served: buns, cookies, sweets.
Living conditions in military unit 54801 are generally good. Conscripts live in the location of the unit in the barracks, in cockpits of 4-6 people. The furniture, although old-fashioned, is strong and comfortable, there are TVs. Each has its own nightstand and safe. Toilets and showers in every cockpit, hot water all the time. On the territory of the military unit 54801 there is a gym with exercise equipment, two shops (grocery and manufactured goods), the Museum of Military Glory of military unit No. 54801. There is a regimental military band.
On weekends in the military unit 54801 they give dismissals. Phones in military unit 54801, unlike many military units, are not taken away, but need to turn on the silent mode. There can be communication problems on the road.
At least 55 paratroopers from one regiment of the Russian Airborne Forces were killed in Ukraine. This was established by the publication Important Stories (Russian authorities recognized it as an "undesirable organization"), after analyzing the mourning videos that appeared on the Internet and were sent by subscribers. Radio Liberty published a video of a new cemetery alley in the city of Mikhailovsk, Stavropol Territory, with a large number of fresh graves, wreaths and flags of the Airborne Forces.
Mikhailovsk is a suburb of Stavropol, where the 247th Guards Airborne Assault Caucasian Cossack Regiment is stationed . On March 5, the regional authorities confirmed the death in Ukraine of the commander of this regiment, Konstantin Zizevsky, and two days earlier, on March 3, Vladimir Putin posthumously awarded the title of Hero of Russia to Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov, officer of the 247th Guards Airborne Assault Caucasian Cossack Regiment.
"Important stories" found that in the photographs of the dead published on the Internet - at least 55 servicemen of this regiment. In addition to the regimental commander, there are several company commanders among them. The publication names the names of several dead officers. All of them were previously reported by the authorities of various Russian regions.
The 331st Guards Airborne Regiment (military unit 71211) was considered one of Russia’s elite units. The regiment fought in both Chechen wars and some of its members were directly involved in the Donbas conflict in 2014 to 2015. Since 1960, the 331st Airborne Regiment (Kostroma) has been part of the 106th Guards Airborne Forces. Since 1976, the 331st Airborne Regiment has become a permanent participant in military parades on Red Square.
The training of the Kostroma paratroopers took place not only at the regimental training base, but also during large-scale exercises. Here is an incomplete list: landing in cooperation with the marines in the area of the city of Kerch (1966); landing in Bulgaria during the exercises "Dnepr" (1967); landing at the Novaya Zemlya training ground (1969); landing in Azerbaijan (1971).
Six months before the end of the Great Patriotic War, on December 27, 1944, the 331st Guards Regiment was formed in Maryina Gorka, Minsk Region. The foundation for the regiment was the units of the 7th, 11th, 14th and 17th Guards Brigades. In January 1945, the regiment was included in the 105th Guards Rifle Division. During the months of fighting against the Axis forces in Europe, the 331st Regiment performs excellently and receives eight times the gratitude from the command. In July 1946, the regiment was reorganized into a paratrooper regiment. Since then, the Guards formation has been called the 331st Guards Airborne Regiment.
The turbulent period that preceded the collapse of the Soviet Union and the difficult years of the early 90s required the paratroopers from 331 paratroopers (Kostroma) to stand up for the interests of the state and ensure a peaceful settlement of numerous ethnic conflicts. In 1988-1990, 331 PDPs took part in the division of the warring parties in the Transcaucasus. South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh will long remain in the memory of paratroopers from the banks of the Volga.
The war between Serbia and Croatia also did not bypass the 331 parachute regiment. A combined company was sent from the regiment to the former Yugoslavia as peacekeepers. In the same year, units of the regiment did not allow rivers of blood to spill in Ossetia and Transnistria.
Since 1993, the regiment has been part of the 98th Guards Airborne Division. During the Chechen war of 1994-1995, the personnel of the 331st airborne regiment took part in hostilities as part of a combined battalion sent by a division to the North Caucasus. In June 1999, 2 PDB 331 PDP of the Airborne Forces became the backbone for the formation of the 14th separate airborne battalion. This unit was urgently sent to Kosovo, where the Albanian separatists entered into an armed conflict with the Serbs.
From September 1999 to March 2000, the regimental tactical group 331 PDP from Kostroma participates in operations to eliminate illegal gangs in the North Caucasus. In Dagestan and Chechnya, the paratroopers of the regiment showed themselves as courageous and trained warriors. Two paratroopers from the PTG 331 pdp were awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation. 217 fighters and commanders of the 331st Guards Airborne Regiment received state awards from the hands of V. Putin, who was in Chechnya at that time.
From November 2002 to March 2003, the tactical group from the 3rd paratrooper battalion 331 paratroopers again performs combat missions in the North Caucasus. The escalation of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict that began in August 2008 required the protection of civilians of the Russian Federation in South Ossetia. From the 331st regiment of the Airborne Forces (Kostroma), the 1st infantry brigade was sent to the conflict zone, which completed all the tasks set by the command.
In August 2014, units of the regiment took part in the Battle of Ilovaisk . On August 24, at about 00:15, a BMD-2 column of the regiment was shot down by a Ukrainian anti-tank detachment of the 51st mechanized brigade near the village of Kuteynikovo, 13. km west of the city of Amvroseevka . Two BMD-2s were destroyed. The paratroopers left the cars and took cover in the trees nearby. A few hours later, at about 17:00, they left the shelter and were captured by the reconnaissance group of the 51st mechanized brigade near the village of Dzerkalne, field headquarters of the tactical group of the Ukrainian battalion. Ten paratroopers were taken prisoner. The Russian military said the captured paratroopers crossed the border "accidentally." During a briefing on August 5, 2015, the General Military Prosecutor of Ukraine reported that from August 29 to 30, 2014, captured paratroopers were exchanged for 200 Ukrainian soldiers and civilians detained by Russia and pro-Russian forces.
The 331st and Colonel Sergey Sukharev took part in the Battle of Ilovaisk in eastern Ukraine in August 2014, when fighting broke out between pro-Moscow separatists and Ukrainian forces. Russian forces allegedly went back on an agreement to allow Ukrainian soldiers to retreat, killing many in the ensuing shoot out. Ariana Gic, a political and legal analyst, said: "Whenever anyone talks about agreements with Russia, I think of the 2014 Ilovaisk massacre. "After agreeing to allow Ukrainian troops to retreat from Russian encirclement on Ukrainian territory, the Russian army fired at the Ukrainians like fish in a barrel as they fled."
