From Jin Yinan, "Can the US military still fight?"

Not long ago, Huawei's president's office sent an email to all Huawei employees through Email No. 20 15035, the content is to read an article by Jin Yinan, "Can the US military still fight?" The publisher is Ren Zheng Fei. And the "press" is as follows: the responsibility of soldiers is victory, and sacrifice is just a spirit. Huawei employees should not only have the spirit of struggle, but also put this dedication into down-to-earth learning and skill upgrading, showing efficiency and effectiveness in practical work. It is not difficult to see that the discipline and spirit of the US military mentioned in this article are of educational significance to Huawei employees! To maintain the combat effectiveness of the Huawei team, the boss must constantly beat and remind. "The honor code of American officers stipulates: First, we will never lie. Second, we will never cheat. Third, we will never steal. Fourth, we will never allow any of us to do this. " "The military manual stipulates that if you admire and respect your superiors very much, please express it in the following three ways: First, give your superiors a standard military salute. Second, conscientiously implement the instructions of superiors. Third, do your duty and improve the combat effectiveness of the troops. " "The key word of American military officers' military career is' moving'. Through constant "movement", the general rotation of personnel can not only maintain the professional freshness of soldiers, but also maintain the vitality and creativity of soldiers. "If one thing is familiar enough that people can do it with their eyes closed, then the rest are inert and not creative." West Point graduates want to go to dangerous areas to listen to gunshots and go to war. The following is Jin Yinan's "Can the American army still fight?" Full text: 200 1, giving a lecture at National Defense University. In those years, almost all China military delegations visiting the United States hated the director of the Pentagon in China, and they were typical villains. No matter what you ask, he is arrogant and evasive. Later, we saw his other face. The lecture was well received by the United States, and an agenda was temporarily added: Assistant Secretary of Defense Smith met with me. When this agenda was first submitted to the plan, when I was told, it was too late to ask China for instructions. The foreign affairs comrades who went with me asked me what to do. Did I see it or not? I said I was just meeting. Goodbye. I will take responsibility. In the process of meeting Smith, the obnoxious director of China's office suddenly turned into a full-faced slave. After arriving at the Pentagon, we waited in the reception room outside the assistant secretary's office. At ordinary times, he is very arrogant. When he sees us impolite, he takes care of us. Then he crept to the door of the office and gently opened a crack. He glanced at him and closed it quickly. He didn't even dare to watch it again. He came back and told us that "the assistant minister is still on the phone" for fear of disturbing the host. That kind of cautious and arrogant on weekdays is simply a different person. During the meeting, Smith and I sat on the main sofa. He trotted back and forth and moved two chairs. He sat straight in front of us, his hands flat on his knees, motionless, like a page at any time. After I started talking with Smith, he took out a notebook from nowhere and began to take notes carefully, with a pious and humble face from beginning to end. According to China, this person is a typical "two-faced person" and "flatterer". The boss's presence or absence is completely two gestures and two faces. Are there no villains in the American army? There are the same ones. But then he didn't get promoted. In 2003, I accompanied Pei Huailiang, then president of National Defense University, to visit the United States. When I arrived at the Pentagon, I found that Director China had changed and the little man had retired. Therefore, there are such little people in the army of any country. The key depends on whether you have a mechanism to prevent this kind of villain from gaining power. For example, the US military etiquette taboo stipulated in the US military manual: Don't praise leaders in person. "It is vulgar to praise the chief executive or superior directly face to face. No matter how much you admire your superiors, praise in person is suspected of flattery, which is easy to cause misunderstanding. " The military manual stipulates that if you admire and respect your superiors very much, please express it in the following three ways: First, give your superiors a standard military salute. Second, conscientiously implement the instructions of superiors. Third, do your duty and improve the combat effectiveness of the troops. Isn't that the rule? The rule is not only not to invite people to drink, but also not to form cliques. The US military has also made a rule not to praise leaders in person, just to prevent sycophantic villains from gaining power. Schwartz, former commander of the US Central Command, had a good record in the Gulf War. Many people predicted that he would be the army chief of staff, but he retired as