Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR

If I were ever to make 2nd timeline, which one would you be most interested in?

  • 1. German Empire 1888

    Votes: 62 29.2%
  • 2. Russian Federation 1993

    Votes: 74 34.9%
  • 3. Red China 1949

    Votes: 37 17.5%
  • 4. Yugoslavia 1920

    Votes: 27 12.7%
  • 5. India 1947

    Votes: 28 13.2%
  • 6. alt-fascist Italy 1922

    Votes: 29 13.7%
  • 7. South Africa 1994

    Votes: 18 8.5%
  • 8. Germany 1990

    Votes: 20 9.4%
  • 9. Japan 2000

    Votes: 18 8.5%
  • 10. United Kingdom 1997

    Votes: 20 9.4%

  • Total voters
    212
  • Poll closed .
Chapter One: The End of an Era (November '82)
  • Since the end of World War II in 1945 and victory over the Axis powers, two new superpowers USSR and USA are locked in open yet restricted geopolitical rivalry which involves both countries and their respective allies, the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc. Aside from the nuclear arsenal development and conventional military deployment, the struggle for dominance was expressed via indirect means such as psychological warfare, propaganda campaigns, espionage, far-reaching embargoes, rivalry at sports events, and technological competitions such as the Space Race.

    Cold_war_europe_military_alliances_map_en.png


    The first phase of the Cold War began shortly after the end of World War II in 1945. The United States and its Western European allies sought to strengthen their bonds and used the policy of containment against Soviet influence; they accomplished this most notably through the formation of NATO, which was essentially a defensive agreement in 1949. The Soviet Union countered with the Warsaw Pact in 1955, which had similar results with the Eastern Bloc. Following the Cuban Missile Crisis, a new phase began that saw the Sino-Soviet split between China and the Soviet Union complicate relations within the communist sphere, leading to a series of border confrontations, while France, a Western Bloc state, began to demand greater autonomy of action. The USSR invaded Czechoslovakia to suppress the 1968 Prague Spring, while the US experienced internal turmoil from the civil rights movement and opposition to the Vietnam War. By the 1970s, both sides had started making allowances for peace and security, ushering in a period of détente that saw the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks and the US opening relations with the People's Republic of China as a strategic counterweight to the USSR. Détente collapsed at the end of the decade with the beginning of the Soviet–Afghan War in 1979.

    main_1200.jpg


    For the last 18 years, USSR have been ruled by General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, whose tenure from 1964 to 1982 was second only to Joseph Stalin's in duration. While his rule as general secretary was characterized by political stability and significant foreign policy successes, it was also marked by corruption, inefficiency, economic stagnation, and rapidly growing technological gaps with the West. On 10 November 1982, Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev, the third General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the fifth leader of the Soviet Union, died at the age of 75, a month before his 76th birthday, after suffering a heart attack following years of serious ailments. His death was officially acknowledged on 11 November simultaneously by Soviet radio and television.

    421px-Leonid_Brezhnev_Portrait_1-e1570479025608.jpg
    pic_C_P_CPSU Politburo 1980s.jpg


    With the death of Brezhnev, the Politburo must find an answer to the most important solution – who is going to take charge of the Soviet state and the CPSU and navigate the country through the turbulent 1980s to the bright and prosperous future. The list of potential candidates includes: Yuri Andropov, an all-powerful Chairman of Committee for State Security (KGB), infamous for his role in suppression of the Hungarian Uprising and the Prague Spring. Second most likely candidate is Konstantin Chernenko, who during Brezhnev's final years, Chernenko became fully immersed in ideological Party work: heading Soviet delegations abroad, accompanying Brezhnev to important meetings and conferences, and working as a member of the commission that revised the Soviet Constitution in 1977. In 1979, he took part in the Vienna arms limitation talks. Then there is also Nikolai Aleksandrovich Tikhonov, serving as Chairman of the Council of Ministers (Premier) from 1980, being responsible for the cultural and economic administration of the Soviet Union.

    Andrei Gromyko, who serves as Minister of Foreign Affairs from year 1957(!). As Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union, Gromyko was directly involved in deliberations with the Americans during the Cuban Missile Crisis and helped broker a peace treaty ending the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. Under the leadership of Leonid Brezhnev, he played a central role in the establishment of détente with the United States by negotiating the ABM Treaty, the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the SALT I & II among others. Next is Viktor Grishin, who rose to become leader of the Communist party in the city of Moscow from 1967. Grishin is renowned for his hardline stance and implacable character. Some party members have suggested other candidates for the position of General Secretary, all in the name of renewal of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party. The list of those rather unlikely successors includes: Grigory Romanov, First Secretary of the Leningrad Regional Party Committee since 1970, in this position he gained a reputation of being a good organizer and well versed in economic matters, winning defense investment for Leningrad. Another candidate is

    Volodymyr Shcherbytsky, First Secretary of the Communist Party of Ukraine, unfailingly loyal to Brezhnev. His rule of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was characterized by the expanded policies of re-centralisation and suppression of dissent, accompanied by a broad assault on Ukrainian culture and intensification of Russification. There is also a candidate supported by non-slavic members of the CPSU - Dinmukhamed Kunaev, First Secretary of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan. During Kunaev's long rule, Kazakhs occupied prominent positions in the bureaucracy, economy and educational institutions. His supporters believe in increasing the role of all non-russian and non-slavic nations of USSR in everyday governance and decision-making. The last and the youngest candidate on the list is Mikhail Gorbachev, who in 1978 was appointed a Secretary of the Central Committee and to the Central Committee's Secretariat for Agriculture. Although he is committed to preserving and strengthening of the Soviet state and its Marxist–Leninist ideals, Gorbachev believes significant reform are necessary in order to fix all the problems plaguing the USSR.


    Current world map (November 1982) - all credit goes to @CountofDooku
    dfxfyka-8472f3dc-c968-45d6-b518-a1fc73305540.png
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Two: A New Beginning (Romanov – Kunaev alliance) (December 1982 – January 1983)
  • In a rather surprising turn of events, Grigory Romanov - First Secretary of the Leningrad Regional Party Committee since 1970, was elected the fourth General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. His election was received with surprise, as Romanov, while was considered a capable politician and good organizer, never held a position in the Central Government. The surprise, however, did not last long, as the real of results of the vote on the next General Secretary became better known.

    Before the vote, it was believed that the two most likely candidates to the position of General Secretary were all-powerful Chairman of KGB Yuri Andropov and one of the most influential party members – Konstantin Chernenko. The vote turned out to be a reality check to both of them, as none of them was able to secure a significant number of votes, moreover later there was a rumor that Chernenko was not able to secure even a single vote to his name.

