931
The training of officers should be focused on
flexibility, their thinking should be based on the
selection of alternative methods and means (variants
of actions), which should be used to influence the
military, conceptual, moral, and psychological power
of enemies, by attacking them under favorable
conditions. This allows to achieve the best battle
results with fewer resources – so that smaller forces
could suppress larger ones.
Of course, at a household level, a stereotype has
emerged that soldiers are actors who carry out orders
rather than ask questions. Someone would say that
war is such a practical and dynamic thing that it
makes no sense to spend time thinking about the war;
when bullets are buzzing around, there is no time to
flip through the books and look in them for answers
how to beat the enemy; a soldier or officer asking
many questions can become a heavy burden or even
an obstacle to achieving the goals set.
However, it is difficult to agree with such a
position, given what a truly dynamic process war is.
War is a changing and, at the same time, constant
phenomenon. In order to understand the interaction
between these two elements, it is important to
constantly research and reflect on the real image of
war and its departure from the ideal image. Since the
restoration of independence, Lithuanian soldiers have
participated in many international missions in Bosnia,
Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, off the coast of Somalia,
and in Mali. What principles and ideas were used to
prepare for these missions? Why were some ideas or
military doctrines used while others not? Why were
the conceptual principles offered by certain countries
used? Why is the content of the Lithuanian military
doctrine and other similar documents the way it is?
What is the origin of ideas reflected therein? Some of
the answers are already known. Many best practices
have been adopted from Allies in the West.
The training of officers is a tradition of the British
military thought adopted by NATO. The military in
Lithuania has been newly created. The best western
tradition and models have been adopted and applied.
Thus, in fact, we can tell our colleagues abroad about
the effectiveness of the models they have developed
[16].
The crisis in Ukraine and the aggressive foreign
policy of the Russian Federation has changed the
stagnant attitude of politicians towards national
defense both in Lithuania and in the international
arena and has led to increased appropriations in this
area [4]. The agreement of the political parties to
fulfill the commitments made by the NATO Alliance
on defense financing has stimulated the processes of
modernization of the army that has been underway
since 2016 and has received a great deal of public
attention and discussion about the validity of one or
another purchase in light of existing geopolitical
situation. The problem becomes deeper when the
people involved focus on the acquisition of new
equipment, and the importance of training a qualified
commander seems to be forgotten. The regulated
responsibility of Naval Forces is the training of
personnel as a key and critical resource. Without a
properly trained naval officer, the most advanced
technology is worthless.
The army is a hierarchical organization based on
discipline, patriotism, national and military values.
Its units must be headed by officers who are best-
trained leaders, who know how to point in the
necessary direction, explain the goal, clearly define
tasks, and who are able to persuade and motivate.
The main values and qualities of a naval officer are
patriotism, loyalty, commitment, honesty, courage,
respect, honor, and extensive professional knowledge
related to the old maritime traditions, high culture of
communication, and opportunities to participate in
international exercises in both hemispheres of the
Earth. The naval officer is a leading personality
precisely in terms of these values and qualities.
In his article “Separate but Equal – a Look at
Officer Training in the U.S. Navy and Merchant
Marine” [6], John Hafner notes that a destroyer and a
tanker is based on the same principle of being on the
water, however, the internal organization, purpose,
specificity, preparation, and responsibility covered by
the ships are separated by an invisible border. Unlike
a merchant fleet, the main goal of the U.S. Navy is to
prepare an officer according to his/her competencies
and professional knowledge for him/her to become
optimally suited for service both onboard and ashore.
Considering the wide range of professional
knowledge required, U.S. naval officers are rotating
their line of service from direct command of the
ship’s crew to the operational and strategic planning
sector ashore, gradually moving up the career ladder.
A warship is one of the most complicated ships in
terms of construction and specifics.
Therefore, the commander of the ship is not
required to take care of the propeller rotation. He/she
is responsible for the proper management of the crew
(specialists), its motivation, appropriate decision-
making in an emergency situation, and successful
completion of a tactical or operational task.
Warfare is one of the most complex activities.
Soldiers often have to deal with very difficult
conditions, which pose a threat to their lives and
health, endure heavy physical exertion, and
experience various psychological and spiritual shocks
and challenges. Naval officers must be particularly
prepared well to operate in critical conditions
because the mental state, behavior, and
combativeness of soldiers depend on the
psychological condition of the officers. An officer is
required to have a clear and strong civic and moral
position and to know his/her professional field well
[15].
For a naval officer to be well-prepared, it is
necessary to organize his/her personal strategic self-
development based on a comprehensive approach to
his/her personality. The main areas of organization of
the strategic self-development of the naval officer in
accordance with his/her personality levels, i.e.
physical, psychological, and spiritual, are presented
in Table 1.