soon as the Gulf War was over. Why? From 65438 to 0997, I studied in National Defense University. Colin Powell, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave me a speech at the National Defense University and gave me a copy of his new book My Journey of America, which revealed the reasons why schwarzkopf was not promoted. Because then US Secretary of Defense Cheney hated him and thought he had a personality problem. Description in the book: On the 15-hour flight to the Saudi capital, passengers lined up to go to the toilet. Cheney saw a major waiting in line for schwarzkopf and shouted "General!" Schwartz just stood up slowly, inserted into the front and went into the bathroom. Another thing on the same plane was also seen by Cheney: a colonel knelt on the floor of the engine room and arranged schwarzkopf's uniform by hand. Because of these two things, Cheney thought that he had a bad personality and could not be the army chief of staff. We may think it is trivial to wait in line for others to go to the toilet and let others help us tidy up our military uniforms, but they think it is a matter of personal quality. Therefore, any army tends to be corrupt, especially a senior officer, but how to control these people with rules is a realistic problem that must be solved to strictly manage the army. During the period of 1995, Admiral Michael Boorda, then the United States Naval Operations Minister, wore two V-shaped bronze badges on his chest, and the news media questioned whether he had the right to wear these two military medals. According to the regulations of the US Navy, badges are only awarded to soldiers who directly participated in the war and won the meritorious service, and the right to wear them must be stated on the certificate of honor. Boorda participated in the Vietnam War and the Gulf War, but the words "wearing this badge" were not on the certificate of honor. He later took off his badge, but people still insisted that he must have something else besides wearing it privately, and began to dig deep into other problems when he served in the navy. 1May 1996 16, Admiral Boorda committed suicide, leaving a suicide note: I violated the honor code of American officers. I choose to die today for the honor of the navy. The honor code of American officers stipulates: first, never lie. Second, we will never cheat. Third, we will never steal. Fourth, we will never allow any of us to do this. When I first saw these guides at West Point Military Academy, I thought the standards were too low. Is it an "honor standard" not to cheat, cheat or steal? The honor of a soldier should be loyalty to the motherland and the people! Later, I gradually understood through one case: the honor of soldiers is not to open doors or mountains and seas, but to accumulate over time like this. The honor code of American officers begins with the most basic points: never lie, never cheat, never steal. Violation of these basic points will be tolerated by the army and despised by soldiers. Therefore, Boorda finally chose to die to save his honor. Another example is Lieutenant General Joseph Phil, who served as commander of the Eighth Army of the US Army stationed in South Korea. He accepted a gold-plated pen worth $65,438+0,500 and a leather briefcase worth $2,000 from a Korean citizen. Phil's family also accepted $3,000 in cash, but did not report it as required. Lieutenant General Phil explained that the giver is a good friend for many years, and it should be legal to accept these gifts for the sake of the relationship between the two countries. Investigators refused to accept his explanation. Later, Lieutenant General Phil handed in the gold pen and briefcase he received and returned the $3,000 received by his family by check. Phil retired in August 20 12, and his rank will be reduced to Major General. It can be seen that the US military has adopted strict rules to prevent officers at all levels from making mistakes. Not only senior officers are strictly bound by the rules, but also the president of the United States. On May 13 and 16, US President Barack Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan held a joint press conference in the White House Rose Garden. It was raining that day, and Obama was strongly criticized by public opinion for letting the marines beside him open umbrellas for him and his guests. Because the US Marine Corps Manual stipulates that male soldiers can't open umbrellas and umbrellas when wearing uniforms, it also stipulates that no official can give instructions to members of the Marine Corps that conflict with the manual without the approval of the commander of the Marine Corps. The president is no exception. Obama was finally forced to admit that he had violated the rules and had to apologize to the Marine Corps. Even the president can't forgive. This is the power of rules. During the period of 1997, a colleague and I studied in National Defense University. Every night, Americans take us to Lin Bao Air Force Base for dinner in a van. One night it rained, and the American troops in the base marched in the rain. The US Army's military manual stipulates that soldiers should not show fear in the face of natural phenomena. American military regulations also stipulate that