Andriy Senchenko, a Ukrainian politician, led a parliamentary inquiry into the incident. The inquiry concluded that at least 1,000 Ukrainian soldiers died during the fighting. The Ukraine government described the battle as a massacre and a soldier who survived it told the Kyiv Independent it was a "real meat grinder."
Reports claim that the Russian 331st Guards Airborne Regiment was destroyed after coming under fire from Ukrainian forces. The regiment is part of the 98th Guard Airborne Division and had around 2000 soldiers along with over 200 armored fighting vehicles. The regiment's commander, Colonel Sergey Sukharev, was also confirmed as killed during the fierce battle that raged near Kyiv on March 17, according to local reports. His death was confirmed by the Russian regional state TV network GTRK Kostroma. The Regional Military Commissariat acknowledged the commander's death along with four other soldiers from the regiment, saying they "gave their lives for the security of [Russia]."
According to the TV and radio company, senior sergeant Sergei Lebedev, sergeant Alexander Limonov, corporal Yuri Degtyarev and captain Alexei Nikitin were killed. “Captain Alexei Nikitin died in the line of duty – Kostroma served in one of the military units of Anapa,” the website of the State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company Kostroma said. The TV and radio company reported that Governor Sergei Sitnikov expressed condolences to the families and friends of the victims.





By David Denby
“Who here comes from a savage race?” Professor James Shapiro shouted at his students.
“We all come from Africa,” said the one African-American in the class, whom I’ll call Henry, calmly referring to the supposition among most anthropologists that human life originated in sub-Saharan Africa. What Henry was saying was that there are no racial hierarchies among peoples—that we’re all “savages.”
Shapiro smiled. It was not, I thought, exactly the answer he had been looking for, but it was a good answer. Then he was off again. “Are you natural?” he roared at a girl sitting near his end of the seminar table. “What are the constraints for you? What are the rivets? Why are you here getting civilized, reading Lit Hum?”
It was the end of the academic year, and the mood had grown agitated, burdened, portentous. In short, we were reading Joseph Conrad, the final author in Columbia’s Literature Humanities (or Lit Hum) course, one of the two famous “great books” courses that have long been required of all Columbia College undergraduates. Both Lit Hum and the other course, Contemporary Civilization, are devoted to the much ridiculed “narrative” of Western culture, the list of classics, which, in the case of Lit Hum, begins with Homer and ends, chronologically speaking, with Virginia Woolf. I was spending the year reading the same books and sitting in on the Lit Hum classes, which were taught entirely in sections; there were no lectures. At the end of the year, the individual instructors were allotted a week for a free choice. Some teachers chose works by Dostoyevski or Mann or Gide or Borges. Shapiro, a Shakespeare scholar from the Department of English and Comparative Literature (his book “Shakespeare and the Jews” will be published by Columbia University Press in January), chose Conrad.
The terms of Shapiro’s rhetorical questions—savagery, civilization, constraints, rivets—were drawn from Conrad’s great novella of colonial depredation, “Heart of Darkness,” and the students, almost all of them freshmen, were electrified. Almost a hundred years old, and familiar to generations of readers, Conrad’s little book has lost none of its power to amaze and appall: it remains, in many places, an essential starting point for discussions of modernism, imperialism, the hypocrisies and glories of the West, and the ambiguities of “civilization.” Critics by the dozen have subjected it to symbolic, mythological, and psychoanalytic interpretation; T. S. Eliot used a line from it as an epigraph for “The Hollow Men,” and Hemingway and Faulkner were much impressed by it, as were Orson Welles and Francis Ford Coppola, who employed it as the ground plan for his despairing epic of Americans in Vietnam, “Apocalypse Now.”
In recent years, however, Conrad—and particularly “Heart of Darkness”—has fallen under a cloud of suspicion in the academy. In the curious language of the tribe, the book has become “a site of contestation.” After all, Conrad offered a nineteenth-century European’s view of Africans as primitive. He attacked Belgian imperialism and in the same breath seemed to praise the British variety. In 1975, the distinguished Nigerian novelist and essayist Chinua Achebe assailed “Heart of Darkness” as racist and called for its elimination from the canon of Western classics. And recently Edward W. Said, one of the most famous critics and scholars at Columbia today, has been raising hostile and undermining questions about it. Certainly Said is no breaker of canons. But if Conrad were somehow discredited, one could hardly imagine a more successful challenge to what the academic left has repeatedly deplored as the “hegemonic discourse” of the classic Western texts. There is also the inescapable question of justice to Conrad himself.
Written in a little more than two months, the last of 1898 and the first of 1899, “Heart of Darkness” is both the story of a journey and a kind of morbid fairy tale. Marlow, Conrad’s narrator and familiar alter ego, a British merchant seaman of the eighteen-nineties, travels up the Congo in the service of a rapacious Belgian trading company, hoping to retrieve the company’s brilliant representative and ivory trader, Mr. Kurtz, who has mysteriously grown silent. The great Mr. Kurtz! In Africa, everyone gossips about him, envies him, and, with rare exception, loathes him. The flower of European civilization (“all Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz”), exemplar of light and compassion, journalist, artist, humanist, Kurtz has gone way upriver and at times well into the jungle, abandoning himself to certain . . . practices. Rifle in hand, he has set himself up as god or devil in ascendancy over the Africans. Conrad is notoriously vague about what Kurtz actually does, but if you said “kills some people, has sex with others, steals all the ivory,” you would not, I believe, be far wrong. In Kurtz, the alleged benevolence of colonialism has flowered into criminality. Marlow’s voyage from Europe to Africa and then upriver to Kurtz’s Inner Station is a revelation of the squalors and disasters of the colonial “mission”; it is also, in Marlow’s mind, a journey back to the beginning of creation, when nature reigned exuberant and unrestrained, and a trip figuratively down as well, through the levels of the self to repressed and unlawful desires. At death’s door, Marlow and Kurtz find each other.
Rereading a work of literature is often a shock, an encounter with an earlier self that has been revised, and I found that I was initially discomforted, as I had not been in the past, by the famous manner—the magnificent, alarmed, and (there is no other word) throbbing excitement of Conrad’s laboriously mastered English. Conrad was born in czarist-occupied Poland; though he heard English spoken as a boy (and his father translated Shakespeare), it was his third language, and his prose, now and then, betrays the propensity for high intellectual melodrama and rhymed abstraction (“the fascination of the abomination”) characteristic of his second language, French. Oh, inexorable, unutterable, unspeakable! The great British critic F. R. Leavis, who loved Conrad, ridiculed such sentences as “It was the stillness of an implacable force brooding over an inscrutable intention.” The sound, Leavis thought, was an overwrought, thrilled embrace of strangeness. (In Max Beerbohm’s parody: “Silence, the silence murmurous and unquiet of a tropical night, brooded over the hut that, baked through by the sun, sweated a vapour beneath the cynical light of the stars. . . . Within the hut the form of the white man, corpulent and pale, was covered with a mosquito-net that was itself illusory like everything else, only more so.”)
