Causes and Essence of the Revolution in Military Affairs

p Military affairs develop very unevenly. There were periods when military equipment, weapons, the methods and forms of combat and the war as a whole changed comparatively slowly. These periods were very long, they lasted decades and even centuries. For example, the period of the comparatively slow and gradual 325 development of military affairs on the basis of side-arms began with the emergence of wars and continued up to the 15th century. Side-arms were also used in the wars of our century. The period of the gradual development of military affairs on the basis of firearms also lasted for centuries.

p But military affairs also went through periods of rapid development, periods of qualitative, radical change. They experienced a series of major revolutions. One of them was ushered in by the invention of powder and the introduction of firearms. This revolution lasted for a comparatively long time. It included a number of stages connected with qualitative changes of firearms and military equipment.

p The modern revolution in military affairs began after the Second World War. Essentially it was carried out within a few years, but it still continues to develop. The revolution in military affairs has been prepared by the whole course of modern social development. Its basis is the powerful advance of the productive forces in the economically highly developed states and scientific and technological progress, and the policies of states are its driving force.

p It is the state policy that directs the economy and scientific and technological progress along a definite course. Politics, expressing the vital, notably the economic, interests of classes, can use economic and scientific development to increase the welfare of the people, to multiply the wealth of society, but it can also use it to harm mankind.

p The policies of the imperialist states spark off an upheaval in military affairs because the capitalists are willing to use any means, including war, to shore up the crumbling structure of capitalism. The imperialists are willing to lay all the achievements of the economy, science and technology on the altar of the Moloch of war. They believe that they can save their system by using the achievements of scientific and technological progress for the purpose of war.

p Conversely, the policies of the socialist countries have wrought major changes in military affairs to defend peace, democracy and socialism. They have created a reliable nuclear shield against imperialist aggression. The Soviet Union’s defences are strengthened in every way in the interest of the Soviet people and of all peace-loving peoples, of all of mankind.

p The deepest and general causes, or sources, of the contemporary revolution in military affairs lie in the economy, scientific and technological progress and politics. This revolution is expressed in the radical changes in the key elements of the armed forces’ combat power—military equipment, the culturaland technical level of the soldiers, the means and forms of the armed struggle. The last named, and all other aspects of military affairs, are always determined by the quantity and quality of the equipment and by the people handling it.

p Naturally, the most mobile and quickly changing element is weapons. Changes in weapons work changes in the various methods of warfare. Advances in weaponry, Engels wrote, “most forcibly produced changes and even revolutions in the methods of warfare, often indeed against the will of the army command".  [326•1  We had an example of this in the changes in the art of war connected with the mass replacement of smooth-bore guns by rifles, with the introduction of machineguns and other automatic weapons, the application of tanks, aircraft, etc.

p Military affairs changed also in connection with the evolution of the socio-political conditions. The most substantial changes took place under the influence of the French bourgeois revolution at the end of the 18th century, and in the 20th century, following the Great October Socialist Revolution. Thus, during the Civil War in Russia, the Red Army, having approximately the same technical equipment as the enemy, waged manoeuvrable, decisive and energetic combat operations. The combat operations waged in the national liberation wars by the peoples of China, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba and other countries also introduced many new methods of warfare.

p The modern revolution in military affairs in the USA and the USSR, the countries most advanced and strongest in military respects, is directly linked with radical changes in weapons and military equipment. It follows from the internal logic of the development of military equipment. Of course, one must not ignore the spiritual growth of the Soviet people connected with the USSR’s embarkation on the new stage of development, although the decisive element is the revolution 327 in military equipment brought about by rapid scientific and technological progress.

p This is explained by the fact that combat actions are waged by people who use not only their physical and spiritual forces but also the technical means of armed struggle created by them. The latter inflict upon the opponent direct losses in manpower and materials, create tactical and operational, and also strategic possibilities for routing the enemy.

p The more perfect the military equipment, notably the weapons, the greater is the damage they inflict on the enemy, the shorter is the way to victory.

p The improvement of military equipment and weapons throughout history may be described as the passing on to them of the key functions people have to perform in the armed struggle—they are made to serve as a power source, engine (transformation of energy), exert direct action on the opponent, carry out control functions, etc. Therefore, military equipment and weapons include: means of destruction, means of delivery and means of control. Changes in military equipment proceed unevenly and irregularly.

p The creation of means of destruction and means of delivery depends on our knowledge of nature, on our scientific knowledge and on production development. The deeper we cognise nature, the more perfect are weapons; the higher is the level of production and the greater its possibility, the more abundant and widely distributed are weapons. This can be clearly seen from the development of weapons.