    Romanov_185x246_348329a.jpg

    (Grigori Romanov)

    Returning to the vote, its outcome has completely changed the balance of power within the Soviet establishment. Candidates who were able to secure the highest number of votes were respectively: Grigory Romanov, Dinmukhamed Kunaev and Volodymyr Shcherbytsky. Overnight, the roles and position of many most influential candidates were turned upside down. The most powerful and influential during the Brezhnev era saw their position and influence evaporate just like that, while the other politicians were elevated to the highest positions of power and influence.

    The choice of Romanov and Kunaev as the most popular candidates was a clear sign that the Party and its members were done with the Old Guard and their policies, which lead the country to a very difficult position internally and on the international stage. The Old Guard was blamed for the stagnation of Soviet economy and agriculture, widespread corruption, growing feeling of discontent within the USSR and satellite states and the hopeless situation of the Soviet Army in Afghanistan. Romanov and Kunauev as capable organizers and well reversed in economic matters, were seen as a chance for modernization and reorganization of the Soviet State, the Communist Party, and renewal of communism. On the other hand, the appointment of Romanov was received with surprise in the West, but the official response of the West was rather muted amid renewed growing tensions between both USA and USSR. The response from the Eastern Bloc and Soviet-aligned countries was positive, with some degree of uncertainty about Romanov's lack of experience. Nevertheless his choice could be considered a new chapter and beginning for communist and socialist bloc.

    The first weeks and months resulted in a lot of changes within the power structures of both the Party and the State. Beginning with the new General Secretary Romanov, his first order of things was to secure and spread his own power-base within the State and the Party, as his current power-base was limited only to the Leningrad Oblast. While right now he was very popular among the party members, relying only on good-will in the short-term may be good, but in the long-term it could turn fatal for his. To secure his position, Romanov had to secure the support of three bodies: the Soviet bureaucracy/administration, military (silovniks) and secret services. Romanov was able to secure the support of the bureaucracy by keeping the current premier Nikolai Tikhonov on his post as the Premier. Tikhonov as a member of the Old Guard was aware of his current precarious position, but was able to reach an agreement that in exchange for keeping his position, he and the administration in general will support the new General Secretary.

    Romanov was also able to secure the support of the army by reaching an agreement and understanding with two most powerful representatives of the Armed Forces - Chief of the General Staff Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov and Soviet Minister of Defense Marshal Dmitry Ustinov. In order to gain their support, Romanov was forced to agree not to cut in any case spending on the army and keep the state focus on the military-industrial complex. The last problem to solve was the infamous Chairman of KGB – Yuri Andropov, for the long time second-most powerful man in the USSR, now the biggest loser of the great balance-shift of power in USSR. Romanov, as an experienced politician, was once again able to reach an agreement with Andropov. With his position within the Party and State really weakened, Andropov was fighting right now for keeping his position as Chairman of KGB. As quickly as the news of results of the vote came out and the scale of Andropov's defeat was clear, feeling the proverbial blood in the water, several contenders have risen up, very eager to take Andropov's position as Chairman of KGB. Romanov came to the conclusion that it would be in his best interest to keep Andropov as Chairman of KGB for now, as the balance of power between the Chairman of KGB and the General Secretary was completely on his side, and the position of Andropov was completely dependent on his good-will. Andropov was also aware of his really weak position, so had no other choice, but to accept the proposition.

    Dmitry_Ustinov_(colorized,_full).jpg

    (Dmirty Ustinov - the Soviet Minister of Defense)

    The last man, with whom Romanov had to deal with was another rising superstar of the Soviet politics - Dinmukhamed Kunaev First Secretary of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan, who held the position in years 1960 – 1962 and again from year 1964. During his tenure, Dinmukhamed Kunaev made a significant contribution to social, economic and cultural development of Kazakhstan. As a result of his policy, mining industry in Kazakhstan reached the highest levels, new industrial areas in the country were established, new cities and provincial human settlements were constructed. Romanov and Kunaev were able to reach an understanding as both of them represented the same stance on the future of the USSR – both wanted to introduce a comprehensive program for the reform, renewal and further development of socialism in the USSR and abroad. As the result of the agreement – informal position of Kunayev as the new second most powerful man in the USSR was formally recognized with his appointment as Second Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, replacing Konstantin Chernenko.

    As soon as his position of General Secretary and power-base was secured, Romanov immediately had to deal with multiple problems plaguing the Soviet Union:- the ongoing war in Afghanistan, economic and crisis, widespread corruption/ overblown bureaucracy.

    _86417485_rosenarchivepicap.jpg

    (Soviet troops in Afghanistan)

    Starting with the ongoing war in Afghanistan, Romanov is forced to quickly find a solution to the Afghan quagmire. The Soviet forces alongside Afghan allies are locked in protracted war against the Afghan mujahideen, foreign fighters, and smaller groups of anti-Soviet Maoists. While the mujahideen were backed by various countries and organizations, the majority of their support came from Pakistan, the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Iran, and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf. The biggest problem of on the Soviet side since the invasion of Afghanistan are lack of cohesive strategy and severe tactical deficiencies.The first essential mistake the Soviets made was of strategic nature, as above all the Soviet Union fatally misinterpreted the nature of the war they were going to get engaged in. The Soviet thought the military intervention would be of the quick kind as exercised in Czechoslovakia in 1968, but the fighting against the enemy turned into full scale war. Currently, the number of soldiers deployed into Afghanistan is too low, as the Red Army controls only major urban centers and the road network linking them.

    Moreover, the Soviet Union deployed forces that were inappropriate for the topographic conditions found in Afghanistan. In general terms, the conduct of war is significantly shaped by its geographical setting and military forces have to respond appropriately to natural constraints. Soviet decision-makers had utterly violated this golden rule by employing heavy-tank mechanized formations that would be appropriate in Europe’s flat, rolling terrain. In mountainous Afghanistan, however, these troops were unsuitable and of limited effect. The first mistake was made before the actual fighting started. Doctrine and forces employed by the Soviet Union ran against the physical environment and the threat found in Afghanistan, leading to inappropriate tactical arrangements.

    Coming to proposed solutions, everyone agreed that the current state of things in Afghanistan cannot be tolerated anymore, also a notion of abandoning Afghanistan was quickly denounced, as any Soviet withdrawal from the country, would lead to inevitable diplomatic, political and security problems. Some party members proposed a review of Soviet strategy and tactics employed in Afghanistan, as only controlling the major urban centers in Afghanistan brings no results. In order to achieve this, a significant rise of Soviet troops to Afghanistan is required, not only a number of conscripts, but also a number of elite soviet formations designated to combat Mujahideen forces in ongoing guerilla warfare. What is more, there is also proposal to change combat tactics, and adoption of tactics suited to geographical setting of Afghanistan. The choice of troops used in conflict must be changed as well, as heavy-tank mechanized formations are completely inappropriate in Afghanistan

    Other party members suggested also new political approach towards Afghanistan, as current Soviet policy proved itself to be completely ineffective, as the support of Afghan population is on the side of Mujahideen forces. The proposal is simple - in order to win back the support for the Soviet side, it is proposed to roll back the most unpopular reforms, a complete stop on fight against religion, and new approach towards the civilian population of Afghanistan, as the Soviet campaign of terror brought only more and more problems towards the Soviet side.

