What do you think?
Rate this book
Dedovshchina in the Post-Soviet Military: Hazing of Russian Army Conscripts in a Comparative Perspective
In contemporary armies, violence among soldiers seems to be a universal phenomenon found in both professional and drafted armies. However, the comparison of violent practices in various armies around the world allows us to identify specific features linked to those countries' sociological, political or anthropological contexts. Hazing, for example, seems to be more violent in the armies of transitional societies (Russia, Eastern Europe, Latin America), where social tensions encountered by citizens in their daily lives are carried over to, and sometimes intensified in, the military. The comparison of Russian dedovshchina with the situation in other countries makes it possible to identify universal, transitional and national characteristics of military Konstantin Bannikov on the consequences of the spread throughout society of archaic violence produced by the Russian army; Anna Colin Lebedev on the perception of military violence in Russian society; Anton Oleynik on informal relationships among prisoners and conscripts; Kirill Podrabinek on the reasons of the prevalence of dedovshchina in the post-Soviet context; Igor Obraztsov on the historical roots of dedovshchina; Vadim Mikhailin on the role of language in the military milieu; Julie Elkner on the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers; Bakit Katchekeyev on hazing in the Kyrgyz army; Irakli Sesiashvili on hazing in the Georgian army; Hana Cervinkova on hazing in the Czech army; James Wither on bullying in the British army; Eduardo Paes-Machado & Carlos Linhares de Albuquerque on hazing in the Brazilian police; Joris Van Bladel on dedovshchina and the all-volunteer force.
310 pages, Paperback
First published June 2, 2006
5 people want to read
About the author
Andreas Umland
227 books21 followersThomson Reuters ResearcherID: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/I-539...
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7916-4646
Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/citations?u...
Scopus Elsevier: http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.u...
Microsoft Academic Research: http://academic.research.microsoft.co...
Russian Index of Scientific Citation (RINTs): http://elibrary.ru/author_items.asp?a...
MeinProf: http://www.meinprof.de/uni/prof/42839
Valdai Club: http://valdaiclub.com/personalities/e...
Book series "Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society" : http://www.ibidem-verlag.de/spps.html
"Forum noveishei vostochnoevropeiskoi istorii i kul'tury": http://www1.ku-eichstaett.de/ZIMOS/fo...
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7916-4646
Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/citations?u...
Scopus Elsevier: http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.u...
Microsoft Academic Research: http://academic.research.microsoft.co...
Russian Index of Scientific Citation (RINTs): http://elibrary.ru/author_items.asp?a...
MeinProf: http://www.meinprof.de/uni/prof/42839
Valdai Club: http://valdaiclub.com/personalities/e...
Book series "Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society" : http://www.ibidem-verlag.de/spps.html
"Forum noveishei vostochnoevropeiskoi istorii i kul'tury": http://www1.ku-eichstaett.de/ZIMOS/fo...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
April 29, 2021
For a student of the subject, I would say this ‘collection of papers’ would be informative. For anyone else, I’d say, the content of this is simply harrowing.
The root causes of the abhorrent behaviour, both within society and the military are discussed, as are ideas on the solutions.
Its occurrence has touched on the periphery of my scope once or twice, but I’ve not until now looked more closely at it. I have family ties to Russia and friends from there; and I have on occasions caught whiff of how damaging this problem actually is. And I am ashamed to say, I’ve not bothered to dig deeper.
This is an outsider’s academic take.
The consequences of this behaviour for both the victims and society, with a more tangible perspective, are discussed in a book I’ve recently read. I foolishly let that feature in the story slip. I thank Mary for turning the card over: I had my eye firmly on an ‘underground network’.
Since bringing my shovel from the garden shed; now, I do see how this widespread deviant behaviour causes the most harsh and lasting damage to the agrarian society: the life-blood of the country.
One might marvel at why governance would rather cover the problem up than put an end to it. I’ll not need to think too hard about that; the abuse of young men, women, boys and girls by those nestled within the protected circle has long been a problem: and well-hidden, as far back as the first years of Soviet rule.
The root causes of the abhorrent behaviour, both within society and the military are discussed, as are ideas on the solutions.
