Naval science must be given official status.

Revival of naval science as an independent area of knowledge after its administrative removal from the field of scientific studies continues to loom large among the many problems that have been disturbing the naval scientific public for a quarter of a century. That step, as we see it, detracted from the Navy's role in the ensuring of national security and protection of Russia's state interests.

Naval sciences have been in existence in Russia for almost three centuries. Peter I was the man who ushered them into being by issuing a decree, in January 1720, approving Naval Regulations "in order that everyone knows his billet and no one should claim ignorance." The Regulations gave an impetus to the assertion and development of naval sciences in Russia. Specifically, the document had a specialized article entitled "On the Training of Midshipmen in their Billet," which said among other things that "the Captain shall have assiduity in order that midshipmen be trained in sciences which they already had in schools, pursuant to that which is described at length in their billets. And he shall be closely concerned about their training in order that over time they might be officers. Should he show sloth in anything, he shall be liable to grave responsibility as the neglector of the state's weal." (1) From then on, it was prescribed to ship commanders that they provide character reference for each midshipman. The tradition persists to this day.

The founding, in 1724, of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences and Arts made a start in the development of such domestic naval sciences as ballistics, shipbuilding, navigation, mechanics, and hydrodynamics. In 1749, Leonhard Euler had the Academy of Sciences publish The Naval Science, (2) the first Russian manual on shipbuilding and navigation. Mikhailo V. Lomonosov made the next step in the development of naval sciences in Russia by publishing, in 1759, his work Dissertation on Greater Accuracy of Navigation. In order to build and use a navy, he suggested establishing a Nautical Academy that would employ scientists in areas like astronomy, hydrography and mechanics with a view to developing new devices and instruments for greater safety of navigation. Lomonosov's studies concerned such naval sciences as magnetic compass theory, theory of sea currents, theory of weather forecasting, and wave theory of cyclones. What is of importance for us is his following methodological principle: "To derive theory from observations, to correct observations through theory." (3) Thus, mid-18th century was when, based on physical and mathematical knowledge, naval sciences went over from registration of facts to scientific generalizations.

A fundamentally new naval training school--Officer Class "for perfection of a number of best officers from among cadets in top parts of sciences necessary for naval service"--was created in Russia in 1827, for the first time in history of naval education. That opened a period of intense growth in scientific knowledge in the area of steamship mechanics, shipbuilding, hydrography and shipboard artillery. The nation needed not only new ideas but also people capable of thinking like real statesmen, accepting well-grounded decisions on naval employment and development of naval sciences, and creating new types and models of naval weapons.

In 1862, the Officer Class was converted to Academic Course of Naval Sciences--we emphasize, a course of naval sciences--which included navigation, astronomy, marine survey, shipboard weapons, practical mechanics and steam-navigation, shipboard artillery, applied naval architecture, shipbuilding theory, physical and maritime geography, and fortification. As we can see, the range of sciences taught to naval officers was sufficiently broad and bore witness to a considerable exposure to scientific problems in the area of development and employment of Russia's navy.

In 1896, the Nicholas Naval Academy instituted a course of naval sciences with the status of a department. Thus, for the first time ever the teaching of naval sciences--naval strategy, naval tactics, naval history, naval statistics and geography, maritime international law, etc.--was officially introduced alongside, so to speak, naval technical sciences. Thus, a synthesis was achieved in the late 19th century of maritime technical knowledge and naval knowledge proper, the two merging in the notion of "naval sciences."

Figuring importantly in the history of scientific knowledge about war on the seas was the implementation of the following requirement, which Prof. Nikolai L. Klado of the Naval Academy put before all naval academies: "[You should] develop a science on naval warfare and make it take a shape that would be convenient for practical application in the navy." (4) In 1910, based on the record of the Russo-Japanese war, the Academy's command department introduced a new course of naval sciences: naval strategy, naval tactics, history of naval art, history of naval warfare, naval statistics, naval administration, international law of the seas, General Staff service in the navy, mapping (main subjects), military land affairs, constitutional law, political history, political economy, ship theory, health on the seas, information on naval equipment (auxiliary subjects). (5) Thus, the period immediately preceding World War I was when the process of official recognition of the structure of naval sciences came to an end in the Russian navy.