    Most hardliner members of the Party also had their own ideas – turning Soviet intervention into an international intervention of all member states of the Warsaw Pact, stating that the war in Afghanistan is really not a war against local rebels, but rather the so-called collective West, NATO and China. Some suggested sending conscripts from the Warsaw Pact states, others suggested that the better choice would be to limit their involvement to special forces and material assistance to the Afghan government. There was also a call made by the most extreme wing of hardliners for an extensive campaign involving widespread of chemical weapons aimed at destroying the morale of the enemy. In their opinion, the Soviet Union is justified in using chemical weapons as USSR is fighting in Afghanistan against imperialist and fascist forces of the West and China, hellbent on destroying the USSR.
    pobrane.jpg

    (Soviet bureaucracy in practice)

    The second ongoing crisis is the rampant corruption and overgrown Soviet bureaucracy which significantly affects the Soviet state, economy and population. The proposition of debureaucratisation of the Soviet state came from Premier Tikhonov. Some suggested, that he did it only to prove his usefulness to the new soviet Leadership. Nevertheless, Tikhonov proposes to decrease enormous soviet government by closing and uniting some ministeries, getting rid of completely useless and most ineffective/corrupt politicians in order to streamline the work of the Soviet state and government. What is more, other party members suggested a wide-scale anti-corruption campaign in order ot fight violations of the party, state and labor discipline. However, not everyone was happy with this proposal, as they fear that such a campaign might quickly turn into a witch-hunt.

    main-qimg-0515504fd8fd65e1a19f38492a7c4e10-lq.jpg

    (The ongoing economic crisis affects lives of the Soviet Population)

    The last and the biggest problem is obviously the economic crisis caused partly by East-West tensions increased during the first term of US President Ronald Reagan, reaching levels not seen since the Cuban Missile Crisis as Reagan increased US military spending to 7% of the GDP. To match the military buildup, the Soviet Union increased its own military spending to 27% of its GDP and froze production of civilian goods at 1980 levels, causing a sharp economic decline in the already failing Soviet economy.

    Both Romanov and Kunaev came to the conclusion that the economic crisis cannot be solved just overnight, as it will be a long and complicated process. Some party members suggested that the first step of the reform should be an increase in workforce's efficiency, crackdown on laborer's lack of discipline, granting industries a greater autonomy from the state regulations and to enable factory managers to retain control over more of their profits. Such initiatives should result in a rise of industrial output and efficiency. However, these reforms should be treated only as a temporary solution and laying the ground towards the proper reform. Each faction within the party had their own ideas and solutions towards the economy. Starting with the 1965 Soviet economic reform, sometimes called the Kosygin reform or Liberman reform, was a set of planned changes in the economy of the USSR. A centerpiece of these changes was the introduction of profitability and sales as the two key indicators of enterprise success. Some of an enterprise's profits would go to three funds, used to reward workers and expand operations; most would go to the central budget.

    The second proposal was Goulash Communism, also commonly called Kádárism or the Hungarian Thaw, an economic reform taking into account public opinion and increased focus being paced on the well-being of the citizenry. The general principles also are relaxation of state economic control, giving limited freedom to workings of the market and allowance to a limited number of businesses to operate in the services sector.Additionally, rather than enforcing the system of compulsory crop deliveries and of workdays credit, the collectivizers used monthly cash wages.

    The third proposal, introduced by the liberal/reformatory faction is to follow similar path as China under Deng Xiaoping, known as the Chinese economic reform or "socialist market economy" which involves the de-collectivization of agriculture, the opening up of the country to foreign investment, and permission for entrepreneurs to start businesses. However, a large percentage of industries would remain state-owned and controlled.

    The fourth and final proposition is to transform the economy of the Soviet Union in the fashion of the economy of Socialist Yugoslavia which is a unique system of socialist self-management the Yugoslav economy is characterized by a combination of market mechanisms and state planning, with a focus on worker self-management and a decentralized approach to decision-making.

    Aside from different proposed solutions, Andrei Gromyko, minister of foreign affairs and newly appointed by Romanov First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, proposed an increase in foreign trade with the world, as it would bring much needed capital to the USSR.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Three: The Evil Empire Speech and Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) (February - March 1983)
  • In the next couple of months, USSR has witnessed more change within its political, social and economic policies and organization than in the past 20 years. Since the very beginning of his tenure as the General Secretary, Grigory Romanov together with his newfound ally Dinmukhamed Kunaev began working on a comprehensive program aimed later known as "Program for Renewal of Socialism". The main goals of this program were to overcome the disillusionment of the Soviet population with the economic and political situation within the country. The plan was to breathe new life into the ideals of socialism, which lost popular support due to the policies of the Soviet state and the communist party in the previous decades.

    sputnik-855964-preview.jpg

    (General Secretary Romanov during announcing of "Program for Renewal of Socialism")

    Other main goal were to include: development of new technologies, debureacratization of the Soviet state, anti-alcohol campaign, improvement of social services provided by the state, modernization and reorganization of stagnant economy, as well as increased investments in infrastructure and production of consumer goods to meet the demands of the population. Any notion of military reforms were quickly abandoned at the start, as the position of the new General Secretary relied on the support of the Armed Forces, with Marshal Ustinov in charge. Kunaev and Romanov quickly realized that the economy couldn't be truly reorganized, as any potential for its change and reorganization was blocked by Ustinov and his emphasis on further Soviet arms buildup against the US, meaning that there will be no shift in the economy from military-industrial focus onto the production of consumer goods. Nevertheless, Romanov and Kunaev came to the conclusion that they had to work with what they had at the current time.

    Chelyabinsk.jpg

    (For the time being Soviet economy will remain focused on heavy industy and military-industrial complex)

    Before any meaningful change could be introduced, Romanov decided to lay the groundwork by restoring the party, state and labor discipline. The first order of things was to crack down on Soviet laborer's lack of discipline by decreeing the arrest of absentee employees and penalties for tardiness. Furthermore, Romanov gave select industries greater autonomy from state regulations and enabled factory managers to retain control over more of their profits. Such policies resulted in a rise in industrial output, which allowed for increased investments in development of Soviet industries. Nevertheless, this was only a first phase for Romanov and Kunaev.

    At the beginning of February, Romanov and Kunaev introduced "Plan for the Renewal of Socialism", which main goal was to modernize and revitalize the State as well as the Party according to the principles of Marxism-Leninism. The first order of things was to deal with overblown Soviet bureaucracy, an endless black hole for money, resources and privileges. The main goal of Romanov and Kunaev was to rationalize, streamline and modernize the state apparatus. The most redundant and unnecessary ministries and positions were eliminated, unneeded positions as vice-viceministers and helpers of helpers were also eliminated, the enormous Soviet government was also decreased by closing and uniting of many ministries.