soldiers can wear raincoats, but not umbrellas. Because holding an umbrella will affect holding weapons and saluting the officer. These regulations of the US military are impressive. Let's review how the US military maintains and cultivates the bloodiness of soldiers through various rules. When I was studying at the National Defense University, I found that they didn't have a barracks department. The headmaster and dean moved into the official residence with orders and moved out with resignation orders. They are "flowing iron bureaucrats". Other officers' housing is also their own business, and they can live in the officers' dormitory of the National Defense University, but they have to pay money, which is not cheap. Many officers rent houses nearby because they are too expensive. Military housing subsidies are all included in wages, so it is not necessary to build houses in a unified way, and it is impossible to engage in corruption with houses. In addition, they have no vehicle management department. There are 7 vehicles for National Defense University, equipment truck 1, 4 vans for official reception and 2 cars, of which 1 is used by the president and 1 is used by the president of Information Resources Management College. This car was brought from the Pentagon when the school merged into the National Defense University. Two two-star generals, the president of the National War College and the president of the Armed Forces Industrial College, have no special cars. The "military vehicles" of the US military are also completely different from our military vehicles. Our vehicles with military badges are called military vehicles, and their "military vehicles" are basically military camouflage vehicles. Usually you need to contact the municipal department first to specify the time and route through the town. There is a big "G" (the first letter of the government) on the sign of a few senior officers' cars, which is what we call official cars. They are called "government cars". This kind of car has strict usage rules. The driver of the president of the National Defense University told us that he only has one fixed route every day: take the president to work, take him back after work, and then drive his car back to the National Defense University. If you have a planned business meeting in the evening, you can go, but if you want to make a detour or do something personal, then I'm sorry. You have to go home and drive your own car for these personal things. Because of the rules, the president, a Samsung general, also found it inconvenient to match the car. He often buttons his baseball cap on his head after work and drives away smartly. We learned the budget system of the US military at the National Defense University, and the United States made a budget: banquet when coming, banquet when leaving, and inviting guests to dinner in the middle. There is no budget, only AA system. We visited the Marine Corps University in Quentell, and Colonel Croft, then director of the research center, was very warm and entertained us to taste venison in the officers' club. There are many sika deer in that hilly area, and deer are often killed by cars. I really thought the other person was treating me. I saw nearly 10 people sitting at a table, and I thought there were many people dining with the US military. I didn't want to eat until the end. Grove, sitting in the host's seat, took out his calculator, calculated it, and then announced "165438+ 0.5 USD per person". I quickly asked my colleague, "Do you have money?" He said yes, we immediately took out the money and counted it, and put it on the table like them. In this process, the accompanying American officers did not show any unnaturalness. On the contrary, we were quite embarrassed. This is an American treat, because it is not in the budget. This army with the largest military expenditure in the world has no money to invite people to dinner. At that time, it was 1997. The standardized supply of the US military, that is, the fixed appropriation, accounted for more than 97% of the total military expenditure, and the mobile expenditure was only a little more than 2%. Fund management is dead, and there is not much room for manoeuvre. After returning to China, I learned that at that time, less than 60% of our standardized military expenditure was fixed, which means that nearly 40% of the funds were mobile funds. Later, I learned that two-thirds of our military region's funds came from fixed allocations, and the remaining one-third was entirely co-ordinated by ourselves, which concealed a major corruption hidden danger. In recent years, how did some corruption problems investigated and dealt with by the army happen? One senior leading cadre after another fell. How did they go bad? When the problems of cars, houses, tickets, seats and land assets have seriously disturbed our army, how much energy is left to cultivate the blood and soul of soldiers? Around 2008, the National Defense University conducted a survey to understand the main energy distribution of army officers. The investigation found that "coordination"-coordinating the relationship between the upper and lower levels, the relationship between the left and right, and the relationship between the military