Its occurrence has touched on the periphery of my scope once or twice, but I’ve not until now looked more closely at it. I have family ties to Russia and friends from there; and I have on occasions caught whiff of how damaging this problem actually is. And I am ashamed to say, I’ve not bothered to dig deeper.
This is an outsider’s academic take.
The consequences of this behaviour for both the victims and society, with a more tangible perspective, are discussed in a book I’ve recently read. I foolishly let that feature in the story slip. I thank Mary for turning the card over: I had my eye firmly on an ‘underground network’.
Since bringing my shovel from the garden shed; now, I do see how this widespread deviant behaviour causes the most harsh and lasting damage to the agrarian society: the life-blood of the country.
One might marvel at why governance would rather cover the problem up than put an end to it. I’ll not need to think too hard about that; the abuse of young men, women, boys and girls by those nestled within the protected circle has long been a problem: and well-hidden, as far back as the first years of Soviet rule.
March 25, 2021
Dedovshchina = abuse by older conscripts on younger (newly recruited) conscripts.
“Ded” ... From Wikipedia: ‘meaning “Grandfather” (a more senior soldier). The Russian army slang equivalent of gramps, meaning soldiers after their third (or fourth, which is also known as "dembel”) half-year of compulsory service: stemming from a vulgarization of the word “”demobilisation”. Soldiers erroneously use this word to describe the act of resigning from the army; soldiers also refer to "dembel" (half-year of conscription, with the suffix -shchina which denotes a type of order, rule, or regime. Thus, it can literally be translated as "rule of the grandfathers." This is essentially a folk system of seniority based on stage of service, and not backed by code or law.’
A two-year conscription meant recruits in year 1991 were abused by the 1990 intake; and on becoming the ‘Grandfathers’ in 1992 they were then at liberty to abuse that year’s new recruits. This stems, according to others, from changes made to conscription in 1967, whereby two different intakes of conscripts were serving simultaneously (a bi-annual draft). A cycle of brutality was born, which fed off the experiences suffered by those abused; and so, the abuse worsens year-on-year. Taking food from the new recruit, stealing their clothes and personal possessions, leads to extreme physical and sexual abuse, rape and murder.
Although I am happy to have read it all. It’s not an enjoyable read - maybe I’m a little squeamish - and shows how evil can so easily exist within an organisation should there be a lack of strict, transparent, oversight.
This is for the academics, which I am not. As such, I try here to provide an objective summary rather my personal view. I don’t feel qualified and this is the first academic paper I’ve read; and why I give it 3 stars: middle of the road. I can’t judge how this rates against other published, academic work.
The abuse of younger, ‘weaker’ members of a military or law enforcement establishment is not unique to Russia; there are reports from other military establishments that suggest it can easily happen where senior officers turn a blind-eye and oversight and accountability are lacking.
From the authors, ‘The key to an efficient, well-ordered and effective military is the capable, well-trained Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO).’
A phenomenon that is multi-factorial and complex and as the authors suggest, the multitude of factors, political (a lack of democracy), economic (an historically underfunded army), cultural (inter-ethnic tensions) make this level of abuse unique to the Russian military.
The root of problem within the Russian military is the lack of effective NCOs at unit level and the weakness of junior officers.
A legacy of Soviet rule is that senior officers remain unwilling (AFRAID) to give authority to a non-commissioned rank (NCO).
According to the authors, ‘Moscow attempted to compensate for keeping authority from NCOs by having political officers engage daily with soldiers and by giving junior officers the responsibility for such things as discipline, moral, combat readiness. Political officers were deemed as no longer required once the communist regime fell and those asked to fill this position have done little. Junior officers have taken a second job, to make ends meet and so have little time and little impact on the soldier at unit level.
Senior conscripts were responsible for training new recruits; and disciplining them. A policy, because of the conscript process, open to abuse.
Next, Moscow took young recruits they saw as competent and after a few weeks training promoted them to “serzhanty” (Sergeant). These ’new sergeants’ were no older than the conscripts they had authority over and younger and less able than the older conscripts. Consequently, the YOUNG SERGEANTS were unable to maintain authority over, and discipline, the “Ded”.
A system which results in a high incidence of both desertion and suicide. The figures for which I won’t go into here. Suffice to say that official figures are disputed by many and the incidence if anything is far from being reduced.