    Ebns4r7WsAEgxc-.jpg

    (KGB headquarters in Moscow)

    Another step was the beginning of anti-corruption campaign spearheaded by KGB, which began to crack down on violations of party discipline, as many ministers and first secretaries were either dismissed or arrested, also many criminal cases were started aimed against other high level party and state officials. Many of those arrests ended with show trials aimed at gaining support of the population. The results were immediate and very positive as the most corrupt, inept and inflexible officials were replaced by more competent and younger officials. However, in many cases, corrupt officials were replaced with people loyal either to Romanov or Kunaev to further cement and secure their hold on the Party and the State. All of those actions were met with great deal of support at home as soon as the population realized that the words of new General Secretary were supported with real actions. On the other hand, the Western media very eagerly reported about the details of the "new great purge", with only difference that corrupt politicians lost their careers not life as during the Stalinist times. A complete reorganization of the Soviet bureaucracy will take longer period of time to finish, but the actions undertaken by Romanov and Kunaev allowed for a modernization and standardization of the government and bureaucracy, which now were ready to face any challenges of the ever-changing world.

    The second task was to reorganize and to revitalize the economy, however for the moment number of available actions and solutions for Romanov and Kunaev were limited by the focus on military-industrial complex, any real changes had to wait. Nevertheless, Romanov and Kunaev didn't want to waste any more time and begin introducing their changes and ideas into the Soviet economy and planning system. Those changes and ideas were inspired by the so-called Goulash communism, which goal was to create high-quality living standards for the people of USSR. Once again the first order of things was a debureacratisation of the Soviet economy and decision-making bodies. The goal was to rationalize and streamline Soviet economy planning. Romanov-Kunaev alliance decided to start with repelling regulations, which had the most negative impact on Soviet economy and industries. Many of that regulations were introduced under the former General Secretary Brezhnev. Other changes included increase of responsibilities but also freedom in decision-making of factory managers. Factory managers were also allowed to retain more control over profits generated by their factories. The changes also brought introduction of worker self-management and increased role of regional bodies in economic and industrial planning and decision-making. As self-management was introduced in industries, the Party introduced a reward system which was based on achieved productivity. These rewards included paid vacations, alcohol, material goods, food or items imported from the West. What is more, other incentives included annulments of conscription, better healthcare and preferential choice in housing. Overall, all of those changes combined brought positive results in increased industrial efficiency, labor productivity, industrial effectiveness and increase of industrial output. However, it couldn't remedy shortages in consumer goods and agricultural products, as the USSR was still forced to import grain from the USA. Some of the more conservative and hardliner party members argued that the focus should be placed on increasing workforce's efficiency, labor discipline and recentralization, as there were quite a lot of elements of decentralization in the 1980s Soviet economic planning. All the options proposed by Romanov and Kunaev represented various degrees of further decentralization or the continuation of the status quo. What is more, the State should return to more strict and centralized economic planning (abolishing Khozraschet, curtailing enterprise autonomy regarding the number of policy targets and the ability to reinvest profits on their own, etc.).
    EOPmz3nUwAINeaP.jpg

    (Gromyko during his visit to India)

    Gromyko's proposal to expand trade agreements across the world resulted in an influx of much-needed capital into the Soviet economy. USSR was able to secure trade agreements with a number of African and Asian states, as well as countries in Europe, including Finland and Yugoslavia. Unfortunately, USSR was not able to expand its trade out of its traditional sphere of influence, as some countries which showed interest in establishing or expanding trade with USSR, were quickly forced to change its attitude under the political and economic pressure of the USA and President Reagan. However, the biggest diplomatic and economic victory for USSR was the USSR – India Trade Agreement, which greatly boosted trade between the two states, much to the dismay of the West and China. The trade agreement was a masterpiece of diplomatic negotiation from foreign minister Gromyko, who thanks to this has significantly strengthened his position within the party and state. The treaty included increased export of Soviet natural resources, agricultural products as well as military equipment. As soon as the news reached Washington, USA started to export military equipment to China and Pakistan in order to maintain the fragile balance of power in Asia.

    The last part of "Program for Renewal of Socialism" included the anti-alcohol campaign. However, Romanov and Kunaev decided to introduce the campaign step by step, knowing how much trouble Prohibition has caused in the US. Another reason for gradual introduction of the anti-alcohol campaign was the fact of how much money the Soviet state, which exercised monopoly on its production and distribution, has earned. Any sudden ban on alcohol sale could result in serious budgetary imbalance. The solution was to find new sources of income until they could replace the revenues generated by alcohol-industry. Alcoholism, however, was a major scourge in Soviet society, linked to high rates of child-abuse, suicide, divorce, absenteeism in work, accidents on the job, low labor productivity, and contributing to a rise in mortality rates particularly among Soviet males. In response, the Politburo and the Central Committee passed resolutions entitled “Measures to Overcome Drunkenness and Alcoholism”. The measures undertaken by the government to combat the widespread problem of alcoholism included: finding measures focused on reducing the demand for alcohol. One was heavy subsidization of substitute activities; all Soviet oblasts were required to build and modernize leisure facilities (like parks and sport clubs) and to promote cultural activities. Another was media propaganda and health education programs, together with bans on glamorous media depictions of drinking. To encourage sober lifestyles, the government also created a national temperance society (the “All-Union Voluntary Society for the Struggle for Temperance”). Finally, the government made large efforts to improve the treatment of alcoholism. Health care system responsibility for compulsory treatment of alcoholism was expanded, and physician supervision of treatment was required for up to five years.

    What is more, the government introduced a campaign against alcohol abuse, backing it up with a series of measures to reduce alcohol production and sales. These included limiting the kinds of shops permitted to sell alcohol, closing many vodka distilleries and destroying vineyards in the wine-producing republics of Moldavia, Armenia and Georgia, and banning the sale of alcohol in restaurants before two o’clock in the afternoon. The campaign brought mixed results, as there was decrease in alcohol consumption and increased labor productivity, but at the same time campaign resulted in a sharp rise in the production of moonshine (samogon) and, like Prohibition in the United States, an increase in organized crime. Nevertheless, the real success of the campaign in the future will be closely tied to the future socio-economic situation in the USSR.

    Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R1220-401,_Erich_Honecker_(cropped).jpg

    (Erich Honeker - leader of East Germany)

    The Program for Renewal of Socialism was also introduced with higher and lower degree of success across the whole Eastern Bloc, with the exception of Romania, as the program, in the words of Nicolae Ceaușescu "did not suit the needs of the Romanian population and state". Other leader form the Eastern Bloc who questioned the need for such a program was the leader of East Germany - Erich Honecker. According to the rumors spread in the West, Honecker has directly questioned policy of the General Secretary Romanov, who allegedly quickly replied "Either you will do this comrade, or you more eager successor chosen by me".

