Soviet "Linebacker Raids" against Pakistan

[George Carty]

What would have happened if the Soviet Union had attempted to cut off the supply lines to the Afghan mujahideen, by bombing mujahideen training camps in Pakistan? (And possibly later bombing Islamabad, to try to bring down the Zia regime?)

[MerryPrankster]

I think the US and Pakistanis might be more inclined to let the mujahadeen raid into the USSR if they pulled something like this.

There's a very real danger of escalation if they pulled something like this. Attacking the national capital might trigger a US military response and things might get icky.

[Iñaki]

An interesting way to make the world near, very near of the Third World War.

If this happens during the mandate of Andropov with his paranoias about the United States.

Welll....

1. pakistani and soviet troops clashes near Quetta (after the bombings against the camps the soviets decides that well no only aerial bombing also tank incursions)

2. Incident between soviet and american fleets in Indic Ocean.

3. High Alert in the Warsaw Pact and NATO.

4. Well,... I expect than Andropov decides to have a heart attack if not well:

5. Air clashes between afghan and soviet airplanes against pakistani and american airplanes in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

6. Soviets decides to blockade Berlin accusing Americans of Imperialism.

My god:eek: ! This is the moment in which we needs a heart attack of Andropov if not

7. Skirmishes between american and soviet troops in Pakistan.

8. Andropov believes than Nato could prepare a sudden attack so he decides to make a surprise attack.

9. Invasion of Europe by Warsaw Pact.

10. Third World War.

11. My god! Where is the Andropov heart attack?:eek:

12. The Day After.

[HueyLong]

Does India try to intervene? I mean, they were pro-Soviet, and they would be pretty willing to attack Pakistan.

[Berra]

I don't think tha the US would go to war over Pakistan. Espessially sins the Soviet attack is not of full scale.

[Blaine Hess]

Does India try to intervene? I mean, they were pro-Soviet, and they would be pretty willing to attack Pakistan.

Possibly.

They have aspirations to take Kashmir but nothing else (I think). Perhaps they intervene for the limited purposes to take what is theirs.

Of course they may also look South and see the USN 7th Fleet and Diego Garcia. Then they decide discretion is the better part of valor!

[CalBear]

Does India try to intervene? I mean, they were pro-Soviet, and they would be pretty willing to attack Pakistan.

They weren't THAT pro-Soviet. The relationship with Ivan was more of a counterbalance to China (then an ally of convienence to the U.S.) & U.S. supported Pakistan than a true strategic partnership.

As was pointed out, India had a rather severe force inbalance with the United States at the time (actually, it still does). Partnerships rarely extend to self imolation.

[Torqumada]

The Soviets did go into Pakistan and attack Mujahaideen (sp?) training camps and supply lines. There was an attack in which one of the CIA officers there was almost killed, and he was one of the people that suggested sending Stingers to Afghanistan. I saw him recently interviewed on the History Channel. So, it did have an effect on the war in Afghanistan.

Torqumada

[Grimm Reaper]

Since Pakistan also has an association with China, this could become extremely dangerous for the USSR. If this leads to the Beijing-DC Alliance then the current leader of the USSR needs a fatal illness immediately or sooner.

Meanwhile the superior American aircraft, either in Pakistan hands or flown by 'volunteers' take a devastating toll of the Soviet air force. This has the side effect of easing the Cold War in Europe as it becomes clear that the Soviets can barely maintain the air war over Pakistan and can't possibly go on the offensive in Western Europe.

India is certainly not seeking trouble with the US and any allies, plus Pakistan, plus China as well. They MIGHT even turn on Moscow, either out of self-interest or the realization that Soviet advances are about to cross the last border between the USSR and India itself.

[George Carty]

An interesting way to make the world near, very near of the Third World War.

If this happens during the mandate of Andropov with his paranoias about the United States.

Welll....

1. pakistani and soviet troops clashes near Quetta (after the bombings against the camps the soviets decides that well no only aerial bombing also tank incursions)
I'm specifically excluding a Soviet land attack on Afghanistan, as that would lead to World War III as you suggest (same reason why the United States never launched a land invasion of North Vietnam).

[Michael B]

Meanwhile the superior American aircraft, either in Pakistan hands or flown by 'volunteers' take a devastating toll of the Soviet air force. This has the side effect of easing the Cold War in Europe as it becomes clear that the Soviets can barely maintain the air war over Pakistan and can't possibly go on the offensive in Western Europe.
1) The Americans aren't going to put their best planes in the hands of a Chinese ally nor are they going to send "volunteers" to Pakistan.