p Side-arms—the sword, spear, bow, etc.—were predominantly introduced empirically, without scientific knowledge. These weapons increased man’s physical strength, enabled him to act over greater distances. Firearms, which use mechanical, physical and chemical energy, considerably increased the possibility of inflicting damage to the opponent. The knowledge of the fundamental laws of nature made it possible to use enormous nuclear sources of energy in warfare and thereby vastly to increase the pressure on the enemy. Suffice it to say that the explosion of a 10 megaton hydrogen bomb releases an amount of energy exceeding that released by all the explosive materials produced during the Second World War throughout the world.

p The use of the powerful forces of nature (the chemical energy of explosions, electric power, nuclear energy), the 328 utilisation of internal combustion engines, various machinery, radio, automatic and many other technical means have considerably lightened man’s efforts, have changed the relation between man and technology in the armed struggle. Man is now able to apply the enormous forces of nature in war. Powerful and perfect military equipment, weapons of enormous destructive power make it easier for the troops to wage combat, increase the effectiveness of their attempts to win victory.

p Developments in the military field are characterised by constant quantitative and qualitative changes of the material and technical basis. First to change are the means of destruction. The destructive power of weapons has grown mainly owing to an increase in the power of the charge. When man learned to release the energy locked in the nucleus, the troops were armed with nuclear weapons, which cannot be compared with so-called conventional weapons. The destructive power of weapons has also increased owing to their greater rate of fire and longer range. The range of weapons has increased from several metres to practically unlimited distances (missiles). The enormous power of the nuclear charge as a means of destruction, combined with the missile as a means of delivery, has created a fundamentally new weapons system. All this has wrought vast changes in military affairs, and brought about a veritable revolution in that field. The means of controlling weapons and troops also changed continuously, though generally slower than the means of destruction and means of delivery.

p Nuclear missile weapons are able to destroy any enemy objective and to strike any point on the globe almost instantaneously. The enemy can be destroyed not only by series of blows delivered by the troops, but, first and foremost, by direct nuclear missile strikes. The political and military leaders now command over powerful means to strike directly at the enemy and of effectively attaining their aims. This is the characteristic feature of the revolution in military affairs as a whole, which has ushered in a fundamentally new method of resolving the main tasks pursued by combat actions of different scale, and by the war as a whole.

That is why this sharp, leap-like transition from conventional to nuclear-missile weapons as the main means of waging war and the corresponding new means of achieving the 329 basic aims of the war, comprise the essence of the contemporary revolution in military science. Soviet military doctrine assigns a major role in the rout of the aggressor to nuclear weapons. At the same time it does not deny the importance of other kinds of weapons and means of struggle and the possibility, in certain conditions, of combat actions being fought without the use of nuclear weapons. The final victory over the aggressor can be achieved only by the concerted efforts of all the services and arms.

Main Features of Modern Revolution in Military Affairs

p As regards its content and specifics the revolution in military affairs is an extremely complicated and many- faceted phenomenon brought about by the development of the productive forces, by the scientific and technological revolution. It reflects the transformation of science into a direct productive force.

p Scientific and technological progress and the logic of the development of military equipment were responsible for the comparatively rapid creation of nuclear weapons, and for the transformation of all of military affairs on their basis. Only a few years were needed before the discovery of the chain reaction released by the fission of the nuclei of uranium materialised in nuclear weapons, power plants and in other specific technological fields. At the same time this led to the growing differentiation of military equipment, its greater complexity and the very rapid rate at which it grows obsolete.

p Suffice it to say that every service now commands over hundreds of different types of equipment and weapons systems, while during the Second World War they had only two or three weapons systems at their disposal. The enormous number of parts comprising the various kinds of equipment have made such equipment very complicated and expensive, and it is steadily growing even more complex and more expensive.

p According to the US press the complete replacement of the armament of troops, which was necessary to maintain their combat readiness, was formerly carried out on an average once in 14 years. Later this period was cut to ten years, while some equipment—aircraft and missiles, for example—grows obsolete in much less than ten years.

p The changes in the military field have not only become 330 more rapid, but have also become more extensive. They embrace not only one of the services or arms of the services, but all of them, without exception. The introduction of a fundamentally new means of destruction—nuclear weapons—has changed the means of delivery: supersonic aircraft of an enormous payload and rockets of different power and range were built. Revolutionary changes are also being wrought in the means of controlling troops. At the same time the power-to-man ratio has increased greatly. As compared with the beginning of the Second World War it has grown several times over. The armed forces are now motorised. They have at their disposal a large amount of mechanical and automatic equipment, more reliable guns with a much higher rate of fire, new engineering equipment, communication and control devices, etc.