    The Program for Renewal of Socialism also included a completely different political and military approach towards the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. Political reorganization was overseen by the Second General Secretary of CPSU Kunaev, while the military matters were a job for Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov, who had a golden opportunity to test his ideas in practice in Afghanistan. Starting with political reorganization of matters, the USSR decided for a new political approach towards the Afghan government and Afghan population. In order to rebuild the image of Afghan and Soviet governments and trust of local population, a series of reform was introduced. Starting with reorganization of unpopular Afghan government resulted in arrests and dismissal of most corrupt, inept and unpopular officials. Other changes were also roll back of the most unpopular reforms, a complete stop on fight against Islam and religious institutions, a new approach towards the civilian population of Afghanistan as well as the end of campaign of terror implemented earlier by the Soviet Armed Forces. All of those changes combined were able to score positive propaganda points among the Afghan population, but were not able to overcome the perception of the Soviet troops by the Afghani population as foreign invaders and infidels. Mujahideen and other rebel forces were still very popular among the civilian population, but the Afghan government started to slowly gain better opinion and perception.

    640px-Evstafiev-spetsnaz-prepare-for-mission.jpg

    (Spetsnaz forces in Afghanistan during deployment)

    Soviet Armed Forces in Afghanistan and their allies saw even more changes and bigger reorganization under Marshal Ogarkov than one could expect. Ogarkov started with strategic and tactical reorganization of the Soviet forces. The political and military leadership in Moscow realized that the current strategy in Afghanistan of based on controlling of major urban centers and the road network linking them is completely ineffective. The Soviet forces and Afghan army in order to win the war had to retake control of whole Afghanistan, not fraction of it. What is more, the Soviet forces would be forced to stay in Afghanistan until the Afghan Armed Forces would be able to take over the current role of the Soviet Army. The Soviet leadership concluded also that the Afghan government must be able to win the war using its own strength and available resources. The whole existence of Afghan government could not be based only on the military help of USSR, as it will only result in the inevitable Mujahideen victory. In order to do this, the Afghan Army, just like the Afghan government, has to be rebuilt and reorganized, which will require additional time. Until then, the Soviet has decided to go on offensive against the rebel forces in order to regain the strategic initiative and to weaken the rebel forces as much as possible.

    The first order of things for the Soviets was to increase the number of deployed troops in Afghanistan initially to 200,000 and finally to around 300,000. The current number of Soviet troops was completely inadequate to the tasks set before the Soviet Armed Forces. The increased number of deployed troops included conscripts but most importantly a significant number of Spetsnaz and other elite Soviet formations send to wage full-scale counterinsurgency war against the Mujahideen forces. Another step for the Soviet forces was to deploy an increased number of most elite and special troops from member countries of the Warsaw Pact (for example, one on most elite division in the whole Warsaw Pact – East German 40. Fallschirmjägerbataillon Willi Sänger was deployed in Afghanistan, which despite its small size was able to effectively combat more numerous Mujahideen units). To justify their decision of internationalization of the conflict, Moscow claimed that the intervention of other countries in the Afghan war is completely based on the current policy of USSR known as the Brezhnev doctrine. The decision was met with outrage in the West and China, as the Soviet decision was described as "an act of Soviet imperialism and violation of the international law". The deployment of special forces in large numbers allowed for the Soviets to score a number of tactical victories against the rebel forces, as they were much better suited for war in Afghanistan than regular conscript units. As a result of those victories, the Soviets were able to finally stabilize the front in Afghanistan.

    4bd95d7e3706916c43b583bff7c69b2a--soviet-union-badger.jpg

    (Soviet Tuplev Tu-16 in flight over Pakistan)

    In order to further weaken the rebel forces across Afghanistan, the Soviet Air force was deployed in large numbers and conducted 2 separate bombing campaigns: the first in Afghanistan with an increased use of chemical weapons, and the second against Mujahideen training camps in Pakistan bases located across the border, which resulted with temporary stop of flow of weapons, supplies and aid from Pakistan to Afghan rebel forces. On the one hand, Soviet aerial campaign proved to be military success, but almost ended in a complete political catastrophe. Soviet aircrafts, returning to the Soviet bases located in Afghanistan and Central Asia, were engaged in air-to-air skirmish with aircrafts belonging to the Pakistani Air Force (PAF). The result was a loss of several Soviet and more Pakistani aircrafts. Nevertheless, as soon as the Pakistani leader Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq learned about the Soviet violation of Pakistani airspace and bombings of rebel bases located across the northern Pakistan and at the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, immidiately ordered the Pakistani Air Force to conduct retaliatory strike on the position of Soviet Forces in Afghanistan. At the end, Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq was forced to recall his orders under the American pressure, as Washington has feared that it would trigger a war between Pakistan and USSR, which could lead to inevitable Chinese and Indian interventions. An all-out war in Asia, including 3 nuclear powers, was the last thing that the American administration wanted to see. Nevertheless, all the recent developments involving USSR and Soviet Forces which happened in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India resulted in inevitable American and Chinese reactions in the following months.

    p01ggwjg.jpg

    (President Reagan delivering "the Evil Empire" speech)

    The first blow aimed at USSR was delivered on March 8, 1983 by U.S. President Ronald Reagan delivered one of the most provocative and memorable speeches to the National Association of Evangelicals. In that speech, Reagan referred to the Soviet Union as an "evil empire" and as "the focus of evil in the modern world". Reagan explicitly rejected the notion that the United States and the Soviet Union were equally responsible for the Cold War and the ongoing nuclear arms race between the two nations; rather, he asserted that the conflict was a battle between good and evil. In that speech, Reagan said:

    Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness—pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the State, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world .... So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride—the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

    In the "Evil Empire" speech, which also dealt with domestic issues, Reagan made the case for deploying NATO nuclear-armed intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Western Europe as a response to the Soviets installing new nuclear-armed missiles in Eastern Europe. In response to the words of Reagan, General Secretary Romanov denounced the recent speech as an attempt to destabilize international peace and cooperation between USSR and the rest of the world. Romanov also pointed out that Reagan's neoliberal economic policies will ruin American economy in the near future and giving the corporations more influence and power in the government. Romanov in his speech to the people of USSR stated that "It is once again evident to the peaceful, socialist world, that the United States and its allies, who, in the forums of International relations views themselves as defenders and protectors of freedom and democracy, are nothing but bourgeois imperialists who have not changed from the ones a century ago, with the exception that they became better at hiding it from the masses through the use of religion as a political tool". Fragments of the Romanov speech were printed all across the Socialist camp and Soviet aligned states.

    image_med_hr.png

    (President Reagan proposes the Star Wars program)

    The second blow by Reagan was made almost two weeks later on March 23, 1983, when the concept of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), derisively nicknamed the "Star Wars program" was revealed. The concept was a proposed missile defense system intended to protect the United States from attack by ballistic strategic nuclear weapons (intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles).
    In a nationally televised speech, Reagan stated:

    I call upon the scientific community in this country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great talents to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete.