Read in isolation, some of Conrad’s sentences are certainly a howl, but one reads them in isolation only in criticism like Leavis’s or Achebe’s. Reading the tale straight through, I lost my discomfort after twenty pages or so and fell hopelessly under Conrad’s spell; thereafter, even his most heavily freighted constructions dropped into place, summing up the many specific matters that had come before. Marlow speaks:
“Going up that river was like travelling back to the earliest beginnings of the world, when vegetation rioted on the earth and the big trees were kings. An empty stream, a great silence, an impenetrable forest. The air was warm, thick, heavy, sluggish. There was no joy in the brilliance of sunshine. The long stretches of the waterway ran on, deserted, into the gloom of overshadowed distances. On silvery sandbanks hippos and alligators sunned themselves side by side. The broadening waters flowed through a mob of wooded islands. You lost your way on that river as you would in a desert and butted all day long against shoals trying to find the challenge till you thought yourself bewitched and cut off for ever from everything you had known once—somewhere—far away—in another existence perhaps. There were moments when one’s past came back to one, as it will sometimes when you have not a moment to spare to yourself; but it came in the shape of an unrestful and noisy dream remembered with wonder amongst the overwhelming realities of this strange world of plants and water and silence. And this stillness of life did not in the least resemble a peace. It was the stillness of an implacable force brooding over an inscrutable intention.”
In one sense, the writing now seemed close to the movies: it revelled in sensation and atmosphere, in extreme acts and grotesque violence (however indirectly presented), in shivering enigmas and richly phrased premonitions and frights. In other ways, though, “Heart of Darkness” was modernism at its most intellectually bracing, with tonalities, entirely contemporary and distanced, that I had failed to notice when I was younger—immense pride and immense contempt; a mood of barely contained revolt; and sardonic humor that verged on malevolence:
“I don’t pretend to say that steamboat floated all the time. More than once she had to wade for a bit, with twenty cannibals splashing around and pushing. We had enlisted some of these crew. Fine fellows—cannibals—in their place. They were men one could work with, and I am grateful to them. And, after all, they did not eat each other before my face: they had brought along a provision of chaps on the way for a hippo-meat which went rotten and made the mystery of the wilderness stink in my nostrils. Phoo! I can sniff it now. I had the Manager on board and three or four pilgrims [white traders] with their staves—all complete. Sometimes we came upon a station close by the bank clinging to the skirts of the unknown, and the white men rushing out of a tumble-down hovel with great gestures of joy and surprise and welcome seemed very strange, had the appearance of being held there captive by a spell. The word ‘ivory’ would ring in the air for a while—and on we went again into the silence, along empty reaches, round the still bends, between the high walls of our winding way, reverberating in hollow claps the ponderous beat of the stern-wheel.”
Out of sight of their countrymen back home, who continue to cloak the colonial mission in the language of Christian charity and improvement, the “pilgrims” have become rapacious and cruel. The cannibals eating hippo meat practice restraint; the Europeans do not. That was the point of Shapiro’s taunting initial sally: “savagery” is inherent in all of us, including the most “civilized,” for we live, according to Conrad, in a brief interlude between innumerable centuries of darkness and the darkness yet to come. Only the rivets, desperately needed to repair Marlow’s pathetic steamboat, offer stability—the rivets and the ship itself and the codes of seamanship and duty are all that hold life together in a time of moral anarchy. Marlow, meeting Kurtz at last, despises him for letting go—and at the same time, with breathtaking ambivalence, admires him for going all the way to the bottom of his soul and discovering there, at the point of death, a judgment of his own life. It is perhaps the most famous death scene written since Shakespeare:
“Anything approaching the change that came over his features I have never seen before and hope never to see again. Oh, I wasn’t touched. I was fascinated. It was as though a veil had been rent. I saw on that ivory face the expression of sombre pride, of ruthless power, of craven terror—of an intense and hopeless despair. Did he live his life again in every detail of desire, temptation, and surrender during that supreme moment of complete knowledge? He cried in a whisper at some image, at some vision—he cried out twice, a cry that was no more than a breath:
“ ‘The horror! The horror!’ ”
Much dispute and occasional merriment have long attended the question of what, exactly, Kurtz means by the melodramatic exclamation “The horror!” But surely one of the things he means is his long revelling in “abominations”—is own internal collapse. Shapiro’s opening questions set up a reading of the novella that interrogated the Western civilization of which Kurtz is the supreme representative and of which the students, in their youthful way, were representatives as well.
When Shapiro asked the class why they thought he had chosen “Heart of Darkness,” hands were going up before he had finished his question.
“You chose it because the whole core curriculum is embodied in Kurtz,” said Henry, who had answered Shapiro’s earlier question. “We embody this knowledge, and the book asks, Do we fall into the void—do we drown or come out with a stronger sense of self?”
Henry had turned the book into a test of the course and of himself. Conrad had great personal significance for him, which didn’t surprise me. An African-American from Baltimore, Henry, in his sophomore year at Columbia, had evolved into a fervent Nietzschean, and, though Conrad claimed to dislike Nietzsche, this was a Nietzschean text. The meaning of Henry’s life—his personal myth—required (he had said it in class many times) challenge, struggle, and self-transcendence. He was tall and strong, with a flattop “wedge” haircut and a loud, excited voice. Some months after this class, he got himself not tattooed but branded with the insignia of his black Columbia fraternity—an act of excruciating irony unavailable to members of the master race. Kurtz, however horrifying, was an exemplar for him as for Conrad’s hero, Marlow.
A freshman of Chinese descent from Singapore, who was largely reared on British and Continental literature, also saw the book as a test for Western civilization. But, unlike Henry, she hated the abyss. Kurtz was a seduced man, a portent of disintegration. “Can we deal with the knowledge we are seeking?” she asked. “Or will we say, with Kurtz, ‘The horror’?” For her, Kurtz’s outburst was an admission of the failure of knowledge.
And many others made similar remarks, All of a sudden, at the end of the course, the students were quite willing to see their year of education in Western classics as problematic. Their reading of “the great books” could be affirmed only if it was simultaneously questioned. No doubt Shapiro’s rhetorical questions had shaped their responses, but still their intensity surprised me.