p Nuclear weapons have wrought fundamental changes in the structure of the armed forces. For example, in the Soviet Union a new fighting service has been set up—the Strategic Rocket Troops—which is constantly maintained in combat readiness. Nuclear weapons have transformed the Air Defence, Air Force and the Navy. All the arms of the services have changed qualitatively. Nuclear weapons have altered conventional weapons too. They have affected transport facilities, engineer, communication and control equipment. Changes are also being made in the system of the training and education of the servicemen, military theory is developing, etc.

p In accordance with the radical changes in the basic elements of military equipment and weapons a number of relatively independent stages can be discerned in the revolution in military affairs. The first stage was linked with the creation of atomic weapons, which ushered in a number of important changes in the military field; the second was connected with the emergence of a carrier for the atomic charge ( rockets) and the creation of nuclear missile weapons. Nuclear charges, possessing a fantastic power, were evolved almost simultaneously. In the second stage of the revolution farreaching changes were made not only in the material and technical basis of military affairs, but also in all other military theory, the organisation of the troops and their structure, in the training and education of servicemen, etc.

p These stages did not coincide in the Soviet Union and in the USA. In the USSR atomic weapons and missiles were created more or less simultaneously. In the USA, aircraft was initially assigned the main role as the carrier of nuclear bombs, and some time passed before the change was made to missiles as the chief means of delivery.

p Nuclear weapons are still being improved. There are two trends in the further development of these weapons. One of them consists in the creation of nuclear charges of smaller power intended for operational-tactical purposes. The other trend is to create charges having a power of many megatons. These are thermonuclear bombs equivalent to 20, 50, 100 and more million tons of TNT. The Soviet Union has large stockpiles of charges of small and colossal power.

p The third stage of the revolution in military affairs began in the USA and the USSR almost simultaneously. This stage was characterised by the comprehensive automation of military equipment, the automatic control of equipment and the combat actions of troops, the intensive introduction of scientific knowledge into the military field, notably for the control of the troops.

p The development of automated control of troops in scale and scope will undoubtedly revolutionise all of military affairs, will make it possible to resolve many of problems in a new way. Only an overall automation of the control of troops and of the means of engaging the enemy will promote the maximum use of the possibilities inherent in nuclear weapons and other modern military equipment. The means of control must correspond to the new means of destruction and means of delivery.

p The further development of the revolution in military affairs is characterised by the maximum utilisation of the achievements of scientific and technological progress, the introduction of scientific knowledge in the actions of the armed forces, in the training and education of the troops and in the preparations for possible military action. The modern stage of the revolution has to do with improvements in the scientific leadership of the troops, of military matters as a whole.

p The present revolution in military affairs was unusual also because it proceeded in peacetime, in the absence of military 332 action. The two atom bombs exploded by the Americans over Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of the Second World War contributed little to the art of war. It was only in later years, when the mass production of nuclear missile weapons was begun, when the Army and Navy were reequipped and the servicemen retrained, that radical changes were made in military theory. Thus, the new military theoretical propositions have been checked experimentally only in peacetime conditions.

p The present revolution is also extraordinary because it, as distinct from the revolutionary changes brought about by the introduction of fire weapons (which affected mainly the tactical sphere and had an impact on the operational sphere only much later), began essentially in the strategic sphere and simultaneously transformed the operational and tactical sphere as well. This, in particular, explains the speed of the changes in the military field.

p The modern revolution in military affairs began and continues on two diametrically opposed socio-political bases and under divergent ideological influence. This left its mark on the rate and trends of the changes in military affairs, and, which is most important, on the form of the changes. In the USA the revolution in military affairs reflected the deepening contradictions of capitalism, the sharp competitive struggle between the biggest monopolies. This was reflected, for example, in the lag of the second stage of military-technical changes behind the first: nuclear weapons were manufactured considerably earlier than were rockets—the means of their delivery. The biggest aircraft monopolies and other monopolies associated with them successfully resisted the production of rockets for a long time. The striving to suppress the national liberation movement in “limited” wars plays a major role in the development and improvement of nuclear weapons of small power. The profits involved in the production of electronic and other technical devices acted as a catalyst and accelerated the advent of the new stage in the revolution in military affairs.

p In recent years, under pressure of the monopolies and the military, a plan was adopted and is being implemented to accelerate the development of weapons. The US ruling circles attempt to attain military technical superiority over the Soviet Union.