    The latest actions made by Reagan in March were a clear indication of his aggressive attitude towards the USSR and complete denunciation of recent Soviet military actions in Afghanistan and Pakistan. General Secretary Romanov in closed meeting with the political and military leadership stated that the US and Reagan are hellbent on destroying USSR and complete eradication of socialism. The US has greatly threatened the world-peace by disrupting the balance of power between two superpowers in attempt to counter the Soviet nuclear deterrence. Marshal Ustinov stated also that the Soviet Armed Forced will be ready for any nuclear or conventional confrontation with NATO and China. What is more, a number of propositions of how to deal with the SDI were made by members of the Soviet military and political leadership.

    The first proposal was to lodge diplomatic protests, loudly proclaiming that USSR is being threatened with a nuclear destruction by warmongering nation of the United States, whose leadership and president Reagan wants to eradicate peace loving workers and peasants of the Soviet Union. The second proposal was made by militarist faction under Marshal Ustinov which suggested expansion of Soviet nuclear program, which would be able to overwhelm American defenses with sufficient number of rockets. The third proposal was to announce a counter-program for propaganda purposes, as the costs of actual development of an anti-SDI program would be enormous and could badly damage already strained Soviet economy. Another proposition was to actually researching our anti-SDI program, as in the belief of some party members the Soviet economy could really handle such expense... but not very easily. The last were proposal made by scientists, who proclaimed that the best course of action would be to do nothing, as they believed that American SDI program is nothing more as a propaganda stunt, with a real purpose of forcing USSR in taking part in more and more expensive Arms Race with the USA.

    Among all of these propositions, one was more extraordinary than the others. Some of the hardliners, influenced by scientific and technological developments, proposed that since USA wants to dominate the space, USSR should dominate ... the underwater. This faction proposed a very interesting concept – Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon. The Poseidon is a remote-controlled, nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle, capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear warheads. In other words, they proposed a development of a new intercontinental, nuclear armed, nuclear-powered, undersea remote-controlled torpedo equipped with a cobalt bomb. The main aim purpose of the vehicle would be to restore a balance of power between the two superpowers and increase the Soviet capability to overcome the U.S. missile defense systems. The Poseidon could be a radiological second strike weapon. If used against an aircraft carrier battle group, the battle group would have reduced chances of defending itself against it. The remote-controlled drone could detonate its very large warhead at standoff range, and anti-submarine warfare units would have very little time to react because of the speed at which it travels. The Poseidon would be equipped with a warhead 100 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The weapon is designed to ensure U.S. coastal cities remain at risk from nuclear attack should Washington decide to scale up its missile defenses. Theoretically, a weapon like Poseidon would be designed to attack enemy coastal targets from thousands of miles away and could be launched from a port or naval base, but deploying it on a submarine would make it more difficult to locate and destroy.
     

    Attachments

    • tu95ms003.jpg
      tu95ms003.jpg
      124.6 KB · Views: 1,528
    Last edited:
    Chapter Four: Growing Tensions (April – June 1983)
  • The announcement of Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was met with a swift response from the Soviet Union and General Secretary Romanov. The USSR protested against the program on a diplomatic level, expressing concerns that space-based missile defenses would lead to inevitable militarization of outer space. Soviet government reacted also on the forum on United Nations proposing a resolution condemning U.S. government and President Reagan for violation of the Outer Space Treaty from 1966, however USA used its veto to block a United Nations resolution. The Soviet government perceived the program both as a threat and as an opportunity to weaken NATO. SDI was likely seen not only as a threat to the physical security of the Soviet Union, but also as part of an effort by the United States to seize the strategic initiative in arms controls by neutralizing the military component of Soviet strategy. Another major objective of Soviet dipmolatic strategy was the political separation of Western Europe from the United States, which the Soviets sought to facilitate by aggravating allied concern over the SDI's potential implications for European security and economic interests.

    General Secretary Romanov and the Soviet leadership decided to respond directly to Reagan's call upon American scientists and engineers to develop a system that would render nuclear weapons obsolete. Romanov in a speech directed to the international community assessed that the Soviet Union reserves the right to respond to any U.S. program that may threaten the vital interests of the Soviet Union and the world communist and socialist movements. In reality, Romanov and Soviet leadership knew that USSR would not be able to start of actual anti-SDI program in the foreseeable future, as the program would be too simply expensive. Furthermore, Romanov and Kunaev believed that SDI is nothing more than a ploy and American propaganda tool, but SDI should be considered as a start of Reagan's economic war against USSR through a defensive arms race to further cripple the Soviet economy with extra military spending, while another interpretation by hardliner and militarist factions was that it served as a disguise for the US wish to initiate a first strike on the Soviet Union.

    sputnik-428260-preview.jpg

    (General Secretary Romanov denounces President Reagan)

    In order to kill multiple birds with a one stone, Romanov decided to announce Soviet anti-SDI program to show the resolve of the Soviet Union, but in reality there was no such program as Soviet Union couldn't afford one in contrast to the United States. Nevertheless, Romanov made an "anti-SDI" speech in which Romanov stated that "Our (Soviet) Anti-SDI program was something we would normally not have pursued. But you (U.S. government) forced our hand." Furthermore, to appease elements of hardliner and militarist factions, Romanov decided to rebrand of some of the projects already under development under "anti-SDI" umbrella, as well as implementation of a number of changes to the Soviet nuclear strategy and doctrine, by taking into account potential existence of SDI with all of its abilities to counter the Soviet nuclear potential. A number of projects have been approved by Romanov, including development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System (or the Poseidon), Dead Hand (Perimeter) – an automatic nuclear weapons-control system. It was meant to be a backup communication system, in case the key components of the "Kazbek" command system and the link to the Strategic Missile Forces are destroyed by a decapitation first strike. Another projects were the Polyus spacecraft, also known as Polus, which was a prototype Soviet orbital weapons platform designed to destroy Strategic Defense Initiative satellites with a megawatt carbon-dioxide laser. It had a Functional Cargo Block derived from a TKS spacecraft to control its orbit, and it could launch test targets to demonstrate the fire control system. Also, Salyut-3 (Almaz OPS-2) space station project saw an increase in funding. To appease supporters of strengthening of potential of Soviet nuclear forces, the Soviet leadership decided to extract Neptunium from spent nuclear fuel and use it to make nuclear weapons with Neptunium 237 and other fissionable isotopes. This decision was proved to be useful, as Neptunium 237 could be turned into Plutonium 238, and later used in the Soviet Space Program. Ultimately, Romanov was able to achieve all of his political and diplomatic goals at the same time, which included responding on the international stage to the American threat, scoring propaganda points and keeping more hardliner and militarist elements within the Soviet leadership happy, while at the same time staying within reasonable budgets.