“The book is a kind of test,” said a student from the Washington, D.C., area, who was normally a polite, bland schoolboy type. “Does its existence redeem the male hegemonic line of culture? Does it redeem education in this tradition?” By which I believe that he also meant to ask, “Could the existence of such a book redeem the crimes of imperialism?” That, at any rate, was my question.
The students were in good form, bold and free, and as the class went on they expounded certain points in the text, some of them holding the little paperback in their hands like preachers before the faithful. All year long, Shapiro had struggled to get them to read aloud, and with some emotional commitment to the words. And all too often they had droned, as if they were reading from a computer manual. But now they read aloud spontaneously, and their voices were alive, even ringing.
“For this course, it’s a kind of summing up, isn’t it?” Shapiro said. “We began with the journey to Troy.”
“It has a resemblance to all the journeys through Hell we’ve read,” said a student I will call Alex, a thin, ascetic-looking boy, the son of a professor. He cited the voyages to the underworld in the Odyssey and the Aeneid, and he cited Dante, whom Conrad, in one of his greatest moments, obviously had in mind. Marlow arrives at one of the trading company’s stations, a disastrous ramshackle settlement of wrecked machinery and rusting rails, and there encounters, under the trees, dozens of exhausted African workers who have been left to die. “It seemed to me I had stepped into the gloomy circle of some Inferno,” he says.
“They were dying slowly—it was very clear. They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthly now, nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation lying confusedly in the greenish gloom. Brought from all the recesses of the coast in the legality of time contracts, lost in uncongenial surroundings, fed on unfamiliar food, they sickened, became inefficient, and were then allowed to crawl away and rest. These moribund shapes were free as air—and nearly as thin. I began to distinguish the gleam of the eyes under the trees. Then glancing down I saw a face near my hand. The black bones reclined at full length with one shoulder against the tree, and slowly the eyelids rose and the sunken eyes looked up at me, enormous and vacant, a kind of blind, white flicker in the depths of the orbs which died out slowly. The man seemed young—almost a boy—but you know with them it’s hard to tell. I found nothing else to do but to offer him one of my good Swede’s ship’s biscuits I had in my pocket. The fingers closed slowly on it and held—there was no other movement and no other glance. He had tied a bit of white worsted round his neck—Why? Where did he get it. Was it a badge—an ornament—a charm—a propitiatory act? Was there any idea at all connected with it. It looked startling round his black neck this bit of white thread from beyond the seas.
“Near the same tree two more bundles of acute angles sat with their legs drawn up. One, with his chin propped on his knees, stared at nothing in an intolerable and appalling manner. His brother phantom rested its forehead as if overcome with a great weariness; and all about others were scattered in every pose of contorted collapse, as in some picture of a massacre or a pestilence.”
Despite the last sentence, which links the grove of death to ancient and medieval catastrophes, there is a sense here, as many readers have said, of something unprecedented in horror, something new on earth—what later became known as genocide. It is one of Conrad’s bitter ironies that at least some of the Europeans forcing the Congolese into labor are “liberals” devoted to the “suppression of savage customs.” What they had perpetrated in the Congo was not, perhaps, planned slaughter, but it was a slaughter nonetheless, and some of the students, pointing to the passage, were abashed. Western man had done this. We had created an Inferno on earth. “Heart of Darkness,” written at the end of the nineteenth century, resonates unhappily throughout the twentieth. Marlow’s shock, his amazement before the sheer strangeness of the ravaged human forms, anticipates what the Allied liberators of the concentration camps felt in 1945. The answer to the question “Does the book redeem the West?” was clear enough: No book can provide expiation for any culture. But if some crimes are irredeemable, a frank acknowledgment of the crime might lead to a partial remission of sin. Conrad had written such an acknowledgment.
That was the heart of the liberal reading, and Shapiro’s students rose to it willingly, gravely, ardently—and then, all of a sudden, the class fell into an acrimonious dispute. Alex was not happy with the way Shapiro and the other students were talking about Kurtz and the moral self-judgment of the West. He thought it was glib. He couldn’t see the book in apocalyptic terms. Kurtz was a criminal, an isolated figure. He was not representative of the West or of anything else. “Why is this a critique of the West?” he demanded. “No culture celebrates men like Kurtz. No culture condones what he did.” There was general protest, even a few laughs. “O.K.,” he said, yielding a bit. “It can be read as a critique of the West, but not only of the West.”
From my corner of the room, I took a hard look at him. He was as tight as a drum, dry, a little supercilious. Kurtz had nothing to do with him—that was his unmistakable attitude. He denied the connection that the other students acknowledged. He was cut off in some way, withholding himself. Yet I knew this student. I had seen him only in class, but there was something familiar in him that irked me, though exactly what it was I couldn’t say. Why was he so dense? The other students were not claiming personal responsibility for imperialism or luxuriating in guilt. They were merely admitting participation in an “advanced” civilization that could lose its moral bearings.
Henry, leaning back in his chair—against the wall, behind Alex, who sat at the table—insisted on an existential reading. “Kurtz is an Everyman figure,” he said. “He gets down to the soul, below the layers of parents, religion, society.”
Alex hotly disagreed. They were talking past each other, offering different angles of approach, but there was an edge to their voices which suggested an animus that went beyond mere disagreement. There was an awkward pause, and some of the students stirred uneasily. I had never seen these two quarrel in the past, and what they said presented no grounds for anger, but when each repeated his position, anger filled the room. Shapiro tried to calm things down, and the other students looked at one another in wonder and alarm. The argument between Alex and Henry wasn’t about race, yet race unmistakably hovered over it. In a tangent, Henry brought up the way Conrad, reflecting European assumptions of his time, portrayed the Africans as wild and primitive. He started to make a case similar to Achebe’s (whose hostile essay is included in the current Norton Critical Edition of the text), then stopped in midsentence, abruptly abandoning his position. In our class on “King Lear” and at other times over the past several months, he had argued explicitly as a black man. But at that moment he wasn’t interested. A greater urgency overcame him—not the racial but the existential issue, his own pressing need for identification not just as an African-American but as an embattled man. “Good and evil are conventions,” he said. “They collapse under stress.” And this, he insisted, was true for everyone.
“The book is also about the difference between good and evil,” Alex retorted. “Everyone judges Kurtz.” But this is not correct. Marlow judges Kurtz; Conrad judges Kurtz. But back in Brussels he is mourned as an apostle of enlightenment.