p In the Soviet Union the revolution in military affairs has from the very beginning had the full support of the people and is being carried out under the leadership of the Communist Party and its Central Committee. As a result the changes in the military field have a planned and purposive nature, and material and human resources are used more economically and more effectively.

p The carrying out of revolutionary changes in this field has once more confirmed the indubitable advantages of the Soviet military organisation over the military organisation of the imperialist states. Modern weapons were designed and produced in ample quantities in a very short time, the Army and Navy were re-equipped, the servicemen, notably the command cadres, were retrained; at the same time a Soviet military doctrine was worked out to suit the present level of military matters, and military science was further developed.

p The Communist Party concentrated its- efforts not only on supplying the Army and Navy with modern weapons and combat equipment. Relying on the objective processes conditioned by the successes in the building of communism, and the further consolidation of the socialist state, its greater role in the world, the Party succeeded in increasing the political awareness in the Armed Forces, in strengthening the conviction and determination of the Soviet soldiers, in making them even more devoted to their country and the communist cause. The general and military technical standards of the men, sergeants and officers have also risen considerably. The changes in the quality of the personnel of the Soviet Armed Forces makes it possible constantly to maintain the necessary combat readiness and combat efficiency of the troops.

p The most specific feature of the present-day revolution in military matters is the enormous influence it exerts on social life, on all the aspects or elements of the state’s military power.

p It was already evident in the past that the transformations in military affairs exert a strong influence on social relations by changing their form. Frederick Engels said: “... the introduction of firearms had a revolutionising effect not only on the conduct of war itself, but also on the political 334 relationship of domination and subjection."  [334•1  It helped to smash feudalism and promoted the victory of capitalism.

The present revolution in military affairs has an even bigger effect on social relations. In the past changes in military affairs affected only separate countries, those in which they were taking place, now, however, they affect the fate of many peoples, of all of mankind. Moreover, the modern revolution in military affairs forms part of the content of our epoch, comprises a definite aspect of it. It has important economic and socio-political consequences which are indissolubly linked with the main content of our epoch—the revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism. Therefore, its influence on the military potential, on the military power of states (coalitions) is enormous and many-sided.

Influence of the Revolution in Military Affairs on the Military Power of States and on the Military Potential

p By interacting with the economic, scientific and moral-political potentials, the revolution in military affairs has changed the military potential. Having undergone qualitative changes, the military potential has given the military power of states (coalitions) a new form, has introduced structural changes into it. Hence, the revolution in military affairs exerts a determinative influence on the foundations of the military might of states (coalitions) and on the military potential per se, naturally with due account for their nature and the concrete conditions.

p Against the background of the basic socio-political problems of today the revolution in military affairs has proved the military-economic supremacy of socialism over capitalism and lent dynamic qualities to the relation of forces in the world.

p On the one hand, the revolution in military affairs has clearly revealed the anti-humane essence of capitalism, its inability to use the achievements of scientific and technological progress in a rational way, to cope with the modern productive forces. It further intensified the tendency of capitalism to move towards its doom under the burden of militarism. The revolution in military affairs in the capitalist countries reveals the internal laws of the movement, 335 according to which, as Engels said, militarism, like any other historical phenomenon, perishes as a result of its own development.

p This is vividly proved by the concrete indices characterising the development of the capitalist countries, notably that of the USA. Some bourgeois economists and politicians admit that imperialist circles have turned military expenditure into an important lever of regulating the aggregate demand, stabilising the economic situation and preventing crises. The prominent US economist John Galbraith points out that the growing role of the Federal Government in the economy is linked primarily with the arms race. During the 1930s, he says, expenditures for national defence (excluding those for veterans and interest) “amounted to between 10 and 15 per cent of the administrative budget. In the first half of the sixties they were between 55 and 60 per cent.... If a large public sector of the economy, supported by personal and corporate income taxation, is the fulcrum for the regulation of demand, plainly military expenditures are the pivot on which the fulcrum rests."  [335•1 

p In 1937 the military expenditure in the leading capitalist countries was $25 per head of the population, in 1968 it amounted to $396 in the USA, $121 in France, $98 in Great Britain and $87 in the FRG.  [335•2  Speaking of the impact of the “threefold revolution" (the cybernetic, military- technical and the struggle of the Negroes for civil rights), the authors of the book Manifesto of the Special Committee of the Threefold Revolution (among whom are such scholars as Linus Pauling, R. Theobald and others) declared that the antagonisms of capitalism had intensified. They said that the modern system of industrial production was no longer viable since the revolution in the productive forces led to a growth of social contradictions.