2) Give 1, the Soviets can offset some of advantage of the Pakistan Air Force by using air launched cruise missiles. Obviously this is more expensive than carpet bombing Pakistani villages, but it also cut losses of combat aircraft.

[Grimm Reaper]

Michael B, the US can and did sell F16s to Pakistan. Hundreds of them. IN either situation the USSR had to commit 15% of its air power to Afghanistan. Throw in Pakistan and Moscow's air power is going to be at a serious disadvantage in any other crisis.

[Electric Monk]

Not really total strength (because the Soviets were serious pack rats) but certainly the supply of 4th generation fighters is going to be drawn down. Which if the war expands leads to a major problem for the USSR in any other area, given the disadvantages non-4th gen Russian fighters have against front line western fighters.

After all only the Su-27 and variants (maybe MiG-29/31) are a match (or more then a match given modern electronics) against frontline Western fighters such as the F-16/15/Rafale/Typhoon/etc... Take a look at Australia's rapidly deteriorating strategic situation for an example. The Su-30MKI owns anything else in the Pacific Rim short of the F-22.

Assuming Pakistan takes delivery of large numbers of F-16's and possibly other modern US fighters, then the Soviet Air Force is going to have big problems matching it and balancing defense requirements in other theatres.

[Ivan Druzhkov]

7. Skirmishes between american and soviet troops in Pakistan.

8. Andropov believes than Nato could prepare a sudden attack so he decides to make a surprise attack.

9. Invasion of Europe by Warsaw Pact.

10. Third World War.

11. My god! Where is the Andropov heart attack?:eek:

12. The Day After.
I suppose having "Giant alien squid suddenly teleports into downtown Manhattan and kills everyone with a psychic blast" just after No. 7 would be out of the question?

[CalBear]

I suppose having "Giant alien squid suddenly teleports into downtown Manhattan and kills everyone with a psychic blast" just after No. 7 would be out of the question?

ROFLMAO:D:p :D

[bill_bruno]

I suppose having "Giant alien squid suddenly teleports into downtown Manhattan and kills everyone with a psychic blast" just after No. 7 would be out of the question?

Qui custodiet ipsos custodes?

[The Sandman]

I can see it now...

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, Brezhnev!" :D

[Iñaki]

originally posted by Ivan Druzhkov
I suppose having "Giant alien squid suddenly teleports into downtown Manhattan and kills everyone with a psychic blast" just after No. 7 would be out of the question?


I am sorry but for misfortune of the people of a possible ATL with this serie of events no Ozymandias and also no Doc Manhattan in this ATL:D

[Michael B]

After all only the Su-27 and variants (maybe MiG-29/31) are a match (or more then a match given modern electronics) against frontline Western fighters such as the F-16/15/Rafale/Typhoon/etc... Take a look at Australia's rapidly deteriorating strategic situation for an example. The Su-30MKI owns anything else in the Pacific Rim short of the F-22.

Assuming Pakistan takes delivery of large numbers of F-16's and possibly other modern US fighters, then the Soviet Air Force is going to have big problems matching it and balancing defense requirements in other theatres. So the Soviets thin out other fronts which they are not fighting on. As for the Americans unless they increase overall production of the F16 (which is obviously a possibility), they are going cut supply to some other country, almost certainly one facing Soviets. In that case, that is where the Soviets can move their fighters from. All that is happening is that pieces are being shuffled about.

Of course the Americans could increase production, but that is going to hit something else. Beside that is going to take time and the Soviets are already in action......

Furthermore, if Pakistan does get large numbers of F16s it is unlikely that they will be able to operate them effectively. Think North Koreans flying Migs in the Korean War and you can see what I mean. On paper they may appear to have an advantage, but in this scenario I would back experienced Soviets against inexperienced Pakistanis.

There is also another factor. The Americans will have to fully support Pakistan in the war otherwise the Chinese will move in and one of their rewards will be a functional F16 plus manuals. Whilst their commitment need not be as high as the Soviets, they are not going to win the war on the cheap as they historically did. It is also going to cramp their style in starting trouble for the Soviets elsewhere.

