Talk:GRU (Russian Federation)

Untitled
I have never seen such a fuc... up article on such an important intelligence organization as GRU. Do yourself a favor - Translate http://ru.wikipedia.org, or https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRU  or other f.. horror. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.5.131 (talk) 17:44, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * And, was it, ... the participation of the GRU in the sinking of the "Kursk 141".
 * Hello respected admirals, officers, and, sailors. Closing the rescue hatch. From the outside of the side. Or, GRU combat swimmers? Or, the divers of the FSB? Further . Who can guess? What did the FSB officers foil the temporary anti-hydrogen catalysts? All the ends are shod with these bastards. Boyfriends of the US CIA. Well, a CIA agent who participated in the action they ... where to Deli?109.134.133.241 (talk) 08:57, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

The article needs changes
It needs them badly. Common style of the article isn't neutrile and antirussian. There are alot of definatly antirussian sources like different defectors and others such peopels, there are alot of unprooven phrases from politicians, that looks more like populism, then well-weighted statements. This should be cleaned out. Even references list in the end begins with GRUs defectors and so on - I don't think this is correct, as it's not GRUs purpose. Oleg_Str

Rewrite sentence
Could someone rewrite the following sentence: During its history, the GRU was always a subordinate to the NKVD, its successors (KGB, etc.), the GRU has at different times, made very spectacular recruits of foreign agents, and was the first Soviet intelligence service, to exploit the lax security of western companies, and began to steal S&T (Science and technology) though this later became a domain controlled by KGB, under line x, later Directorate T. It's a long, run-on sentence and I can't make heads nor tails of it. Abigail 16:25, May 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * how's this:
 * During the entire period it operated, GRU was always subordinate to the NKVD and its successors (KGB, etc.). The GRU was particularly successful in recruiting foreign agents, and was the first Soviet intelligence service to exploit the lax security of western companies.  GRU agents pioneered espionage targeted at gaining science and technology (S&T) material.  This function later fell to the KGB, under its "line x" (later Directorate T).
 * -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:17, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

Article rename
Any objection to an article rename to the full name? To be more consistent with other Russian articles. -Joseph 04:24, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)


 * The renaming is wrong. The abbreviation GRU is well known, the full name is not so. &mdash; Monedula 20:59, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC).

Holy Similarities Batman!


Was the symbol of the GRU spetsnaz later adapted into Batman's symbol? The two are pretty much identical. I scanned through Batman's article, and nothing of the sort was listed under "Costume."
 * Your title for this section made me laugh. First I thought they had nicked the Batman logo, but it's the other way around. The spanish version of this article has a similar logo. AFAIK, this logo is the real one. I think its supposed to represent a bird overlooking the world, not a bat.--81.105.251.160 22:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * But yeah my first impression of seeing that symbol was like: BATMAN. Lol, guess those of us living in the West have a pretty different POV on that bat-looking symbol. :P 24.80.236.14 (talk) 23:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

NOT emblem of GRU
The emblem pictured on this page is NOT that of GRU. Along the bottom is does in fact say, in Russian, "Military intelligence," but along the top the acronym is "VS RF." I'm not sure what "VS" means, but "RF" certainly means "Russian Federation" ("Rossiiskaia federatsiia" in Russian). In other words, this emblem might be that of a post-Soviet successor organization, but it is NOT that of the Soviet-era GRU. Terrasirradient 16:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This (see the second image) seems to imply that the logo (if not the GRU name) is still in current use. Lionfire 01:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * It's correct for the current GRU. VS RF is Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (perhaps better sense is Military Forces of the Russian Federation). Buckshot06 14:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of text
Vlad Fedorov deleted the following large portions of text:

During 2006 Georgian-Russian espionage controversy several GRU officers were accused by Georgian authorities of preparations to commit sabotage and terrorist acts. GRU detachments from Chechnya were transferred to Lebanon independently on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon after 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict "to improve Russia’s image in the Arab world", according to Sergei Ivanov. Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev was assassinated by two GRU officers. GRU officers are accused of creating criminal death squads Special services are making teams for extrajudicial punishment (Russian)] by Igor Korolkov, Novaya Gazeta, January 11, 2007. It was reported that GRU helped Saddam Hussein to hide his Weapons of mass destruction before US invasion of Iraq in 2003 Russia Hid Saddam's WMDs -by Ion Mihai Pacepa, Washington Times, October 2, 2003.

