Conflict in the Third World in the 1970s and 1980s.

Within this module I focussed at the impact of the Iranian revolution (on both USSR and USA), the conflict in Angola (especially the part played by Cuba) and also on the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

Impact of the Iranian Revolution. The impact of the Iranian revolution was not simply a Cold War issue, it had wider impacts in the Middle East (notably in the Lebanon) and also with the Iran-Iraq War. I believe however that the most noteworthy issue was the relationship (or lack of it) between Iran and America. The instability in the region was felt by both Russia and America, as well as troubled more moderate Arab Gulf states.

Angola is a highly interesting conflict to study, it has colonial links, also with players such as South Africa heavily involved, but I believe most noteworthy was the major involvement of Cuba, and with no agreement from Russia! There was a very interesing documentary on TV covering the conflict in Angola which was worth watching.

For me Afghanistan is one of the most interesting conflicts to look at. Clearly the Politburo considered long and hard before going in December 1979 ‘at the request of the Afghan Government’, but they then executed President Amin almost immediately on arriving in Kabul!! The way that the West (USA) backed the Afghan resistance (in the form of the Mujahedin) has had long term consequences; firstly in the way that an insurgent campaign can be mounted, lessons from Afghanistan have been exported to the Balkans, Chechnya, Iraq and back to Afghanistan again. It is worth noting that some of the ‘Taliban’ insurgents being fought by US forces today will have been trained by US Special Forces in insurgent warfare in the 1980s!! It is remarkable to see that USA support for the Mujahedin came in through Pakistan (where there were training camps), and now USA is putting pressure on Pakistan to improve its control over the boarder with Afghanistan.

What I particularly liked about this was the availability of translated documents from the Politburo as well as papers written by, or in conjunction with, USSR commanders with experience of the campaign. It is worthy of study, Afghanistan has been in a state of almost continual armed conflict since 1979, the current insurgency in Afghanistan has some linkage with 1979. If civil war/insurgency was an Olympic sport would Afghanistan be repeat gold medal winners?

Non-Cold War Conflicts

This was a super Unit and each of the six areas of conflict could have been taken as a unit in its own right. As this was a specialist unit for me I led discussions on two of the conflicts, namely the Iran-Iraq War and also the Falklands Conflict. I also looked into the Indo-Pakistan series of wars.

Iran-Iraq. Saddam’s first major conflict which I was particularly interested as the Iran-Iraq War as this took place in an area of the World that I have served in twice. This particular conflict involved a series of tactics and campaigns that had not been seen before or had not been seen for a considerable period. The use of human waves and suicide bombers by the Iranians (although seen in Vietnam) was of considerable interest, especially the popular high esteem that they were seen (and this continues to this day within the realms of radical Islam and is not limited to one country). Also the campaign of firing rockets into population centres, this terrorising the civilian population had had little success in WW2, there is no reason to suppose that it would be successful in this conflict. The attacks each others oil installations was also significant and as was seen caused a significant raise in the price of oil. The ‘tanker war’ is another element that is unique. The shooting down of an Iranian passenger jet, after a US Navy ship mistook it for an Iranian fighter, could have been more significant than it was, there has never been any love lost between the Revolutionary Iran and the USA, and this incident was another chapter. The use of chemical weapons by Saddam would, I believe add credibility to later ‘intelligence’ that he had retained WMD and would lead to his downfall in 2003. I believe that it is right to link Iran-Iraq to invasion of Iraq in 2003 and also with Iran’s interests in the political landscape of the emerging Iraq under occupation.

Falklands Conflict. In contrast, the Falklands conflict was much the most simple conflict and clearly a much shorter one that most of the others in this Unit. The political background to the conflict is clearly a long running saga between Argentina and Britain over sovereignty of a remote (to Britain) and strategically unimportant group of sparsely populated islands, and even after victory in 1982, it is still not resolved. To a certain extent it could be argued that with the UK having to build a new military airport and garrison at Mount Pleasant that the conflict may be over, but the military aftermath continues to this day. I served in 5 Infantry Brigade in the Falklands conflict in 1982 and returned there in 1994 for a 7 month Garrison tour. The achievement of the UK Armed Forces was outstanding but it was truly a close run thing, with the loss of Sheffield, Ardent, Antelope and the Atlantic Conveyor prior to any land engagement it could have gone against Britain. Although it was out-of-style in the Cold War, this conflict should still be studied in relation to the modern era, as it has much to mark it out: the joint nature of operations, the logistic complexities, the use of General Wolfe’s ‘Quebec’ tactic of coming in the back door and the long ‘yomp’ or ‘tab’ across the island of East Falkland. Also the use of missiles against naval ships, the sinking of the Belgrano and in one engagement eliminating the Argentine navy from the conflict and also the use of conscripts against an all volunteer regular force, mark the Falkland conflict as still ripe for study.

Strife in the Communist World


This was an intersting module looking at the relationship between the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites. As far as Russia was concerned it was vital for the defence of the Motherland to retain a series of strongly pro-Soviet buffer states. The Warsaw Pact was essentially a defensive grouping to protect Rusia. America failed to recognise just how badly Russia had suffered in WW2. Stalin genuinely feared German re-unification, especially having luived through WW1 and WW2. Russia retained control over East Europe (less Yugoslavia) through the threat of force or actual use of force. This was shown in East Germany, Hungary and Czechoslivakia.

The emergance of the opposition movement 'Solidarity' in Poland over 1980/81 is particularly interesting. The Soviets did not invade (nor could they due to a large scale involvement in Afghanistan) and Regan clearly sought to pressurise the USSR. Although Solidarity was repressed by the Communist Government of Poland, this to me is one of the first major cracks in the East European Bloc. It had massive popular support in Poland (who generally disliked the Russians) and as was seen at the end of the Cold War Solidarity did well as a political body in Poland.