[greenknight]

don't know how russia would think bombing a forgein capital would solve their problem. mujahadeen would just head for the mountians. bombings in afganistan wasn't effective. don't think how bombing pakistan would be. baring dropping the "bomb" don't think it would change russia's fortunes in the war. if russia did do this, they would still lose the war but may make the region more unstable.

[Electric Monk]

So the Soviets thin out other fronts which they are not fighting on. As for the Americans unless they increase overall production of the F16 (which is obviously a possibility), they are going cut supply to some other country, almost certainly one facing Soviets. In that case, that is where the Soviets can move their fighters from. All that is happening is that pieces are being shuffled about.

Furthermore, if Pakistan does get large numbers of F16s it is unlikely that they will be able to operate them effectively. Think North Koreans flying Migs in the Korean War and you can see what I mean. On paper they may appear to have an advantage, but in this scenario I would back experienced Soviets against inexperienced Pakistanis.

There is also another factor. The Americans will have to fully support Pakistan in the war otherwise the Chinese will move in and one of their rewards will be a functional F16 plus manuals. Whilst their commitment need not be as high as the Soviets, they are not going to win the war on the cheap as they historically did. It is also going to cramp their style in starting trouble for the Soviets elsewhere.

True pilot training is going to suck, but I could certainly see American "instructors" engaging Russian planes just like another war where it was Russian instructors.

As for taking planes from other areas that's all well and good, but production Su-27's entered service only in 1984 (Flanker-B model), and not in numbers till '86 and until then they had either the MiG-29 (short range tactical fighter 1/2 generation behind Su-27) or... That's about it really for modern fighters.

What time are we talking about for Russian "linebacker" type raids? It depends on the year quite a bit if we're talking hardware. Of course Russian pilot training is way better then Pakistan so regardless of F-16's outclassing MiG-29's so it probably won't matter much unless as I suggest American pilots start flying those F-16s. Then the availability of Su-27's matters quite a bit.

[George Carty]

Soviet land attack on AfghanistanOops, I meant a Soviet land attack on Pakistan

:o

[Flocculencio]

Good lord, that's one helluva bump :D

[SunilTanna]

The US and China are likely to both be extremely annoyed if the USSR launches a substantial attack on Pakistan. The Cold War sinks to a new low. There is a small chance either might get militarily involved, but the risk is probably small -- but if it does happen, WW3.

If the USSR kills Zia, any new government is likely to pursue the same sorts of policies in support of Afghan rebels. The only way to stop the Pakistan government supporting the rebels is to conquer the country, but now the USSR has 100 million more hostiles to deal with... and a pissed off China and USA. Even India may start to feel threatened by the USSR in this case with the Red Army on its borders. The risk of invasions are too high, and the potential gains too small.

I think more likely is USSR taking limited action to increase the cost to Pakistan of supporting the rebels. They don't hope to stop all Pakistani support, but retaliate, and also make them think twice. Bombing raids on military and economic targets. Cross border raids. Even a limited temporary invasion of a border province perhaps.

The Pakistan military will have to deploy some forces to face this threat, and then India will surely take the opportunity to give Pakistan a kicking while it can, especially over Kashmir

The US won't intervene. The Indians will assume so anyway... they have recent experience of the US not intervening to save Pakistan in the Bangladesh war.

[Electric Monk]

A solid bump, though not a record :).


Geopolitically this will almost certainly tie India closer to the USSR. Likewise it will push China closer to direct confrontation with both India and the USSR.

The USA will have to strengthen the Indian Ocean fleet, and probably reinforce Diego Garcia. I'm curious as to where they'd get the resources—the Pacific Fleet loses out?

As I mentioned I can certainly see American advisors flying a bunch of shiny new "Pakistani" fighter jets against the USSR. What happens if the Soviets get proof? (Good proof, not the "everybody already knows" kind of proof.)

Anyway, the Cold War is getting warmer.

[Douglas]

In terms of "advisers" I think it's much more likely that Israeli pilots would be used by Pakistan, as they have combat experience against Russian equipment, as well as less of a "Oh crap WW3!" factor if they're caught.

In terms of the actual raids on Pakistan, that depends on the year. Assuming it takes the USSR at least two years to get pissed off at Pakistan enough to the point where bombing starts, you have the first raids in 1982. If we assume Gorbachev comes to power on schedule, the biggest and most deadly air raids will be in 1985, as this the year Gorbachev pretty much said "Win it, or we'll quit."