This text was supported by references and relevant to the subject. Therefore, I had to restore it. ~

Iraq/ WMD
I read both articles that are referenced as supporting the claim, that the GRU cleaned Iraq of WMD's before the 2003 Invasion- but both of articles are mere speculation and there is not one official source or some documents that they are based on. Also, both were published in the Washington Times and that is as if Wikipedia would rely solely on Fox News for its political articles. Therefore i removed the sentence until some proof backs this claim up. ~

Reply (GRU and Saddam's WMD)
Russia "Cleaned Up" Saddam's WMD

Former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John A. Shaw, a "top Pentagon official who was responsible for tracking Saddam Hussein's weapons programs before and after the 2003 liberation of Iraq," stated in October 2004, March 2005, and again in February 2006 that it was the Russians who helped Saddam Hussein to "clean up" his weapons of mass destruction stockpiles "to prevent the United States from discovering them." 

In late October 2004, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations' "nuclear watchdog", told the UN Security Council that the Iraqi Interim Government "reported to the agency" that approximately 380 tons of "conventional explosives" were "missing" from the "vast" Al Qa Qaa complex of "1,100 buildings" about 30 miles south of Baghdad "after last year's invasion." 

IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei "passed on the letter from Iraqi authorities informing the agency of the theft." The IAEA said that "the material, sealed and monitored by its inspectors until the US-led invasion, had gone missing some time after" April 9, 2003, "during 'the theft and looting of governmental installations'." The IAEA "last inspected the munitions at al-Qaqaa in January 2003 but [had] not been allowed back into Iraq" following the invasion. 

The Associated Press reported October 25, 2004, that, "At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said U.S.-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact. Thereafter, the site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, also speaking on condition of anonymity."

The Pentagon was "unclear" as to whether or not the explosives had "disappeared" after the site in Iraq "fell under US control."

On February 18, 2006, Shaw "told an audience" at "a privately sponsored 'Intelligence Summit'" in Alexandria, Virginia, that "The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went" to Syria and the Bekka valley in Lebanon, Kenneth R. Timmerman reported February 19, 2006, in NewsMax. "They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence," Shaw said.

However, the Financial Times (UK) reported October 28, 2004, that Shaw had "not provided evidence for his claims and the Pentagon [had] distanced itself from his remarks."

On December 10, 2004, Bill Gertz reported in The Washington Times that Shaw, who was a former aide to Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, "was forced to leave his position ... as the result of a 'reorganization' that eliminated his job, defense officials said. ... Shaw said he had been asked to resign for 'exceeding his authority' in disclosing the information, a charge he called 'specious'."

It was reported that GRU helped Saddam Hussein to hide his weapons of mass destruction before the US invasion of Iraq in 2003

Merge with Spetsnaz GRU
there isn't enough info/structure about the Spetsnaz GRU to warrant a separate article. Lugnuthemvar (talk) 09:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Main Intelligence Directorate (Russia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061125045521/http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=4&issue_id=217&article_id=2507 to http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=4&issue_id=217&article_id=2507

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

GRU building
Please provide WP:RS telling that buildings on the image are indeed GRU headquarters. In addition, this looks like a TV screenshot. Is it? If so, this is a copyright violation. My very best wishes (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2016 (UTC) Некоторые юные участники Википедия пишут и пишут о секретной работе Военной Разведки России. И, здесь важны мотивы. Зачем ? Почему ? Для чего ? Ну, естественно, чтобы помочь ! Улутшить ! И страничьку Википедия о Военной Разведки России. И, работу доблестных защитников  Отчизны. Честно разделить оплату и почести за успешные ОП. Часть ,и, весомая часть,  пологается  их друзьям и компаньёнам  из дружественных  Организаций. Ведь наши офицеры нехотят  всё себе заграбастать, а ? Pro Rolex2 (talk) 13:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * "Some of the young participants of Wikipedia write and write about the secret work of the Russian military intelligence. And there are important reasons. What for ? Why? For what ? Well, of course, to help! To improve! And page Wikipedia about Russian military intelligence. And the work of the valiant defenders of the Motherland. Honestly split payment and honors for successful OP. Part, and a significant part of, relies on their friends and on friendly organizations. After all, our officers reluctantly everything yourself hog" --Pro Rolex2 (talk) 13:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe lost in translation, but I don't know what you are talking about. The picture looks like the same building on google street view, but google images are copyright and someone added that picture as free license to be used for wikipedia. here's a link to a (copyright) internet image  --IP_commenter (talk) 04:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No, we don't know that it's free even if the uploader has claimed it as their own. Thousands upon thousands of copyrighted images are uploaded by users to Wiki Commons and claimed as their own. I've found the originals of enough photos used in articles on Wikipedia from there that have simply been cropped slightly and passed off as 'own work'. The uploader -(here - is highly dubious. Of the 3 images s/he has ever uploaded (all in a short spate in 2013), one was quickly deleted as a copyright violation. If there was exif data, I might have been more predisposed to believe that it was genuinely that person's work. Wiki Commons has to look out for WP:COPYVIO. As editors here, we have to be even more vigilant as we are providing a venue to accommodate a high risk copyvio photo at Wikipedia's risk (i.e., by posting it, we are validating it as being a genuinely free image). That's not a risk we are at liberty to take. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You have an issue: in your edit summary you seem to claim that the image is original research yet here you seem to claim that the image is a copyright violation and this contradicts your claim that it is original research i.e. it cannot be original and copied at the same time. Unless you are the legal copyright holder (or authorized representative, (or have rights as licensee)) YOU HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT TO HAVE THE IMAGE REMOVED. --IP_commenter (talk) 19:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Many Wikipedia languages other than English use this image. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Main Intelligence Directorate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090114034635/http://prima-news.ru/eng/news/articles/2005/3/11/31434.html to http://prima-news.ru/eng/news/articles/2005/3/11/31434.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061016222317/http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=416&issue_id=3848&article_id=2371430 to http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=416&issue_id=3848&article_id=2371430