In 1919, soon after the Great October Socialist Revolution and a temporary lull in studies, the Naval Academy revived such naval sciences as philosophy of war, strategy, naval tactics, technique and tactics of weapons, history of naval art, and naval statistics. (6) In the Soviet epoch, more precisely in the 1930s and 1940s, the government accepted a decision, one unprecedented in scale and consequences, on the introduction of scientific knowledge in naval organizational development. It established research institutions and designing bureaus to develop naval weapons and equipment. In the period between 1950s and 1970s, when the oceanic atomic-powered nuclear missile fleet came into being, new knowledge became needed on how to prepare and pursue war on the seas with the use of both nuclear and conventional weapons. This knowledge was obtained from a navy-friendly synthesis of physical and mathematical, natural, socioeconomic and technical sciences. At that time, the naval sciences reached the peak of their development.

Thus, during two and a half centuries the naval sciences formed a well-balanced system of knowledge about war on the seas, naval equipment and naval weapons, going all the way from sails and boarding, through steam and armor, to atomic power and nuclear missiles.

For the two and a half centuries, up to the mid-1970s, no one had even a shade of a doubt that the naval sciences were a necessary thing. Their problems were addressed by military scientists, the Academy of Sciences, and many research institutes in branches of industry. Moreover, the Soviet period saw publication of special state enactments declaring branches of sciences entitled to award scientific degrees. Before 1972, naval sciences were not put in a separate category, existing on the same footing as other military sciences. Scientific degrees were awarded separately in military or naval sciences as dictated solely by research themes. Decree No. 385 of July 28, 1972, issued by the USSR Council of Ministers' State Committee for Science and Technology singled out the naval sciences as a separate section in the nomenclature of scientific specialties, which included the following: theory of strategic employment of the Navy; operational art of the Navy; tactics of naval forces; communications in the Navy; reconnaissance in the Navy and its assets; military hydrography and oceanography; operation and restoration of naval equipment and weapons; protection of vessels from detection equipment.

In 1977, however, the concept of "naval sciences" was abolished, this contrary to the historical process of scientific thought. Formally, it proved easy to "shut down" the naval sciences, which were simply struck off from the official documents. But no one so far is going to restore and put them as a separate category on the List of Specialties of Scientific Workers. Yet, this has to be done without fail and the following will explain why.

The 21st century will be the age of the World Ocean, something associated with the growing importance of its energy, biological, mineral and other resources for the life of nations. On top of that, the World Ocean enables secret deployment and unexpected use of all naval weapons. The interests of the leading world nations will inevitably come into contact in the World Ocean and that is liable to grow into armed conflicts or even a major war. In a one-pole world governed by might rather than law, a "black redivision" of the World Ocean is inevitable in favor of the country or a number of countries concentrated on that "pole." If it doesn't have a strong navy, Russia is likely to be ousted from the strategically important areas of the World Ocean, and our descendants will be barred from them forever. The U.S. and Britain taught the world a graphic and clear lesson by starting a war against Iraq contrary to UN Security Council resolution.

Aside from that, globalization of all processes (in economy, politics, ideology, science, culture, religion, information, etc.) is a factor demanding that scientific research be intensified in all spheres of activities related to the defense of state interests and support of national security of the Russian Federation. Since the World Ocean is the focus of national interests of all without exception countries, maritime investigations, including in the area of naval activities and related spheres, come to the fore.

In this connection, there is a need for new thinking on the Navy's role and place in the general structure of the Armed Forces: after all, Russia as a great power cannot exist without a strong Navy. For this reason, the role of naval sciences is enhanced immeasurably.

On February 3, 2003, the Main Staff of the Navy held a theoretical conference on the theme "Naval Science, the Basis of Organizational Development and Advancement of the Navy." In his final address to the conference, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy Fleet Admiral V.I. Kuroyedov drew the bottom line under years of debate by declaring this: "First, we are putting an end to the dispute on the necessity of naval science! Second, we are starting practical work to create an information and legal field of naval science!" (7)

In everyday use the concept of "naval sciences" is usually replaced with "naval science." In this case the two are seen as synonyms. In our further reasoning we will keep to this approach as well. Science of science states that the necessary attributes of any science, including naval, are subject, object, subject-matter and methodology of research. In order to avoid being drowned in the definitions of these notions, which, as is common knowledge, number around 150, we will be guided by the following. By "subject of science" we will understand a separate researcher, a scientific collective or the scientific community; by "object of science," the sphere of interests of the subject of science; by "subject-matter (subject area) of science," the most important aspects of the object of science from the point of view of its subject.

Object of research is a multi-faceted thing and as a rule has numerous subject-matters of research. Apart from that, subject areas of one and the same object of science may be objects of knowledge in other sciences. For example, warfare, a subject area in naval science, may be an object of research in theory of military shipbuilding and theory of weapons and military equipment. For this reason, the notions of "object" and "subject-matter" are relative, which relativity accounts for the difficulty in defining objects and subject areas in sciences.