Vietnam War.

The Vietnam War deserved a module on its own, I had never looked into one campaign in such depth before. The WIMW reading notes provided were good but it was useful to look into some other sources. As well as the directed reading I also read 'Nam: Vietnam War in the Words of the Men and Women Who Fought There' by Mark Baker (printed by Abacus Books) as a bedside book for the week. It provided the soldiers story and showed the lack of understanding and fear by the soldier on the ground, a harrowing and honest book.

The Different phases of the US engagement with Vietnam were significant, but there did not seem to be a clar strategy, especially not with the use of the media. The Tet Offensive was clearly a case where the US and South Vietnam Army won the battle but the media lost the War. The big question is was it worth all of the the casualties, on all sides. It certainly halted the spread of Communism and allowed other states in the region to recover from the Second World War. I enjoyed the discussion group as well.

CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS SIMULATION - The simulation was excellent fun with much reading into the events of the time but also having to respond to daily events. It was a great way to look at the Cuban Missile Crisis which was the single most hazardous period of the Cold War era, not simply because of the risk of conflict, but because of the potential nature of that conflict - a nuclear exchange.
The Soviet team had a collective desire to avoid war (as a ‘victory condition’) and together we worked to prevent the crisis escalating into a superpower confrontation, simultaneously trying to achieve the best possible outcome for our respective nations. Although this was a group activity, the lead roles of Kennedy and Khrushchev were crucial in both simulation and in the events of 1962. Modern communications made the mechanics of crisis management easier, allowed rapid changes to the rules of engagement for Soviet forces in Cuba and retained central control in the Kremlin. Being students who are now 44 years removed from events of the time it is difficult to get a sense of just how close to WW 3 the world came. The resolution of the crisis was assisted by the relationship between Kennedy and Khrushchev and specifically their mutually known desire for peace. There is little doubt that with hawks in both camps this was a constraint in any possible superpower confrontation and helped both sides seek a peaceful settlement. In reality it also helped Kennedy hold his nerve until the other side ‘blinked’. Had Khrushchev held his nerve (as in the simulation) there could have been a more balanced outcome for the USSR, in that the American missiles in Turkey would have been overtly removed. Cuba, in both the simulation and reality gained little, apart from a promise from the USA not to invade, however after the Bay of Pigs I do not believe that the USA could have mounted another invasion. To prevent Cuba ending up reliant on the Soviet Union for economic support, I was surprised that the Cuban players of 2006 did not seek an end to the economic embargo by the USA, which would have been a long term benefit.
This simulation showed the potential of the UN and was a successful and enjoyable format for the replaying and reviewing of the events of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

The Arms Race and Nuclear Strategy. Although there were interesting elements I did find it a slog to work through this module. There is no doubt that Nuclear weapons played a very significant role in ensuring peace between East and West across Europe who have benifited from 40 years of peace through deterrence.

The different policies that evolved of first strike capability, an assured nuclear response, MAD are worthy of study, however the sheer scale of the resources that USA, Russia, China, UK and France have put into nuclear weopns is staggering, especially when you consider all of the training, maning, submarines, aircraft, fule used etc..... And we are left with a residual legacy and with other "third world" nations seeking and gaining entry into the nuclear club (India and pakistan) while Iran is being threatened with sanctions for attempting the same thing.

If anything the Arms Race led to a constant paranoia between USA and USSR which was a major handicap in the proces of detente. The development of global strategy which could have destroied the World is an un-real development, but I remember military training exercises in the early 1980s where there would be simulated tactical nuclear weapons being used.

MILITARISATION OF THE COLD WAR.

The NSC 68 document was a great read as it was the blue print for much of post 1950 American policy. It influenced defence, foreign, security, economic and domestic policies for decades to come, to such a degree that it would also influence daily life for millions of Americans. Most importantly it influenced an entire generation of US politicians, military leaders and strategic thinkers and to some degree I believ that the World is still influenced by this today - look at Donal Rumsfeld!!.

I also believe that it had far reaching influence in Western academia which has only recently (since late 1990s) challenged the American position and stance (since open access to documents in the former USSR).

The Korean War has a personal link for me, in that my Father-in-Law fought in the conflict as a young man. The Korean War showed showed the protagonists (USA and the West on one side and USSR and China on the other) that it could get ‘hot’. It also provided Congress with evidence of USSR and Chinese communist ‘expansion and collusion’. The linkage of the Korean War and Communist expansion was considered to be the final piece of evidence that proves that the USA has no option but to approve of the policy espoused in NSC 68 and leads to approval of spending plans for a massive militarisation programme by the USA. Soviet Russia will also not boycott the UN Security Council again!

A very interesting period in history. The theatre level decisions in Korea are masively interesting, the Pusan perimeter, use of an amphibious landing and then the fatally flawed decision of US led forces to go all out for "victory" expecting China to set there and let it happen. Original documents are great to read as always.

SUNDAY 1 OCT 06.

I have really enjoyed the background reading to the first module, I have found Richard Crokatt easy reading and he does cover the War years well. 'We Now Know' by Gaddis is a little thin on the detail of this period.

I have found the web fantastic for research - there are some excellent sites, especially when it comes to original documents - I have accessed the Trunam Presidential Museum and Library, along with the Churchill Archives Centre. I even fond the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office site quite useful as they have a historical documents area. To be able to read personal letters and telegrams from the period really takes you back in time.

I have also been drafting and re-drafting my first academic essay for a long time (about 15-16 years since I wrote an essay!!) This has been a real challenge especially with a 1,000 word limit.

Andy