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:11, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Dissolved in 1992 or not? Zombie spy agency? The living dead?
"In May 1992 the GRU was dissolved and became part of the new Russian Ministry of Defense. In 2006 the GRU moved to a new Headquarters complex at Khoroshovskoye Shosse.." These consecutive sentences seem to say that it was dissolved in May 1992, meaning that it no longer existed but that its existence continued 14 years later. Should it say that in May 1992 it was transferred fro one supervising authority to another, or should it say that it was dissolved in May 1992 and then it was restored to function at some later date? Perhaps we could just leave out "was dissolved and" so that the article says ""In May 1992 the GRU became part of the new Russian Ministry of Defense." Edison (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Section needed on 2016 US election
Needs complete section. Wikipietime (talk) 21:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the proposal of the President of Russia
The President has reorganized military intelligence. Just as with the KGB already happened. Since he has encountered some incompronesance ... Everyone has his arguments ...Simpoatisant1234567890987654323456 (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Main Intelligence Directorate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20080325010447/http://www.sadcom.com/PINS/gru.htm to http://www.sadcom.com/PINS/gru.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:39, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Soviet vs. Russian
The GRU that this article is about only came into existence in 1992, as part of the Russian Federation. If we're going to be including information on individuals like Klaus Fuchs, then I think either the primary infobox needs to be changed, or we need a new article making a distinction between the Soviet and post-Soviet organizations, akin to the SVR vs. the KGB. PvOberstein (talk) 17:43, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Is there an official way to pronounce "GRU"? I always thought each letter was pronounced individually (mostly based on TV), like FBI, but recently other people have argued with me that it's more like SEAL or SOCOM. Whatever the case, if there is a definitive correct way to pronounce it, then it would be helpful to have it written phonetically in the introduction of the article. --Trifler (talk) 09:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Ambiguous abriviature.

Some of GU Colonel's feel kind of hunted. Even though. User's Wikipedia.org. That is sufficiently cultured. Highly intelligent content of internet users. All of them. Often and and long. In the academic, professorial Ciber society. Wikipedia online incyclopedia. Sensitive natures. No less diplomatic. As one of the most diplomatic diplomats. According to the M.G.I.M.O .. For Wikipedia user's. Administrators and Authors. Not required - an order, a decree, an order to be given. To get them to write a new topic. Develop or improve an old, forgotten topic. Expression of interest is sufficient. Public interest. Or ... administrative interests. State administration. Even more ! Civilian political leadership of the Russian Federation. First. Mr. President of the Russian Federation. Wladimir Putin. And also. Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Lavrov. And ... the Minister of Health. Mr. Michail Albertowitsch Muraschko. Shown a real interest. How can it be reduced ?! Political influence. Political force! At home and abroad. On the part of a Sicret Agenci, (state, military) administration. Under the pseudonym GU Russia. Military command of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Defense Minister. College of the Headquarters of the High Command. Manifested. All natural. Economic interest. To add. Foreign exchange holdings, savings, avuars. From "the state in the state in the state" (GU Russia). On the budget of the Ministry of Defense of Russia. The knowledgeable user of Wikipedia. The employment contract with GU was not signed. Should she request a written order? To help. Contribute. Of course not! This is a matter of conscience, honor, likes and dislikes. From Wikipedia users. Who has signed a general contractor? Yes, perhaps.
 * Colonel! We are loyal to the Secretary of Defense and the President. And you ?195.244.164.66 (talk) 15:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Added new source

 * Story by Daniel Turovsky, translation by Kevin Rothrock. November 6, 2018, What is the GRU? Who gets recruited to be a spy? Why are they exposed so often? Here are the most important things you should know about Russia’s intelligence community, Meduza.