    In order to further solidify his popularity and change the perception of the Communist Party within the Soviet population, General Secretary Romanov decided to visit all capital cities of republics of the USSR, starting with Kiev. During his visits, Romanov visited factories, mines, steel mills, factories, construction sites, opened new road and talked to workers and ordinary citizens. All of this was done for the propaganda of success - to show the world and his compatriots that the country under his rule is developing again, and the authorities are close to the people. When Grigory Romanov took over as First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, propaganda was given the important task of convincing the public of the new authorities. It was to build a climate of mutual cooperation, understanding and assistance between those in power and the people. Romanov gave the impression that he was listening carefully to the people, although this was not always true. Unlike his predecessor, Romanov cared about popularity of his administration and used means from the arsenal of political marketing to do so.

    412efd17f0bd3994f52322e1019d1140.jpg

    (Inspection of Soviet troops deployed in Afghanistan)

    Just when the General Secretary was busy visiting Soviet cities, Second General Secretary Dinmukhamed Kunaev made a visit to troops in Afghanistan to congratulate them on their recent victories and to show the world commitment of the Soviet Union to winning the Afghan War. Kunaev also met with Afghan leadership to discuss recent developments in Afghanistan and in the region, as well as ensure them of continuous economic, military and diplomatic support. In a private conversation with the Afghani leadership, Kunaev stated that the Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops will remain in Afghanistan for as long as its needed, but the victory in war must be won by the Afghan army. Kunaev also spoke to troops located in Kabul and visited injured soldiers in recent anti-rebel operations. Almost at the same time, American Vice President George H.W. Bush made a surprise visit to Pakistan. Bush visited some of the many hundreds of thousands of Afghans gathered in refugee camps there, had been taken by Pakistani leader General Mohammad Zia-ul-Haq through the Khyber Pass to see the Afghan border. In wake of recent Soviet bombing-campaign of Northern Pakistan, Vice President Bush stated that "USA won't allow this to happen again" and "the Free World stands united against the Soviet Imperialism". The Kremlin responded to the whole incident by blasting Bush's "provocation aimed at stirring up anti-Soviet hysteria."

    48065288971_55d515d20f_b.jpg

    (President Reagan meeting with Mujahideen at the White House)

    Recent developments in Afghanistan and Pakistan forced the American and Chinese leadership to act swiftly and decisively to counter the resurgent Soviet Union and its forces. As a consequence of recent Soviet actions, USA altogether with Great Britain, Saudi Arabia and China committed to fight against USSR in Afghanistan "until the last Soviet soldier leaves the Afghani territory", excluding any possibility of achieving diplomatic or political agreement with Moscow. President Reagan in agreement with American allies agreed to greatly expand the aid to Mujahideen and also to other anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan, including anti-Soviet Maoists, which additionally began to receive much greater support from China in order to counter increased Soviet presence in Afghanistan. Furthermore, China, United States and Iran were able to achieve a secret agreement, resulting in unofficial ceasefire between Shia, Sunni and Maoists forces in Afghanistan. From now one, all rebel forces would focus entirely on combating Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops, which brought a new period of prolonged and bloody battles between both sides. President Reagan and the U.S. administration announced an expanded financial and military assistance to Pakistan to support the county's role in the war against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. U.S. committed to modernization of the Pakistani Air Force and deployment of modern U.S. made air-defense systems and anti-aircraft weapons to prevent any further Soviet bombing campaigns in Pakistan. These decisions were met with strong a condemnation from the Indian government, which felt threatened by Western backed and modernized Pakistani army. Additionally, to put more pressure to USSR, China decided to significantly ramp up their military presence near Afghanistan, Mongolia and the Soviet Far East, which lead to further increase of tensions between China and USSR.

    All the diplomatic and political changes on the international scene forced Indian Prime minister Indira Gandhi to visit Moscow. The relationship between India and the Soviet Union deepened during Gandhi's rule. The main reason was the perceived bias of the United States and China, rivals of the USSR, towards Pakistan. The support of the Soviets with arms supplies and the casting of a veto at the United Nations helped in winning and consolidating the victory over Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh liberation war. Before the war, Gandhi signed a treaty of friendship with the Soviets. USSR was unhappy with the 1974 nuclear test conducted by India, but did not support further action because of the ensuing Cold War with the United States. Gandhi was unhappy with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but once again calculations involving relations with Pakistan and China kept her from criticizing the Soviet Union harshly. Under Gandhi, by the early 1980s, the Soviets had become India's largest trading partner.


    indian-prime-minister-indira-gandhi-on-an-official-visit-to-the-soviet-B96G3J.jpg

    (Indira Gandhi during visit to USSR)

    Prime Minister Indira Gandhi aimed at solidifying India's relationship with its principal ally among the world's major powers. Nevertheless, the main goal of Gandhi's visit to Moscow was to secure further military and economic support from USSR in wake of Reagan's decision to bolster economy and military potential of Pakistan, which could lead to change in geopolitical balance in the region, not mentioning continuous alliance between Pakistan and China. The Soviets became the main arms supplier during the Gandhi years by offering cheap credit and transactions in rupees rather than in dollars. The easy trade deals also applied to non-military goods. During a meeting with General Secretary Romanov, Gandhi expressed her concern with recent American military and economic support for Pakistan, as well as growing tensions between China on the one side, and India and USSR on the other. Nevertheless, Gandhi wanted to convince Romanov to support of modernization of the Indian Air Forces, as well as deployment of most modern Soviet Air and Missile Defense systems in order to counter growing Pakistani and Chinese potential. Gandhi understood that such move will only worsen already tense geopolitical situation in the region, nevertheless India had no choice but to react to threat posed by both Pakistan and China. Gandhi, to secure Soviet help and commitment, offered a deal to Romanov: in exchange for Soviet military support to India, Gandhi's government will significantly increase humanitarian and economic assistance to the Afghan government and Afghani people, as well as continuous diplomatic support for USSR on the international stage.

    RS_phillyThumb2_1200x800_041617_beirut1_1200.jpg

    (Bombing of U.S. embassy in Beirut)

    On the April 18, 1983 United States embassy became a target of a suicide bombing in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 32 Lebanese, 17 Americans, and 14 visitors and passers-by. The victims were mostly embassy and CIA staff members, but also included several US soldiers and one US Marine Security Guard. It was the deadliest attack on a US diplomatic mission up to that time, and was considered the beginning of Islamist attacks on US targets. The attack came in the wake of an intervention in the Lebanese Civil War by the United States and other Western countries, which sought to restore order and central government authority. The car bomb was detonated by a suicide bomber driving a van packed with nearly 2,000 pounds (900 kg) of explosives at approximately 1:00 p.m. (GMT+2) April 18, 1983. The van, originally sold in Texas, bought used and shipped to the Gulf, gained access to the embassy compound and parked under the portico at the very front of the building, where it exploded.