I looked a little closer. Alex was like the fabled “wicked son” in the Passover celebration, the one who says to the others “Why is this important to you?”—denying a personal connection with an event of mesmerizing significance. I knew him, all right. A pale, narrow face, a bony nose surmounted by glasses, a paucity of flesh, a general air of asexual arrogance. He was very bright and very young. Of all the students in Shapiro’s class, he was—I saw it now—the closest to what I had been at eighteen or nineteen. He was incomparably more self-assured and articulate, but I recognized him all too well. And I was startled. The middle-aged reader, uneasy with earlier versions of himself, little expects his simulacrum to rise up as a walking ghost.
Henry sat sheathed in a green turtleneck sweater, dark glasses, and a baseball cap; I couldn’t see his expression. But Shapiro’s was clear: he was not happy. He had perhaps gone a little too far with his rhetorical questions, striking sparks that threatened to turn into a conflagration, and he quickly moved the conversation in a different direction, getting the students to explicate Conrad’s use of the word “darkness.” Conrad lets us know that even England—where Marlow sits, telling his story—used to be one of the dark places of the earth. For a while, teacher and students explicated the text in a neutral way. All year long, Shapiro had gone back and forth between analyzing the structure and language of the books and attacking the students’ complacencies with rhetorical questions. But sober analysis wasn’t what he wanted, not of this text, and he soon returned to the complicity of the West, and even the Western universities, in a policy that King Leopold II of the Belgians—the man responsible for some of the worst atrocities of colonial Africa—always referred to as noble and self-sacrificing.
“How else would you guys be civilized except for ‘the noble cause’?” Shapiro said. “You guys are all products of the noble cause. Columbia’s motto, translated from the Latin, is ‘In Thy light shall we see light.’ That’s the light that is supposed to penetrate the heart of darkness, isn’t it?”
“But enlightenment comes only by way of darkness,” said Henry, still at it, and Alex demurred angrily again—no darkness for him—and for a terrible moment I thought they were actually going to come to blows. The women in the class, who for the most part had been silent during these exchanges, were appalled and afterward muttered angrily, “It’s a boy thing, macho showing off. ‘Who’s the biggest intellectual?’ ” True, but maybe it was also a race thing. Though Shapiro restored order, something had broken, and the class, which had begun so well, with everyone joining in and expounding, had come unriveted.
Is “Heart of Darkness” a depraved book? The following is one of the passages Chinua Achebe deplores as racist:
“We were wanderers on a prehistoric earth, on an earth that wore the aspect of an unknown planet. We could have fancied ourselves the first of men taking possession of an accursed inheritance, to be subdued at the cost of profound anguish and of excessive toil. But suddenly as we struggled round a bend there would be a glimpse of rush walls, of peaked grass-roofs, a burst of yells, a whirl of black limbs, a mass of and clapping, of feet stamping, of bodies swaying, of eyes rolling under the droop of heavy and motionless foliage. The steamer toiled along slowly on the edge of a black and incomprehensible frenzy. The prehistoric man was cursing us, praying to us, welcoming us—who could tell? We were cut off from the comprehension of our surroundings; we glided past like phantoms, wondering and secretly appalled, as sane men would be before an enthusiastic outbreak in a madhouse. We could not understand because we were too far and could not remember because we were travelling in the night of first ages, of those ages that are gone, leaving hardly a sign—and no memories.
“The earth seemed unearthly. We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but there—there you could look at a thing monstrous and free. It was unearthly and the men were . . . No they were not inhuman. Well, you know that was the worst of it—this suspicion of their not being inhuman. It would come slowly to one. They howled and leaped and spun and made horrid faces, but what thrilled you was just the thought of their humanity—like yours—the thought of your remote kinship with this wild and passionate uproar. Ugly. Yes, it was ugly enough, but if you were man enough you would admit to yourself that there was in you just the faintest trace of a response to the terrible frankness of that noise, a dim suspicion of there being a meaning in it which you—you so remote from the night of first ages—could comprehend.”
Achebe believes that “Heart of Darkness” is an example of the Western habit of setting up Africa “as a foil to Europe, a place of negations . . . in comparison with which Europe’s own state of spiritual grace will be manifest.” Conrad, obsessed with the black skin of Africans, had as his real purpose the desire to comfort Europeans in their sense of superiority: “ ‘Heart of Darkness’ projects the image of Africa as ‘the other world,’ the antithesis of Europe and therefore of civilization, a place where man’s vaunted intelligence and refinement are finally mocked by triumphant bestiality.” Achebe dismisses the grove-of-death passage and others like it as “bleeding-heart sentiments,” mere decoration in a book that “parades in the most vulgar fashion prejudices and insults from which a section of mankind has suffered untold agonies and atrocities in the past and continues to do so in many ways and many places today,” and he adds, “I am talking about a story in which the very humanity of black people is called in question.”
Chinua Achebe has written at least one great novel, “Things Fall Apart” (1958), a book I love and from which I have learned a great deal. Yet this article on Conrad (originally a speech delivered at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, in 1975, and revised for the third Norton edition of the novel in 1987 and reprinted as well in Achebe’s 1988 collection of essays, “Hopes and Impediments”) is an act of rhetorical violence, and I recoiled from it. Achebe regards the book not as an expression of its time or as the elaboration of a fictional situation, in which a white man’s fears of the unknown are accurately represented, but as a general slander against Africans, a simple racial attack. As far as Achebe is concerned, Africans have struggled to free themselves from the prison of colonial discourse, and for him reading Conrad meant reëntering the prison: “Heart of Darkness” is a book in which Europeans consistently have the upper hand.
Reading Achebe, I wanted to argue that most of the students in the Lit Hum class—not Europeans but an American élite—had seen “Heart of Darkness” as a representation of the West’s infamy, and hardly as an affirmation of its “spiritual grace.” I wanted to argue as well that everything in “Heart of Darkness”—not just the spectacular frights of the African jungle but everything, including the city of Brussels and Marlow’s perception of every white character—is rendered sardonically and nightmarishly as an experience of estrangement and displacement. Conrad certainly describes the Africans gesticulating on the riverbank as a violently incomprehensible “other.” But consider the fictional situation! Having arrived fresh from Europe, Marlow, surrounded by jungle, commands a small steamer travelling up the big river en route to an unknown destiny—death, perhaps. He is a character in an adventure story, baffled by strangeness. Achebe might well have preferred that Marlow engage the Africans in conversation or, at least, observe them closely and come to the realization that they, too, are a people, that they, too, are souls, have a destiny, spiritual struggles, triumphs and disasters of selfhood. But could African selfhood be described within this brief narrative, with its extraordinary physical and philosophical momentum, and within Conrad’s purpose of exposing the “pitiless folly” of the Europeans? Achebe wants another story, another hero, another consciousness. As it happens, Marlow, regarding the African tribesmen as savage and incomprehensible, nevertheless feels a kinship with them. He recognizes no moral difference between himself and them. It is the Europeans who have been demoralized.