From what I’ve read elsewhere, this is the tip of the iceberg. Young conscripts are forcibly taken from their barracks, treated as sex toys by senior military and political figures and then quietly disposed of.
Whistle-blowers are executed. Families are threatened. None of which, having read this, surprises me.
With all that said, the authors show that other countries are not entirely innocent. A fact I find most disturbing. A relative of mine served in the Parachute Regiment from 1975 to 1988, and although he never suffered abuse, he admitted to me that it did happen: not in the extreme as described in this book, but it did happen.
“Ded” ... From Wikipedia: ‘meaning “Grandfather” (a more senior soldier). The Russian army slang equivalent of gramps, meaning soldiers after their third (or fourth, which is also known as "dembel”) half-year of compulsory service: stemming from a vulgarization of the word “”demobilisation”. Soldiers erroneously use this word to describe the act of resigning from the army; soldiers also refer to "dembel" (half-year of conscription, with the suffix -shchina which denotes a type of order, rule, or regime. Thus, it can literally be translated as "rule of the grandfathers." This is essentially a folk system of seniority based on stage of service, and not backed by code or law.’
A two-year conscription meant recruits in year 1991 were abused by the 1990 intake; and on becoming the ‘Grandfathers’ in 1992 they were then at liberty to abuse that year’s new recruits. This stems, according to others, from changes made to conscription in 1967, whereby two different intakes of conscripts were serving simultaneously (a bi-annual draft). A cycle of brutality was born, which fed off the experiences suffered by those abused; and so, the abuse worsens year-on-year. Taking food from the new recruit, stealing their clothes and personal possessions, leads to extreme physical and sexual abuse, rape and murder.
Although I am happy to have read it all. It’s not an enjoyable read - maybe I’m a little squeamish - and shows how evil can so easily exist within an organisation should there be a lack of strict, transparent, oversight.
This is for the academics, which I am not. As such, I try here to provide an objective summary rather my personal view. I don’t feel qualified and this is the first academic paper I’ve read; and why I give it 3 stars: middle of the road. I can’t judge how this rates against other published, academic work.
The abuse of younger, ‘weaker’ members of a military or law enforcement establishment is not unique to Russia; there are reports from other military establishments that suggest it can easily happen where senior officers turn a blind-eye and oversight and accountability are lacking.
From the authors, ‘The key to an efficient, well-ordered and effective military is the capable, well-trained Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO).’
A phenomenon that is multi-factorial and complex and as the authors suggest, the multitude of factors, political (a lack of democracy), economic (an historically underfunded army), cultural (inter-ethnic tensions) make this level of abuse unique to the Russian military.
The root of problem within the Russian military is the lack of effective NCOs at unit level and the weakness of junior officers.
A legacy of Soviet rule is that senior officers remain unwilling (AFRAID) to give authority to a non-commissioned rank (NCO).
According to the authors, ‘Moscow attempted to compensate for keeping authority from NCOs by having political officers engage daily with soldiers and by giving junior officers the responsibility for such things as discipline, moral, combat readiness. Political officers were deemed as no longer required once the communist regime fell and those asked to fill this position have done little. Junior officers have taken a second job, to make ends meet and so have little time and little impact on the soldier at unit level.
Senior conscripts were responsible for training new recruits; and disciplining them. A policy, because of the conscript process, open to abuse.
Next, Moscow took young recruits they saw as competent and after a few weeks training promoted them to “serzhanty” (Sergeant). These ’new sergeants’ were no older than the conscripts they had authority over and younger and less able than the older conscripts. Consequently, the YOUNG SERGEANTS were unable to maintain authority over, and discipline, the “Ded”.
A system which results in a high incidence of both desertion and suicide. The figures for which I won’t go into here. Suffice to say that official figures are disputed by many and the incidence if anything is far from being reduced.
From what I’ve read elsewhere, this is the tip of the iceberg. Young conscripts are forcibly taken from their barracks, treated as sex toys by senior military and political figures and then quietly disposed of.
Whistle-blowers are executed. Families are threatened. None of which, having read this, surprises me.
With all that said, the authors show that other countries are not entirely innocent. A fact I find most disturbing. A relative of mine served in the Parachute Regiment from 1975 to 1988, and although he never suffered abuse, he admitted to me that it did happen: not in the extreme as described in this book, but it did happen.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews