In the autumn of 1955, in order to commend the generals who made important contributions to the Chinese revolution and the founding of New China, our army held the first major award in history. This great award produced more than 1,000 founding generals, among whom Duan Suquan was awarded the rank of major general. Although there were clear criteria for awarding titles at the time, there are still those who believe that Duan Suquan's military rank was too low. This controversy has attracted a lot of attention on the Internet, with different opinions.
Some people pointed out that Duan Suquan had served as the political commissar of the division during the Red Army period, and it was argued that his military rank was too low. However, we need to carefully analyze his actual duties. Duan Suquan's position during the Red Army period was the head of the Propaganda Department of the Political Department of the Red 6th Army Corps, not the political commissar of the main division. In October 1934, due to the failure of the Red 26th Army Corps' external attack, he was ordered to form the Qiandong Independent Division, which was just a number, and its strength was equivalent to a reinforced battalion of the main force, far inferior to the main division. Therefore, the duties of Duan Suquan, the political commissar of the division, cannot be compared with the political commissar of the main division.
The establishment of the Qiandong Independent Division was mainly to confuse the enemy, and its name did not represent its actual strength. In terms of actual strength, the Qiandong Independent Division had only 800 men and existed for only a month, before it disintegrated under the siege of the enemy. Duan Suquan was wounded and tried to return to the team, but due to the progress of the Long March, he was unable to contact the troops, and finally had to return to his hometown to recuperate. Therefore, for the political commissar of the main division of the Red Army, the division political commissar of the Qiandong Independent Division did not have the corresponding strength and experience.
After the outbreak of the Anti-Japanese War, the main force of the Red Army in northern Shaanxi was reorganized into the Eighth Route Army. After Duan Suquan learned the news, he immediately went to the office of the Eighth Route Army in Taiyuan and found his old leader, Ren Bishi. He then came to Yan'an to conduct anti-university Xi. Since the Qiandong Independent Division was not the main force, Duan Suquan's strength was equivalent to a reinforced battalion of the main force, so the rating in 1952 was not too low. Duan Suquan's experience in the Qiandong Independent Division and his three-year absence from the army were all reasons for granting him the rank of major general.
During the Liberation War, Duan Suquan served as the commander of the 8th Column of Siye. However, in the Battle of Jinzhou, he made two mistakes that were criticized by Liu Yalou, the chief of staff of Dongye. First, he failed to capture the Jinzhou airfield in time, which led to the fact that the enemy replenished his forces by air. Secondly, he did not report in time after losing the position of Little Bauhinia Mountain, which led to the criticism of him by the general manager. Although the 8th Column performed well in the subsequent Battle of Western Liaoning, after the war, Duan Suquan was demoted to the head of the Operations Department of the Northeast Military Region, and the post of commander of the 8th Column was replaced by Huang Yongsheng. Duan Suquan only served in this position for eight months before he was reinstated to his original rank and appointed deputy chief of staff of the Northeast Military Region. Therefore, the award of him the rank of Major General in 1955 was not too low.
On the whole, Duan Suquan's military rank was not lowered. There was a clear difference between the position of the political commissar of the division during the Red Army period and the political commissar of the main division, and the number of the Qiandong Independent Division did not represent the actual strength. During the War of Liberation, despite some mistakes, Duan Suquan performed well in the Battle of Liaoxi, and his award in 1955 was a full recognition of his multifaceted contributions. This historical mystery has finally been revealed, and the conferral of Duan Suquan's military rank is fair and reasonable.
This article analyzes two key points in the controversy over Duan Suquan's military rank, and deeply analyzes his experiences and responsibilities during the Red Army and the War of Liberation. Through a comprehensive investigation, it was concluded that Duan Suquan's military rank was not lowered. The truth of history is often hidden in the details, and by combing through the course of events, we can better understand the historical changes in that special period.
Commentary: Rank controversy in historical details.
This article deeply analyzes the details of the controversy over the rank of the Soviet Union in the middle of the first major award of titles in our army in 1955, and puts forward a reasonable and detailed explanation for the controversy by sorting out the specific experiences of the Red Army period and the Liberation War period. It is worth mentioning that the author adopts an objective and calm tone, through factual statements and analytical reasoning, so that readers can better understand the historical background and decision-making context at that time.
First of all, the article clarifies the situation of Duan Suquan as the political commissar of the division during the Red Army. Through the specific description of duties, it is clearly expressed that after the failure of the Red 6th Army Corps' external attack, the Qiandong Independent Division formed by Duan Suquan was not the main division, and its strength was only equivalent to a reinforced battalion of the main force. This objective statement helps the reader to understand the differences in the military establishment and the responsibilities of the divisional commissars at that time, and provides the necessary background for the subsequent classification of the 1952 eradication.
Secondly, for Duan Suquan during the Liberation War, the article provides specific achievements and mistakes for him to be awarded the rank of major general through two mistakes in the Jinzhou Battle and his performance in the post of commander of the 8th Column. Through such examples, readers can better understand the complex situations faced by the military leadership in the war situation, and also make the article's views more concrete and credible.
In the conclusion of the article, the author makes a comprehensive investigation of the experience of the Red Army and the War of Liberation, and concludes that Duan Suquan's military rank was not lowered. This conclusion is both a powerful response to the controversy and an indication of the importance attached to in-depth analysis of historical details. This kind of objective analysis and argumentation makes the article very persuasive.
However, it should also be mentioned in the commentary that the interpretation of historical events is often influenced by the context of time and space and personal opinions. Even if the article strives to be objective, there may still be room for different interpretations. Readers also need to maintain critical thinking when reading, and look at historical events from multiple perspectives in order to understand historical truths more comprehensively and profoundly.
To sum up, this review argues that the article fully responds to the controversy over Duan Suquan's military rank through detailed historical data and in-depth analysis, and provides readers with a more comprehensive historical perspective. Rank controversies in history are often hidden in the details, and by excavating and restoring these details, it helps us better understand the complexity and diversity of history.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!