and the land. -it consumes most of the energy of military officials. The second is "safety", that is, to ensure safety, stability and no accidents; Thirdly, it is "management" to ensure the daily work and life order of the troops; Then "train"; The last one is "fighting". It can be seen that these problems have long existed in our army. Now everyone is talking about military reform. For our army, an important indicator to test the effectiveness of military reform is to concentrate the main energy of officials at all levels on training and combat through reform. US Army Military Production Management After studying in National Defense University, we settled the room fee of single officer dormitory before leaving, and found that the whole National Defense University didn't even have a place to invoice. They specially sent a van, a 40-minute drive, to take us to Fort Meyer (where the Washington Military Region is located) to settle the bill. Surprised and dissatisfied, I asked, "Why do you have to settle the bill here? Can't I check out at the National Defense University? " A white-haired old lady in charge of finance told me that the land and houses in Fort mcnair, where the National Defense University is located, are military products under the jurisdiction of the Washington Military Region, and the National Defense University has no right to make any financial settlement. Only then did I understand that the Washington Military Region did not undertake the task of defending the capital or surrounding areas, but only managed all the military products of the US military in Washington. Don't underestimate this responsibility. Military units under the jurisdiction of the Washington Military Region, from the Pentagon to various military organs and bases, cannot make money by speculating on land, renting houses, opening hotels, restaurants and shops. Because houses, real estate and other fixed assets have nothing to do with you, you have no qualification or legal person power to sell or rent houses. In August 2006, I participated in the first joint military exercise between China and the United States, and docked in Hawaii and Pearl Harbor on a warship of the North Sea Fleet. Pearl Harbor is huge and beautiful, but the seaplane wharf is rusty and dilapidated, because the seaplane has been abandoned by the US military. Even so, its Pacific fleet has no right to use the dock for joint development or joint military-civilian construction, and can only be abandoned there. In other words, even if this area can no longer be used for military purposes, it is still an unchangeable military product. The US military is not only advanced in weaponry and information technology, but also worthy of our attention and study. They plug loopholes and achieve checks and balances by carefully designing the management authority of people, money and things. I don't think it's that Americans don't understand corruption and don't want to corrupt. But the loopholes in the system are blocked, the space for corruption is very small, and it is difficult to find opportunities and means. Soldiers who have no or few distractions in other fields can only concentrate on their duties, study, train and fight. The earliest employment system of the US military was the post rotation system. Job rotation in the US military is very common. When you hold a position, you rotate every two or three years, up to four years. 1997 studied at National Defense University, USA, and gave a lecture on 200 1. Only two years later, almost all the government staff and teachers have changed. I don't know anyone except a few senior civil servants. They have a theory that if one thing is familiar enough that people can do it with their eyes closed, then the rest are lazy and uncreative. The less you know about things, the more you are unfamiliar with them, and the more careful you work, the more productive and creative you will be in this state. It is unthinkable for the US military to work in a post for several years or even half a lifetime, and it is not allowed within the system. Once, the Defense College of National Defense University organized foreign military students to visit and study in Shanghai. The Shanghai Garrison was well prepared and warmly received. Foreign military students are very grateful, especially the foreign affairs director of Shanghai Garrison is very capable and coordinated, which left a deep impression on everyone. At the farewell dinner, a foreign officer asked the director, "How many years have you worked here?" The director replied, "30 years." With a bang, the foreign officers around him could not help but exclaim. It is hard for them to imagine that an officer can work in a unit for 30 years. What is this for us? Some of our comrades have worked in a unit for decades, and there are many precedents from private soldiers to captains and even district leaders, but foreign troops are not good. American officers told us that the key word of their military career was "move". Through constant "movement" and general rotation of personnel, we can not only keep the soldiers' professional freshness, vitality and creativity, but also effectively prevent inertia and corruption, and prevent an officer from operating in a unit for a long time, resulting in personal attachment between superiors and subordinates. Why is it so difficult for them to have the so-called "collapse corruption"? The mechanism of regular rotation of officers plays a key role, which is in keeping with China's old saying that "running water does not rot, and the walls of the family do not rot". Therefore, the appointment and rotation system of officers is an effective mechanism to prevent corruption and keep soldiers bloody. The second is the promotion of officers. 