But what’s the use? Though Achebe is a novelist, not a scholar, variants of his critique have appeared in many academic settings and in response to many classic works. Such publications as Lingua Franca are often filled with ads from university presses for books about literature and race, literature and gender, literature and empire. Whatever these scholars are doing in the classroom, they are seeking to make their reputations outside the classroom with politicized views of literature. F. R. Leavis’s criterion of greatness in literature—moral seriousness—has been replaced by the moral aggressiveness of the academic critic in nailing the author to whatever power formation existed around him. “Heart of Darkness” could indeed be read as racist by anyone sufficiently angry to ignore its fictional strategies, its palpable anguish, and the many differences between Conrad’s eighteen nineties consciousness of race and our own. At the same time, parts of the academic left now consider the old way of reading fiction for pleasure, for enchantment—my falling hopelessly under Conrad’s spell—to be naïve, an unconscious submission to political values whose nature is disguised precisely by the pleasures of the narrative. In some quarters, pleasure in reading has itself become a political error, rather like sex in Orwell’s “1984.”
As much as Conrad himself, Edward W. Said is a self-created and ambiguous figure. A Palestinian Christian (from a Protestant family), he was brought up in Jerusalem and Cairo, but has built a formidable career in America, where he has assumed the position of the exiled literary man in extremis—an Arab critic of the West who lives and works in the West, a reader who is at home in Western literature but makes an active case for non-Western literature. Said loathes insularity and parochialism, and has disdained “flat-minded” approaches to reading. Over the years, he has gained many disciples and followers, some of whom he has recently chastised for carrying his moral and political critiques of Western literature to the point of caricature. Said has repeatedly discouraged any attempt to “level” the Western canon.
His most famous work is the remarkable “Orientalism” (1978), a charged analysis of the Western habit of constructing an “exotic” image of the Muslim East as an aid to controlling it. In 1993, Said published “Culture and Imperialism” as a sequel to that book, and part of his intention is to bring to account the great European nineteenth- and twentieth-century writers, examining and judging them as a way of combatting the notion—still alive today, Said says—that Europeans and Americans have the right to govern the inhabitants of the Third World.
Most imaginative writers of the nineteenth century, Said maintains, failed to connect their work, their own spiritual practice, to the squalid operations of colonialism. Such writers as Austen, Carlyle, Thackeray, Dickens, Tennyson, and Flaubert were heroes of culture who either harbored racist views of the subject people then dominated by the English and the French or merely acquiesced in the material advantages of empire. They took empire for granted as a space in which their characters might roam and prosper; they colluded in evil. Here and there, one could see in their work shameless traces of the subordinated world: a sugar plantation in Antigua whose earnings sustain in English luxury a landed family (the Bertrams) in Austen’s “Mansfield Park”; a central character in Dickens’s “Great Expectations” (the convict Magwitch) who enriches himself in the “white colony” of Australia and whose secret bequest turns Pip, the novel’s young hero, into a “London gentleman.” These novels, Said says, could not be fully understood unless their connections to the colonial assumptions and practices in the culture at large were analyzed. But how important, I wonder, is the source of the money to either of these novels? Austen mentions the Antigua plantation only a few times; exactly where the Bertrams’ money came from clearly did not interest her. And if Magwitch had made his pile not in Australia but in, say, Scotland, by illegally cornering the market in barley or mash, how great a difference would it have made to the structural, thematic, and metaphorical substance of “Great Expectations”? Magwitch would still be a disreputable convict whom Pip would have to reject as a scoundrel or accept as his true spiritual father. Were these novels, as literature, seriously affected by the alleged imperial nexus? Or is Said making lawyer like points, not out of necessity but merely because they can be made? Indeed, one begins to suspect that a work like “Mansfield Park” is useful to Said precisely because it’s such an outlandish example. For if Jane Austen is heavily involved in the creation of imperialism, then every music-hall show, tearoom menu, and floral arrangement is also involved. The West’s cultural innocence must be brought to the bar of justice.
In the end, isn’t Said’s thesis a vast tautology, an assumption that imperialism did, indeed, receive the support of a structure that produced . . . imperialism? By Said’s measure, few writers would escape censure. Proust? Indifferent to French exploitation of North African native workers. (And where did the cork that lined the walls of his bedroom come from? Morocco? The very armature of Proust’s aesthetic contemplation partakes of imperial domination.) Henry James? Failed to inquire into the late-nineteenth-century industrial capitalism and overseas expansion that made possible the leisure, the civilized discourse, and the spiritual anguish of so many of his characters. James’s celebrated refinement was as much a product and an expression of American imperialism as Theodore Roosevelt’s pugnacious jingoism. And so on.
When Said arrives at “Heart of Darkness” (a book he loves), he asserts that Conrad, as much as Marlow and Kurtz, was enclosed within the mind-set of imperial domination and therefore could not imagine any possibilities outside it; that is, Conrad could imagine Africans only as ruled by Europeans. It’s perfectly true that “Heart of Darkness” contains a few widely spaced and ambiguous remarks that appear to praise the British variety of overseas domination. But how much do such remarks matter against the overwhelming weight of all the rest—the awful sense of desolation produced by the physical chaos, the death and ravaging cruelty everywhere? What readers remember is the squalor of imperialism, and it’s surely misleading for Said to speak of “Heart of Darkness” as a work that was “an organic part of the ‘scramble for Africa,’ ” a work that has functioned ever since to reassure Westerners that they had the right to rule the Third World. If we are to discuss the question of the book’s historical effect, shouldn’t we ask, on the contrary, whether thousands of European and American readers may not have become nauseated by colonialism after reading “Heart of Darkness”? Said is so eager to find the hidden power in “Heart of Darkness” that he underestimates the power of what’s on the surface. Here is his summing up:
Kurtz and Marlow acknowledge the darkness, the former as he is dying, the latter as he reflects retrospectively on the meaning of Kurtz’s final words. They (and of course Conrad) are ahead of their time in understanding that what they call “the darkness” has an autonomy of its own, and can reinvade and reclaim what imperialism has taken for its own. But Marlow and Kurtz are also creatures of their time and cannot take the next step, which would be to recognize that what they saw, disablingly and disparagingly, as a non-European “darkness” was in fact a non-European world resisting imperialism so as one day to regain sovereignty and independence, and not, as Conrad reductively says, to reestablish the darkness. Conrad’s tragic limitation is that even though he could see clearly that on one level imperialism was essentially pure dominance and land-grabbing, he could not then conclude that imperialism had to end so that “natives” could lead lives free from European domination. As a creature of his time, Conrad could not grant the natives their freedom, despite his severe critique of the imperialism that enslaved them.