Infinitepeace (talk) 04:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Pension Fund of the Officers of the Headquarters of the Supreme Command. Is it true? That the colonels of the GU / GRU are officers of the Headquarters of the Supreme High Command. User3456789876 (talk) 14:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 15 April 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to GRU (Russian Federation) and GRU (Soviet Union). (non-admin closure)  Vpab15 (talk) 14:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

– Both of the current titles are pretty messy and don't really fit with the article titles policy. With regard to this page, it's title is just a collection of essentially meaningless letters that definitely don't satisfy common name. Meanwhile, "Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU)" is equivalent to if Federal Protective Service (Russia) was instead titled "Federal Protective Service (FSO)", meaning it isn't made clear by the title that that GRU article is only about the Soviet GRU. Thanks in advance, RadiculousJ (talk) 05:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * GRU (G.U.) → Main Intelligence Directorate (Russia)
 * Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) → Main Intelligence Directorate (Soviet Union)
 * Oppose: Indeed, these are currently not the best names, but a Google Books Ngram chart shows how much more often reliable sources call this organization GRU. The respective articles should be moved to GRU (Soviet Union) and GRU (Russia) or GRU (Russian Federation). —Michael Z. 13:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose move to 'Main Intelligence Directorate (Russia)'. Though I support a move to 'GRU (Russia)' or similar. —blindlynx (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Changing support to GRU (Russian Federation) and GRU (Soviet Union), based on Michael Z's n-grams. RadiculousJ (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support move. Any title such as GRU (G.U.), GRU (Soviet Union) or GRU (Russia) automatically fails WP:ACROTITLE, part of the article titles policy, ("Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject") which can't be overriden by a local consensus. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:19, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support GRU (Russian Federation) and GRU (Soviet Union). Very definitely the common name. Nobody calls it the Main Intelligence Directorate. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Spetsnaz gru 1999.jpg


 * Many problems.
 * But, there is also good news.
 * Colonel Victor Boat released from US prison.
 * Kalabaha1969 Zweite (talk) 16:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 18 April 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

GRU (Russian Federation) → GRU – no page should redirect to the page with the same name with brackets. ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Oh. curprev 21:15, 2 April 2023‎ UtherSRG talk contribs‎ 85 bytes +85‎  UtherSRG moved page GRU to GRU (Russian Federation): Revert undiscussed move (WP:RMUM): Requested by 162 etc. at WP:RM/TR: Moved without discussion; GRU (Russian Federation) is the consensus title per a 2021 RM thank Tag: New redirect
 * GRU (disambiguation) In ictu oculi (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * GRU (Russian Federation), Russian intelligence service
 * GRU (Soviet Union), Soviet military intelligence service


 * Leaning to oppose given that the article is split. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, and redirect GRU to Gru (disambiguation). There is no primary topic, given that GRU (Russian Federation) and GRU (Soviet Union) both have significant long-term notability. 162 etc. (talk) 15:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I already redirected GRU to Gru (disambiguation) before reading this comment since that was the previous status quo prior to an undiscussed move that went against the consensus of the previous discussion. Makes sense anyways: Turns out that the incoming links to GRU are split between referring to GRU (Soviet Union) and GRU (Russian Federation). Steel1943  (talk) 20:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll note that this will require a significant amount of link fixing. 162 etc. (talk) 01:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yep, realized that hours ago. Steel1943  (talk) 16:46, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This agency’s real name isn’t even GRU, while the Soviet one’s was. —Michael Z. 13:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose per previous consensus. As mentioned above, the WP:COMMONNAME for this article's subject may not even be "GRU". Steel1943  (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per User:162 etc. (both have long-term significance), consensus, the 2021 RM and the lack of any argument for the move. Llew Mawr (talk) 11:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Glavnoe Razvedyvatel'noe Upravlenie" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Glavnoe_Razvedyvatel%27noe_Upravlenie&redirect=no Glavnoe Razvedyvatel'noe Upravlenie] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

"Razvedupr" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Razvedupr&redirect=no Razvedupr] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * New dimension. Along with the renaming to GU. Changes in... features. Management and Control in the Army and Navy. Management, not discovery, of information - as a priority. The officers of the GU at the staff of the Supreme High Command of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are no longer required. To hide or to cover / shield oneself intensively. On the contrary, to act / administer / control openly. (If not already public.) That should add more respect and recognition.
 * GU, this is GOV. - Administration !
 * Not a military department for scouting info.Steel1943 Zweite (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2023 (UTC)