Aftermath of WWIII (Post-War Red Storm Rising)

There are several issues that are probably worth bearing in mind.

Both sides in the Cold War had vastly inflated opinions of what their enemies could do. The USSR’s exact capabilities weren’t always known to NATO analysts (and Clancy, a novelist, might not have had access to such reports) and writers tended to either underestimate (Dale Brown) or overestimate. This isn’t exactly Clancy’s fault. Someone writing today would have been more accurate. They might not have been more exciting.

The Russian plan is exactly what the Russians intended to do, with the possible exception of Iceland. (It makes sense that they would want to do it, but they might not be able to do it.) They relied heavily on commando units to sow chaos and confusion in NATO’s path. We could expect to see them using their links to Communist Party-like groups and other organisations to manipulate the West. Deception was pretty much the Russian stock-in-trade. They deceived Hitler in 1944-45 and wouldn’t see any reason not to deceive NATO.


Aftermath…the USSR is probably going to quake apart. They’ve just been beaten in a war. Poland and East Germany will probably want to gain independence. The Generals in charge may agree to let them go or dig in for a fight. NATO may or may not provide support. I’m guessing not because of the nukes. Post-war, the US will probably thrust a great deal more money into its military. There will probably be a major depression in Germany as a result of the war damage. The French and British got off lighter

Bob
 
Well, if I understand the result of the Coup in the Kremlin, we essentially have the Soviet Army runnning the country.

Red Storm Rising has a few things going for the Soviets:


  • The Warsaw Pact hasn't had its forces badly bloodied in the fighting. While Soviet divisions have been mauled, there is no mention of Polish or Romanian forces getting trashed.
  • In the events of the story, there is no reports of massive discontent in Eastern Bloc nations. Thus, the Soviets aren't forced into a giant police action at the same time as the heavy fighting. The plot of Hackett's "The Third World War" is essentially once it becomes obvious that the Soviet Union will lose, all kinds of resistance movements break out. This, at least, has not happened in the Eastern Bloc yet.
  • West Germany suffered most of the battle damage.
That said, even in this situation, the Soviet Union would be hard pressed to keep what they have. Afghanistan is already resisting as hard as can be, and East Germany seems restive. Given this imminent crackdown and the economic hits that the West will push on the Soviets, the Soviet Union is doomed.
 
Well, if I understand the result of the Coup in the Kremlin, we essentially have the Soviet Army runnning the country.

Red Storm Rising has a few things going for the Soviets:


  • The Warsaw Pact hasn't had its forces badly bloodied in the fighting. While Soviet divisions have been mauled, there is no mention of Polish or Romanian forces getting trashed.
  • In the events of the story, there is no reports of massive discontent in Eastern Bloc nations. Thus, the Soviets aren't forced into a giant police action at the same time as the heavy fighting. The plot of Hackett's "The Third World War" is essentially once it becomes obvious that the Soviet Union will lose, all kinds of resistance movements break out. This, at least, has not happened in the Eastern Bloc yet.
  • West Germany suffered most of the battle damage.
That said, even in this situation, the Soviet Union would be hard pressed to keep what they have. Afghanistan is already resisting as hard as can be, and East Germany seems restive. Given this imminent crackdown and the economic hits that the West will push on the Soviets, the Soviet Union is doomed.
OK, it's been a while since I read it, but weren't the Pact militaries sidelined because they were not considered to be reliable enough? If that's the case, it really doesn't bode well for Soviet control after a major defeat.
 
OK, it's been a while since I read it, but weren't the Pact militaries sidelined because they were not considered to be reliable enough? If that's the case, it really doesn't bode well for Soviet control after a major defeat.

Don't remember and I didn't see it on Wiki. Maybe. Still, I'd have to think sending in Polish or other Warpac forces would be done instead of "C" units.
 