I have read this passage over and over, each time with increasing disbelief. It’s not enough that Conrad captured the soul of imperialism, the genocidal elimination of a people forced into labor: no, his “tragic limitation” was his failure to “grant the natives their freedom.” Perhaps Said means something fragmentary—a tiny gesture, an implication, a few words that would suggest the liberated future. But I still find the idea bizarre as a suggested improvement of “Heart of Darkness,” and my mind is flooded with visions from terrible Hollywood movies. Mist slowly lifts from thick, dark jungle, revealing a rainbow in the distance; Kurtz, wearing an ivory necklace, gestures to the jungle as he speaks to a magnificent-looking African chief. “Someday your people will throw off the colonial oppressor. Someday your people will be free.”
Dear God, a vision of freedom? After the grove of death? Wouldn’t such a vision amount to the grossest sentimentality? Instead of doing what Said wants, Conrad says that England, too, has been one of the dark places of the earth. Throughout the book, he insists that the darkness is in all men. Conrad is as stern, unyielding, and pessimistic as Said is right-minded, positive, and banal.
Achebe indulges a similar sentimentality. Conrad, he says, was so obsessed with the savagery of the Africans that he somehow failed to notice that Africans just north of the Congo were creating great works of art—making the masks and other art works that only a few years later would astound such painters as Vlaminck, Derain, Picasso, and Matisse, thereby stimulating a new direction in European art. “The point of all this,” Achebe writes, “is to suggest that Conrad’s picture of the people of the Congo seems grossly inadequate.”
But Conrad certainly did not offer “Heart of Darkness” as “a picture of the peoples of the Congo,” any more than Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart,” set in a Nigerian village, purports to be a rounded picture of the British overlords. Conrad, as much as his master, Henry James, was devoted to a ruthless notion of form. Short as it is—only about thirty-five thousand words—“Heart of Darkness” is a mordantly ironic tale of rescue enfolding a philosophical meditation on the complicity between “civilization” and savagery. Conrad practices a narrow economy and omits a great deal. Economy is also a remarkable feature of the art of Chinua Achebe; and no more than Conrad should he be required to render a judgment for all time on every aspect of African civilization.
Achebe wants “Heart of Darkness” ejected from the canon. “The question is whether a novel which celebrates this dehumanization, which depersonalizes a portion of the human race, can be called a great work of art,” he writes. “My answer is: No, it cannot.” Said, to be sure, would never suggest dropping Conrad from the reading lists. Still, one has to wonder if blaming writers for what they fail to write about is not an extraordinarily wrongheaded way of reading them. Among the academic left, literature now inspires restless impatience. Literature excludes: it’s about one thing and not another, represents one point of view and not another, “empowers” one class or race but not another. Literature lacks the perfection of justice, in which all voices must be heard, weighed, balanced. European literature, in particular, is guilty of association with the “winners” of history. Jane Austen is culpable because she failed to dramatize the true nature of colonialism; Joseph Conrad is guilty because he did dramatize it. They are guilty by definition and by category.
In the end, Achebe’s and Said’s complaints come down to this: Joseph Conrad lacked the consciousness of race and imperial power which we have today. Poor, stupid Conrad! Trapped in his own time, he could do no more than write his books. A self-approving moral logic has become familiar on the academic left: So-and-so’s view of women, people of color, and the powerless lacks our amplitude, our humanity, our insistence on the inclusion in discourse of all people. One might think that elementary candor would require the academy to render gratitude to the older writers for yielding such easily detected follies.
Why am I so angry? A disagreeable essay or book does not spell the end of Western civilization, and liberal humanists, of all people, should be able—even required—to listen to points of view that are contrary to their own. But what Achebe and Said (and a fair number of other politicized critics) are offering is not simply a different interpretation of this or that work but something close to an attack on the moral legitimacy of literature.
“There is no way for me to understand your pain,” Henry said the next time the class met, speaking to everyone in general but perhaps to Alex in particular. “Nor is there any way for you to understand mine. The only common ground we have is that we can glimpse the horror.”
It was a portentous remark for so young a man, but he backed it up. Launching into a formal presentation of his ideas about “Heart of Darkness,” he rose from his seat behind Alex to speak. At one point, shouting with excitement, he brushed past him—“Watch out, Alex!” he warned—and threw some coins into the air, first catching them and then letting them drop to the table, where they landed with a clatter and rolled this way and that. Everyone jumped. “That’s what the wilderness does,” he said. “It disperses what we try to hold under control. Kurtz went in and saw that chaos.”
Henry had a talent for melodrama. “Chaos” was another Conradian notion, and I shuddered; our first class on Conrad had come close to breaking apart. Today, however, Shapiro had restored civility, beginning the class with a sombre speech. Hunching over the long table, his voice low, he said, “I had to feel a little despair the other day.” He warned the students against shouting past one another. He spoke very slowly of his own ambivalence in teaching a book that challenges the very nature of Western society. “It’s very hard when you teach a course like Lit Hum, which the outside world represents as the normative, or even conservative, view of social values—it’s very hard to find yourself. As you read Conrad, do you say, ‘Am I going to step away from this culture?’ Or do you say, ‘I’m going to interact with it in some way that recognizes the contradictions and lies that culture tells itself’?”
And Shapiro went on, slowly reëstablishing the frame of his class, situating the book in the year’s work and in the work of the élite university that sits on a hill above Harlem.
Looking back on our little Kulturkampf, I realize now that however much I disliked Achebe’s and Said’s approach, they helped me to understand what happened in the classroom. Just as Alex fought so angrily to keep Western civilization untouched by the stain of Kurtz’s crimes, I initially wanted “Heart of Darkness” to remain impervious to political criticism. In truth, I don’t think any political attack can seriously hurt Conrad’s novella. But to maintain that this book is not embedded in the world—to treat it innocently, as earlier critics did, as a garden of symbols, or as a quest for the Grail or the Father, or whatnot—is itself to diminish Conrad’s achievement. And to pretend that literature has no political component whatsoever is an equal folly.