As we see it, naval science should be understood as a system of knowledge on preparation and pursuance of war on the seas. The content of naval science is scientific knowledge on all areas of peacetime and wartime activities of the Navy, which are pursued both independently and in coordination with other services and combat arms of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and are directed at the attainment of the state's political goals (Fig.).

War on the seas in all its manifestations is the single object of scientific research for all spheres of the state's activities in the interests of ensuring national security in sea and oceanic sectors. Warfare is a crucial component in this object of knowledge, and in an overwhelming majority of cases it is warfare that proves decisive for achieving political goals outlined by top national leadership. This is why warfare on the seas is the subject matter of naval science.

Lacking a general idea of a possible war on the seas (theoretical model), we are unable to build a navy, or prepare it and the country for repulsion of an outside aggression, defense of national interests, and protection of national security in sea and oceanic sectors. Hence it follows that the most urgent task facing the Navy's scientific community is to develop a theoretical model of a possible war on the seas. In the process, it will have to give a philosophical interpretation to the global processes associated with the activities of the leading powers in all areas rather than the World Ocean alone. It is suggested that this theoretical model should be called "philosophy of war on the seas" (in the Soviet period it made part of the teaching on war and army).

Results of scientific studies in the area of naval science depend in many respects on objectivity of their classification as well as on correct identification of the role and place of each particular theory in the general system of knowledge on war on the seas. Considering the historical (evolutionary) experience in the progress of naval science, it seems expedient to classify the particular theories in naval science: by scale of and support for warfare on the seas (first group of theories); by organization of performance of component services and combat arms of the Navy (second group of theories); by influence on the mind and feelings of sailors (third group of theories).

First group of theories embraces problems of naval art and support for warfare on the seas; second group, technical problems in organizational development, equipment, employment and organization of performance of component services and combat arms in the Navy; third group, military humanitarian problems of war on the seas. Despite everything, theories of the first two groups went on being developed, while in the third group no wide-ranging research was done in the last few decades of the 20th century in such areas as naval medicine, naval education and professional training. For example, the closure, in 1954, of the Naval Medical Academy as an educational establishment intended to provide main higher medical education in the fleet generated, in our view, numerous problems, particularly so where the rescuing of submariners was concerned. Naval medicine is a specific area of scientific knowledge, which needs a special status.

One ought to mention in more detail the theory of naval education and professional training (NE and PT), which is a system of scientific knowledge in the area of military education, training of military personnel and preparation of young civilians for naval service and receiving an education from the Navy's educational establishments. The topicality of this theory is also due to the fact that Russia's naval might is at last on its way to revival. But like the cadre, like, basically, the fleet!

The object of knowledge in this theory is professional and service activities of military cadres during preparations for and pursuit of warfare on the seas, while the subject-matter of research is professional education and professional training of military cadres for warfare on the seas.

The theory's tasks are to develop and upgrade scientific knowledge in the area of state policy related to NE and PT (the state's requirements as regards military cadres); to the acquisition of military cadres for the Navy (the state personnel order for the training of different categories of military specialists; to the drafting of NE and PT content (what is to be taught); to the creation and functioning of NE and PT system (where to teach); to the organization and realization of the educational process (how to teach); to the formation of regulatory and legal framework for NE and PT (organization of education); to the standardization of NE and PT (training procedures); to the ensuring of NE and PT and the educational process, NE and PT quality control, NE and PT control (educational control). Even a simple enumeration of NE and PT problems points to their complexity and importance for the training of naval officers. The important thing during any study of problems of NE and PT theory is to take into account the regularities, aims and principles of military education. Let us consider these one by one.

Regularities in military education* make it possible to orient and direct the activities of military education control agencies and military higher educational establishments in order to ensure a high quality of professional education of military cadres. These regularities are as follows: dependence of military education on this country's national interests, national security and economic capacities; dependence of military education on the state education policy; dependence of military education on levels of command echelons; dependence of military education on a degree of its integration with fundamental sciences; dependence of the quality of military education on an accelerated development of military science (naval science) and degree of its penetration in army and navy employment practices; dependence of the quality of military education on the level of scientific and teaching potential and all types of support for military higher educational establishments. (8)

The above regularities embrace the entire totality of problems influencing organization and development of military education. They directly affect the formation of content, structure, organization and methodology of military education. Ignoring or failing to heed these regularities inevitably led and would continue to lead to stagnation and crisis phenomena in education, which, as is evident from the record of reorganization of the Naval Academy in the 1960s, will require from 10 to 15 years in effort to mend.