1997, when I was studying in America, I visited the Pentagon. The war department once provided an example: that year, the graduates of West Point Military Academy were promoted from lieutenant colonel to colonel. First of all, officers serving in overseas headquarters are selected by computers, and officers serving in Pacific headquarters, Atlantic headquarters, European headquarters, central headquarters and southern headquarters are automatically ranked by computers. Then screen among front-line service personnel: Have you ever entered the danger zone? Did you come into contact with hostile fire after entering the dangerous area? Have you ever been injured in a battle after a firefight? In the promotion order of their officers, the highest rank is wounded in the front, the second rank is exposed to hostile fire, the third rank is in danger zone, and the fourth rank is serving in the front command. As for those who serve in the Pentagon or the rear joint chiefs of staff, they rank at the last floor. After the stratification is completed, the "ability and political integrity performance" assessment will be conducted at different levels. For them, the experience of officers will always rank first, and education and age cannot be the primary factors. There is a phenomenon in the distribution of students in American military academies: those who are assigned to serve in the front line are jubilant, while those who are assigned to serve in the Pentagon or the Joint Chiefs of Staff look miserable and ask to go to the front line after working for a period of time. Therefore, there is a phenomenon of "West Point belligerence" within the US military: West Point graduates want to go to dangerous areas to listen to gunshots and want to go to war. Not that they want to die. They also cherish their own lives, but they just want to enrich their military experience. Even if you want to be a general in order to get promoted as soon as possible, you should go forward bravely. This is also driven by interests. Why do most of our military school graduates choose the opposite, thinking about Beijing and entering the headquarters? Because our officers, the more experience in the headquarters, the more they work with leaders, the more opportunities for promotion, which is also driven by interests. The key depends on the interest orientation of an army. The mechanism of the US military tells you that the point of maximizing the interests of soldiers is always ahead. Your experience may be forgotten by the chief officer, but it will not be forgotten by computer files or promotion orders. The third is a variety of incentives. There are many kinds of allowances for the US military: overseas garrison allowance, dangerous post allowance, hostile fire allowance, emergency danger allowance, special post allowance, family separation allowance and foreign language mastery allowance. The US military colonel served for 30 years, the lieutenant colonel served for 28 years and the major served for 20-22 years. The pension is calculated by himself. If a colonel retires, 75% of the three-year average annual salary of the highest income during the 30-year service period is your retirement pension. The first time I saw such a regulation, I felt it was unnecessary. It was very complicated, and it was a typical red tape. What do you mean by "three years with the highest income during 30 years of service"? Not the last three years? The oldest and highest income. But they said no, let me give you an example: an army colonel retired, and the retirement pension was calculated according to his years as a captain in Vietnam. Although the colonel was a captain at that time, his average annual salary was the highest in those three years. Therefore, although their officers have the same rank when they retire, their retirement benefits are varied and very different. Officers who have been on the battlefield have retired and received much more retirement fees than those who stayed behind. Through a set of mechanisms, including promotion, selection and material incentives, the general fairness of military occupations can be realized, thus maintaining and cultivating the blood of military personnel. Blood will die young, so it needs to be preserved and cultivated. Bloody will also sleep, so it needs to be awakened and ignited. What is the significance of soldiers to the country? What is the purpose of the national army? Some people say that the greatest contribution of soldiers is sacrifice, not bloodshed. I'm not quite right. Sacrifice is the greatest contribution of soldiers, but it is not the greatest contribution of soldiers. The greatest contribution of a soldier is victory. The national army is not for you to die at a critical moment.