For the folks calling RSR a NATO wank, keep in mind that the conventional wisdom today indicates that in the event of a large scale non-nuclear conflict between warpac and NATO forces in europe in the late 80's as was stipulated by RSR, then the Soviet economy was weak enough that it could not support a large scale protracted conflict with the west. Effectively the Soviets needed to achieve all their objectives and force the allies to the bargaining table within a few months. As the Germans learned some 40 years earlier, basing your bid for victory on winning a war so quickly and easily is not the best of ideas. Although achieving such an outcome is technically feasable, it would require a lot of if's to go their way:


-if the Red army and other SSR forces manage to overrun NATO positions and take all their objectives without any major hitches

-if NATO decides to come crawling to the negotiating table within a few months rather than stick it out for the long haul

-if Soviet quantitative advantages are enough to account for the rather large qualitative disadvantages they faced against the allies

-if warsaw pact forces perform comparably to their Russian counterparts rather than being considerably deficient in either equipment quality or training

-if NATO commanders fail to notice anything suspicious on the Soviet side of the Iron Curtain and are taken almost completely by surprise

If all of those conditions are met(and probably a few others) the soviets could probably win such a conflict. However that is a lot of if's, any one of which could throw a monkey wrench into the works for the Soviets. Ignoring the more technical side regarding hardware on either side of the conflict, the simple fact that any soviet victory scenario relies so heavily on factors that were far from certain makes such an outcome highly unlikely. Say what you will about TC's assessment of military hardware, the strategic and tactical picture still leans heavily toward a NATO victory.


Back on topic, I haven't read the book, however if the political situation is comparable to OTL (a reagan presidency or president like reagan), the confusion caused by the coup could lead to a long enough delay in responsiveness from the Soviets that NATO may just decide to not risk that it was merely a delaying tactic and decide to push further east. Obviously the USSR is going to break up several years early either due to military reasons, or as a result of peace treaty stipulations. I would say it is safe to assume that we will see a similar result in the long term as to OTL, just with a higher body count.
 
Don't remember and I didn't see it on Wiki. Maybe. Still, I'd have to think sending in Polish or other Warpac forces would be done instead of "C" units.

If that were a viable alternative, sure. Not up to the equipment standards of a category A division, but better than the C's to be sure. better training as well. Also offers the pragmatic benefit of not spending soviet lives, and for better effect.

The fact that the Pact forces were more or less unused raises several questions, and a few possibilities. Certainly, at least the highest echelons of (at least some) pact governments must have known of the impending attack; the east germans knew (refused to allow chemical weapons), and it seems logical to assume that, at the very least, the Poles were aware. Yugoslavia and Romania probably were not considered trustworthy or need-to-know; Hungary perhaps is not reliable enough for the pact. One wonders about the Czechs; I'm tempted to say that, given the lack of an offensive out of Bohemia (IIRC; correct me if i'm wrong), they were kept in the dark, but I'm not sure. But some of those nations were probably at least vaguely aware of what was going on. So why ignore them?

One possibility is to delude NATO forces. Some Soviet reinforcement could be hidden or ignored by NATO; whereas, say, Romanian forces entering Germany would raise question marks. This is not a perfect explanation, though; the Soviets decided to prepare, at the risk of exposure, the moment they declined to initiate Zhukov-4 and blitz the West. And when attrition wears down front-line caliber forces, why not deploy decent Polish divisions to shore up the assault? for that matter, why not the east germans, if logistics are an issue?

So the reason is probably political in nature. one explanation is that this was to limit the escalation of the war. now, this makes sense, to a degree. But once the war is on, and Soviet reserves are falling, why not turn to Pact Forces? The only answer I can come up with is that the Warsaw Pact was unable or unwilling to militarily back the Soviets, or the Soviets are unwilling to accept it. I suppose that the Soviets might have doubted the quality of their allies, but if they were reliant on "C" divisions to a degree, they were hardly in a position to be choosy. But would the allies have been interested in joining in? Remember, Poland is restive; Romania is a few years from revolution; the Germans are being asked to support war against their kin; I doubt that the Czechs or Hungarians are thrilled by the prospect of a Russian-instigated war. Some of them will see this as either a sign of Soviet weakness, or of opportunity to break free. In short, they are not interested in fighting, or the Soviets do not trust them to perform for the Pact.

this raises some interesting prospects for the Postwar world. The USSR has been bloodied and turned back, but the rest of the Warsaw pact territories are militarily secure. They didn't join in the war, so they are on good terms with NATO. The Soviets are weakened, governed by an alliance of army and moderates, and busy reorganizing. One wonders what would happen if they attempt to exert their autonomy...
 
Top