The aims of military education are: to ensure an all-sided (intellectual, moral and physical) development of officers; to prepare them for rendering self-less service to their people and for the armed defense of their Fatherland; to prepare them for independent activities as Russia's military representatives outside its state borders while defending its national interests, and for cooperation with state, public, and religious organizations and the media in the area of defense and military security of the country.

The main principles of military education are formulated on the basis of regularities and aims of military education in order to implement the main vectors in state education policy (federal laws) and tenets of the military doctrine in military school activities. These principles are as follows.

First. The priority of national interests and national security as the basis for defining the content of military education. This principle means that the activities of military cadres are directed primarily at defending national interests and providing for national security of Russia. This must be enshrined in the curricula accepted by all types and kinds of military educational establishments.

Second. The unity of state policy for military and civilian schools where training of military cadres is concerned. This principle should guide both military and civilian schools as they train military cadres, because military service, on the one hand, has been classed as a specific type of federal civil service, while, on the other, is due to secure their most efficient interaction in military education area.

Third. Humanization and democratization of military education. This principle characterizes a democratic state and its Armed Forces. In keeping with this principle, military education ought to be based on respect for personal rights and freedoms in a situation where unity of command is the rule and where laws regulating the activities of power structures are observed. It is oriented to develop servicemen's intellectual, moral and physical qualities. While making the curricula, it is necessary to take into account the fact that the military cadres of the Navy may operate outside of Russia's state borders, including in coordination with armed forces of foreign states.

Fourth. Continuity and succession of military education. It implies that it is mandatory to coordinate the content of education at all levels and stages in professional military training and to regulate integration and support process in curricula. In the Navy this principle is realized within the following chain: naval institutes-Higher Specialized Officer Classes of the Navy-Naval Academy (plus Educational and Methodological Association of Higher Educational Establishments of the Navy). This principle particularly grows in importance when the content of military education in command-and-control specialties for different command-and-control echelons is shaped.

Fifth. Fundamentalization of higher military education. In keeping with this principle, the content of military education must be based on the latest advances in science, technical equipment, technology and culture, which secure high professionalism and a broad scientific world-view for military specialists.

Sixth. Faster development of the military education theory by comparison with practical employment of troops (forces). Military education must work for the future. This is why the content of education should be constantly improved, and a quality of training of military cadres has to grow, outstripping the real practice of employment of forces and troops.

Seventh. Conformity of scientific-teaching potential and all types of support of military education to state-established quality level in the education of military cadres. Based on this principle, military higher educational establishments should have highly skilled professorial and teaching personnel possessing a scientific-teaching potential capable of reproducing scientific-pedagogical cadres on its own basis. They should also have research and educational laboratory facilities at the best world level.

To implement the latter principle, we think it necessary that the state budget specifically provide for military school funding in an amount securing high-quality education for the officer cadres. The Federal Law on Higher and Post-University Professional Education envisaged funding for the higher civilian school at not less than three percent of the federal budget. As we see it, a bigger share of financial and material resources must be allocated for military education.

Thus, achieving a uniform understanding of the object and subject-matter of naval science is the most important task for the Navy's military scientific community as it works to revive the naval science. The naval science has objective grounds for its independent existence as a component of military science. The most important thing, however, is that lacking a naval science we are unable to build a modern navy, defend Russia's national interests in the World Ocean, or ensure its national security. As is evident from the world naval history, developing the Navy and strengthening the naval might are two of the main priorities at the modern stage in the formation of Russian statehood.

NOTES:

1. Ustav morskoi, Book 3, Chapt. 1, p. 56.

2. Nauka Sankt-Peterburga i morskaya moshch Rossii, Nauka Publishers, St. Petersburg, 2001, p. 288.

3. Quoted from: N.I. Barbashev, K istorii morekhodnogo obrazovaniya v Rossii, AN SSSR Publishers, Moscow, 1959, p. 62.

4. N.L. Klado, Etudy po strategii, "Realisty" Club Publishers, Moscow, 1997, p. 30.

5. Voenno-morskaya akademiya, VMA Publishers, Leningrad, 1991, p. 25.

6. Ibid., p. 43.

7. Voenno-morskaya nauka--osnova stroitelstva i razvitiya Voenno-Morskogo Flota, Voenizdat Publishers, Moscow, 2004, p. 110.

8. V.P. Yeremin, Voenno-morskoye obrazovaniye v Rossii, Nauka Publishers, St. Petersburg, 2000, pp. 485-514.

Capt. 1st Rank V.P. KOBZEV (Ret.)

Candidate of Military Sciences

Capt. 1st Rank N.V. MAKHROV (Ret.)

Candidate of Naval Sciences

* The present writers believe that there is no need to consider separately the regularities and principles of naval education.