p On the other hand, the revolution in military affairs has opened the eyes of the world to the progressive character and genuine humanism of the socialist system, its crisis-free development, its planned and purposeful nature. Even though the revolution in military affairs required no little efforts of the 336 state, it showed that the socialist system possesses resources that enable it simultaneously to develop the national economy and to maintain its defensive might on the required level.

p While the build-up of nuclear missile power by the imperialist countries intensifies international tension, pushes the world to the brink of war, the growing military power of the Soviet Union and other socialist countries acts as a factor for peace, as a factor for historical progress.

p The revolution in military affairs has not only demonstrated the economic and military supremacy of socialism over capitalism, but accelerated the change in the relation of the forces in the world also in moral-political respects. The polarisation of social forces in the capitalist countries proceeds to some extent under the influence of the revolution in military affairs—it places the group of monopolists on one pole and the whole nation on the other. The threat of nuclear war changes the consciousness of the peoples of the world and consolidates them in the struggle for the prevention of war.

p The leading role of the Soviet Union and other socialist countries in social transformations, in the struggle for social justice and for universal peace is a factor of enormous significance. This factor is on the side of the armies of the socialist countries and it acts against the armies of the imperialist states.

p The revolution in military affairs carried out in the USA has intensified the aggressiveness of imperialism in general, notably that of US imperialism, and made its policies particularly adventuristic.

p At the same time the revolution in military affairs poses the problem of a sharp and unexpected change in the relation of forces in war. This is an entirely new element in history. It obliges us to adopt a new approach when evaluating and maintaining the military power of states, the combat power of the armed forces. In wars of the past a considerable quantitative superiority in forces over the opponent (at least a three-fold one) often secured the successful outcome of the armed struggle, but now this has changed. Now not only quantitative superiority, but also qualitative superiority over the opponent has become a matter of prime importance. This applies mainly to the superiority in military equipment, in 337 new weapons, in the organisation of the troops, in their training, in their political and moral maturity and combat qualities, etc.

p The revolution in military affairs has not changed the correlation between man and weapons fundamentally. As before man and weapons constitute a dialectical unity of opposites. They are a unity because man (the soldier) does not exist without military equipment and weapons, which are his artificial organs, while the latter are part of his specific functions.

p There have, however, been certain changes in the interaction between man and weapons. This naturally does not mean that weapons have become independent of man, that man has become their appendage, a robot, as many sociologists and military theoreticians in the West are fond of saying. Nuclear missile weapons have enormously increased man’s power, but they have not replaced him; various cybernetical and computer devices reinforce man’s intellectual powers, but they do not and cannot replace his creative abilities. The colossal increase in technical possibilities has vastly heightened the role of man’s ideological, moral- psychological readiness to act in conditions in which nuclear weapons are invoked. The psychological effect of these weapons raises the role of the moral element of the armed forces’ combat power. The enormous possibilities of the new equipment have put higher demands on the soldiers’ military technical standards.

p Only under socialism can man’s moral and spiritual qualities develop in step with the advances in the military field; under capitalism the development of the former lags far behind the spectacular revolution in weaponry.

p The revolution in military affairs has shown that in Soviet social conditions the radical material and technical changes in the military field do not contradict the formation of a new spiritual make-up in the soldier, his comprehensive development. In other words, a harmonious development of both revolutionary aspects of the process has been achieved in the USSR—of the new weapons and of man who is their master. Things are different in the bourgeois countries. The changes in equipment and weapons there did not and could not be attended by a spiritual growth of the servicemen, by the strengthening of their morale. This means that the moral 338 function, one of the most important elements of combat power, has entered into a more acute contradiction with the other elements. A comparative appraisal of the present military power of states should not fail to take this into account.

p The revolution in military affairs prompts the armed forces of states of the same type to unite their efforts, creates conditions for the internationalisation in the military field. In the imperialist camp this tendency is intensified by the ideology and policy of anti-communism. The socialist countries, on the other hand, are faithful to proletarian internationalism and jointly oppose the forces of imperialism. They coordinate their military efforts in every way, taking due account of the possibilities of the probable opponent.

These are some of the most important consequences of the revolution in military affairs. But, as we noted above, the revolution is continuing. It puts new and greater demands on the economy, on science, on the moral possibilities of states (coalitions), and on their armed forces. The revolution in the military field has made the individual elements of the armed forces’ combat power even more independent, but has, at the same time, increased their mutual dependence.