However wrong or extreme in individual cases, the academic left has alerted readers to the possible hidden assumptions in language and point of view. Achebe and Said jarred me into seeing, for instance, that Shapiro’s way with “Heart of Darkness” was also highly political. I will quickly add that the great value of Shapiro’s “liberal” reading is that it did not depend on reductive control of the book’s meanings: when the class, provoked by Shapiro’s questions, broke down, it did not do so along the clichéd lines of whether Conrad was a racist, or an imperialist. On the contrary, an African-American student had read the book seeking not victimization through literature but self-realization through literature, and white and Asian students, with one exception, had tried in their different ways not to accuse the text but to interrogate themselves. Their responses participated in the liberal consensus of a great university, in which the act of self-criticism is one of the highest goals and a fulfillment of Western education itself. A benevolent politics, but politics nonetheless.
Reading Conrad again, one is struck by his extraordinary unease—and by what he made of it. In the end, his precarious situation both inside and outside imperialism should be seen not as a weakness but as a strength. Yes, Conrad the master seaman had done his time as a colonial employee, working for a Belgian company in 1890, making his own trip up the Congo. He had lived within the consciousness of colonial expansion. But if he had not, could he have written a book like “Heart of Darkness”? Could he have captured with such devastating force the peculiar, hollow triviality of the colonists’ ambitions, the self-seeking, the greed, the pettiness, the lies and evasions? Here was the last great Victorian, insisting on responsibility and order, and fighting, at the same time, an exhausting and often excruciating struggle against uncertainty and doubt of every kind, such that he cast every truth in his fictions as a mocking illusion and turned his morally didactic tale into an endlessly provocative and dismaying battle between stoical assumption of duty and perverse complicity in evil. Conrad’s sea-captain hero Marlow loathes the monstrous Kurtz, yet feels, after Kurtz’s death, an overpowering loyalty to the integrity of what Kurtz discovered in his furious descent into crime.
“The horror” was Conrad’s burden as man and artist—the violent contraries that possessed him. But what a yield in art! Certainly T. S. Eliot and others understood “Heart of Darkness” to be one of the essential works of modernism, a new kind of art in which the radically disjunctive experiences of the age would find expression in ever more complex aesthetic forms. Seen in that light, the spectacular intricacy of Conrad’s work is unimaginable without his participation in the destructive energies of imperialism. It’s possible that Achebe and Said understand this better than any Western reader ever could. But great work galls us, drives us into folly; the fervor of our response to it is a form of tribute. Despite his “errors,” Conrad will never be dropped from the reading lists. Achebe’s and Said’s anguish only confirms his centrality to the modern age.
At the end of the second class, Henry spoke at length of Kurtz’s progression toward death and Marlow’s “privilege of watching this self encounter itself,” and Alex was silent, perhaps humbled. My antagonism toward him eased. I had not much liked myself as a young man, I remembered. Alex had resisted the class consensus, which took some courage, or stubbornness, and if he thought he was absolved of “darkness” he had plenty of time to discover otherwise. In Shapiro’s class, liberal humanism had resisted and survived, though the experience had left us all a little shaken. It was hard these days, as Shapiro noted, to find yourself.
“I don’t want to say that this is a work that teaches desperation, or that evil is something we can’t deal with,” Shapiro said. “In some ways, the world we live in is not as dark as Conrad’s; in some ways, it is darker. This is not a one-way slide to the apocalypse that we are witnessing. We ourselves have the ability now to recognize, and even to fix and change our society, just as literature reflects, embodies, and serves as an agent of change.”
The students were relieved. They wanted reconciliation and peace. And one of them, it seems, had, like Marlow, discovered what he was looking for. He had “found” himself. “We scream at the wilderness, and the wilderness screams back,” Henry said, concluding his presentation with a flourish. “There’s a tension, and at that point of tension we resolve our nature.” ♦

A good article on the Slavic influences in the Witcher and also the games
The Cult of The Witcher: Slavic Fantasy Finally Gets Its Due | Tor.com

Ukrainian units that attacked in their offensive 6/4-6/18th so far:
1st Brigade
1st Brigade
72nd brigade
56th brigade
57th brigade
24th brigade
3rd brigade
110th brigade
59th brigade
79th brigade
23rd brigade
31st brigade
37th Brigade
47th Brigade
129th Brigade
68th Brigade
93rd Brigade
NATO trained Armored units, not used yet:
116th Brigade
33rd Brigade
21st Brigade
32nd Brigade:
118th Brigade
117th Brigade:
82th Brigade
Marun Tactical Group, unused.
4th Brigade
46th Brigade
71st Brigade

50 claimed footage knock-outs of vehicles with the 'Whirlwind' missile 6/4-6/11 against the disastrous 1st Ukrainian offensive.
Airtable - Helicopters of the Aerospace Forces
6/4-6/15. So far drone and video footage show 101 knocked out and confirmed destroyed Ukrainian AFVs.
Russia claims that they destroyed/knocked out 186 tanks and 418 armored vehicles of other types for the lost of 54 Russian tanks knocked out. 30-25% of western AFVs have been lost in 9 days. Also: 7,500 casualties inflicted on the Ukrainians with half of them dead or crippled. Russian casualties are around 700.



Ukraine 6/14-6/15 performing armed recon.

There are so many similar aspects compared to WW2. These figures are likely more verified than the officially claimed figures.
June 16 2023- RIA Novosti. Since the beginning of the special military operation in Ukraine, more than ten thousand Russian servicemen have received payments for the destruction or capture of enemy military equipment, the Defense Ministry said.
Last year, 7,064 Russian fighters received payments for destroying 11,586 units of Ukrainian and Western military equipment. And for the five months of this year - 3193 military personnel for 4415 units.
So, this year the distinguished fighters were paid:
* 300 thousand rubles for each of the downed 45 Ukrainian helicopters and 71 aircraft;
* 300 thousand each - for the destruction of 15 launchers of the Tochka-U tactical complex and HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems;
* 100 thousand - for each of the many hundreds of armored vehicles;
* 50 thousand each - for 1501 combat armored vehicles, 203 self-propelled artillery installations and 85 MLRS installations;
* 50 thousand each - for the successful interception of 941 missiles fired by the Tochka-U, Alder (Olkha), Smerch, Uragan and HIMARS systems, as well as 1211 drones.
Military sailors, whose competent and prompt actions destroyed six naval drones that attacked Russian ships and civilian infrastructure in Crimea, received 200,000 rubles each, the Defense Ministry added.
Now in the Zaporozhye and South-Donetsk directions, payments are being made to fighters who destroyed German Leopard tanks and armored vehicles manufactured by the United States and other NATO countries.

New senior officers completed their general-staff training. Likely to be transferred to the new army, corps, and division headquarters.
"Military Academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the graduation of
generals and officers took place Diplomas were presented to graduates by the Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Colonel-General Sergei Istrakov."