[Linkwerk]

In terms of "advisers" I think it's much more likely that Israeli pilots would be used by Pakistan, as they have combat experience against Russian equipment, as well as less of a "Oh crap WW3!" factor if they're caught.

I-Israeli pilots? For Pakistan?

Don't think that's going to happen. US pilots in Pakistani jets would be much, much more plausible than Israeli pilots. It's not like the US is adverse to politically provocative use of American pilots, just look at the USN pilots who flew Taiwanese Sabres in dogfights over the Taiwan strait.

If discretion needs to be used, I guess Turkish pilots could be put in Pakistani cockpits, but frankly I don't think the jump in quality is going to be worth the trouble. The PAF did do pretty well for itself in historical skirmishes with Afghan and Soviet aircraft.

[Michael B]

In terms of "advisers" I think it's much more likely that Israeli pilots would be used by Pakistan, as they have combat experience against Russian equipment, as well as less of a "Oh crap WW3!" factor if they're caught.
If they are Israeli, they are going to have to be freelance Israeli. Tel Aviv is not going to support Pakistan against the Soviet Union because it has not reason to and not the obvious reason that Pakistan is a Muslim country. The latter of course does not wash because the Israelis sold spares to the Iranians, Muslim, during the Iraqi-iIan War, because it was in their interest to take down Preident Hussein a couple of notches.

[SunilTanna]

Pakistan was a close ally of Saudi Arabia in the 80s. Money flowed from Saudi to Pakistan. Pakistan had a significant amount of troops in Saudi securing the kingdom. So if the US wants to help Pakistan, it probably flows via Saudi and the other Gulf States - it doesn't flow via Israel, which considered Saudi etc as potential enemies (for example opposing US supply of drop tanks and F15s to Saudi)

Israel/Iran is a different issue. They were historic allies since the Shah's time, because they both opposed Iraq. The Islamic revolution made an open alliance difficult, but as is well known Israel did supply some arms to Iran in the 80s.

[chris N]

It is likely that an attack by the Soviet Union on Pakistan could very well result in some hositle action on the Sino-Soviet Border. It would definatley make thing worse for the Soviet Union.

[ranoncles]

don't know how russia would think bombing a forgein capital would solve their problem. mujahadeen would just head for the mountians. bombings in afganistan wasn't effective. don't think how bombing pakistan would be. baring dropping the "bomb" don't think it would change russia's fortunes in the war. if russia did do this, they would still lose the war but may make the region more unstable.

Bombing the capital of Pakistan would not materially change the supply and support position of the Mujahedin but it certainly would have an impact (pun intended) on the support Pakistan
would be offering. Its one thing to support your neighbour when there's no price to pay. When bombs fall on your country as a result, its a different situation.

A different issue is the combat value of the Pakistani air force against the Russians. The Russians have a doctrine of overwhelming the enemy with low quality pilots and adequate aircraft whereas the West has a policy of high quality pilots in a handful of high quality aircraft.

WWII has decisively shown that the Russian model works albeit at high cost. It has also shown that while the difference in pilot quality existed, it was not decisive as the high quality force still needs to get replacement pilots which are expensive and time inefficient to train. If losses are high (as happened to the Germans) the high quality will be eroded in the replacement pilots.
It also showed that the difference between the German aircraft and the (best) Russian aircraft was not that great.

The same can be said IMO of the comparison between Russian jets and Western aircraft. Russian equipment has often been rather better than Western experts expected. They currently have a bad rep because of defeats in proxy wars but seriously, would the Egyptians, Syrians and Iraqi's have done better if they had American weapons?

The Pakistani's would be more than able to punish small scale incursions but they would have been hammered in a full scale aerial Soviet style onslaught as even NATO expected to be eventually defeated in such a scenario and only sought to inflict huge attrition.

Now, would Pakistan want to engage in such a losing proposition for the sake of the Mujahedin? Would America want to engage the Russians in Pakistan so shortly after Vietnam? And how would China respond to such overt American presence next to its own borders?

[Flogger]

PAF has only 36 F-16s and most of them in sargodha close to india ....so to expect they could be of more than nuisence value is foolish ...rest of PAF is mainly F-6 and Mirage ....one regiment of VVS Floggers will suffice for them

[Michael B]

And how would China respond to such overt American presence next to its own borders?
Obviously China are no friends of the Mujahedin but what they sit by and let Pakistan be bombed into submission when it is obviously a conspiracy cooked up by Russia and India to emasculate their ally? ;)