    Operation Staunch was launched in the spring of 1983 by the United States State Department to stop the flow of U.S. arms to Iran. The Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979 and the hostage crisis in Tehran frustrated American policymakers whose response came as an embargo on the new government of Iran. On January 20, 1981, the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated, the hostages in Tehran were released. In turn, the embargo was relaxed, but relations with Iran did not improve diplomatically. In fact, the newly elected Reagan refused to sell arms directly to Iran. Even so, arms manufactured in the US that were sold to foreign nations continued to find their way to the Iranian military arsenal. The Iran–Iraq War raised the demand for arms and "created opportunities that arms merchants around the world simply could not afford to miss. Indeed, the lure of windfall profits was so great that few countries had any scruples about selling weapons to Iran or Iraq—or both at the same time." In response, The State Department dispatched special envoy Richard Fairbanks, who "spoke with diplomats, intelligence officers and arms industry officials" in targeted Arab countries as well as South Korea, Italy, Spain and Portugal. The State Department successfully dissuaded American allies from selling American arms to Iran on the tenet, created by Iran's association with Hezbollah, that Iran sponsors terrorism.

    On June 5, 1983 the Second Sudanese Civil War began between the central government in Khartoum and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA). The war started in southern Sudan but spread to other places including the Nuba mountains and the Blue Nile region. The terms of the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972, which ended the first Sudan Civil War, were violated several times. In 1978, president Gaafar Nimeiry wanted to take control of the newly-discovered oil fields located on the border region between north and south Sudan. In 1983, President Nimeiry violated the agreement by imposing Sharia Law across the nation and abolishing the mostly Christian Southern Sudan Autonomous Region. Most South Sudanese people and other people who were non-Muslim living in the north were now punished by Sharia Law. In response, rebels from South Sudan formed the Southern Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA), led by John Garang, to fight the central government in Khartoum. As in the first war, child soldiers were recruited by both sides but were more frequently used by the SPLA.

    a-starboard-bow-view-of-the-aircraft-carriers-uss-midway-cv-41-left-and-the-4ace00-640.jpg

    (American Pacific Fleet during Fleet Ex '83)

    Quickly rising tensions between the USA and USSR didn't deter President Reagan from putting more diplomatic and military pressure on the USSR, as Reagan started to perceive the Cold War not only as a struggle between capitalism/communism and USA/USSR, but also as a personal competition between himself and the new General Secretary Grigory Romanov. At first, Romanov was perceived by the American establishment as an unknown but conservative politician who most likely would follow into the footsteps of Brezhnev. Nevertheless, it soon became clear how different Romanov was from Brezhnev as a leader. Within 7 moths of his tenure, Romanov quickly proved to a capable and flexible politician on the Soviet and on international stage. Recent Soviet resurgence in Afghanistan was also a clear proof that Romanov is not scared to get his hands dirty, and will do anything to achieve his goals of strengthening Soviet position on the international stage. A new form of American pressure on the USSR came in the form of the U.S. Pacific Fleet exercise known as Fleet Ex '83.

    The naval exercise that took place between March 29 and April 17 of 1983 in the northern Pacific Ocean near the Aleutian Islands. Three carrier battle groups participated in the exercise, consisting of the carriers Enterprise, Midway, and Coral Sea and their respective escort ships. According to Admiral Robert L. J. Long, Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Forces in the Pacific, FleetEx 83 comprised “the largest fleet exercise conducted by the Pacific Fleet since World War II.” The combined task force consisted of approximately forty ships, 23,000 crew members, and 300 aircraft. The exercise lasted approximately two weeks and was conducted in the Northern Pacific, within flight range of the Soviet Union coast. The purpose of the mission was to intentionally provoke the Soviet Union into responding so that the US forces could study their response, tactics, and capabilities as well as demonstrate the effective operations of a three-carrier battle force in joint and combined operations across multiple service branches in both the United States and Canada, in a high-threat environment. The exercises were extremely successful and effective in integrating the combined forces of the United States Navy, Coast Guard, Air Force, Canadian Maritime Command and Australian naval forces into an effective battleworthy whole. Despite poor weather, the fleet excelled throughout the exercise.

    The naval exercise conducted by the U.S. Pacific Fleet was met in Moscow with considerable concern. Soviet leadership with Romanov and Kunaev at helm was alarmed because of multiple events such as: quickly rising tensions between both superpowers, American economic war against USSR, American economic and military aid to Pakistan and China, as well as Chinese aggressive stance and military build-up near Afghanistan, Mongolia and Far East. In their minds, all of those events were smaller parts of a grand scheme created in Washington aimed at complete eradication of the Soviet Union and socialism. More hardliner and militarist members of CPSU suggested that NATO and China are preparing for a full-scale war against USSR and the Warsaw Pact, because the West was not able to destroy USSR by non-military means. According to them, NATO wants to start World War III as quickly as possible, while they still maintain dominance over USSR, because the country under the leadership of General Secretary Romanov is quickly regaining its might and strength. Number of proposals have been made about which strategy should be implemented in wake of potential conflict between USSR and NATO/China. The Soviet leadership quickly came to the conclusion that the Soviet Army, even with all its might, won't be able to go on offensive against NATO and China at the same time, so one front must be given priority: Europe or Asia. Some of the party members wanted to focus on Europe first, as NATO was a much bigger military threat than China, while others wanted to eliminate the weaker state – China. There was also a discussion if USSR should use the nuclear weapons first, or only as an answer to the Western nuclear strike. Personally, Romanov and Kunaev believed that the potential war could be won conventionally, relying on sheer numbers of the Soviet Armed Forces.

    Probable_Axes_of_Attack.svg.png



    (Soviet plans of attack against West Germany and NATO forces there located)

    Because of this, the focus of development of the Soviet Armed Forces would be shifted from a nuclear war towards conventional war against NATO and China, much to the dismay of Marshal Ustinov, who was an advocate of preemptive nuclear strike against NATO and China. Nevertheless, Romanov altogether with Kunaev and Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov created a secret united front against Marshal Ustinov, with aim to curtail his power and independence for a number of various reasons. Romanov and Kunaev wanted to subjugate the all-powerful Marshal, which would allow them to move the economy away from the military-industrial complex and demilitarize the country. Marshal Ogarkov on the other hand, was completely opposed to Ustinov's conservative approach towards the development of the Soviet Armed Forces. To his support, Ogarkov was able to successfully implement his ideas in Afghanistan, which brought him political support from Romanov and Kunaev. Their first victory against Ustinov was a decision made and later enforced by Romanov to stop expanding Soviet nuclear warheads stockpile and to cap their numbers to 27,500 down from around 35,000. This allowed them to redirect saved money and resources towards Afghanistan and the Soviet Space Program.

    Moreover, the recent anti-corruption and de-bureaucratisation policies initiated and implemented by Romanov and Kunaev were able to secure and recover money and resources that can now be put to other uses.
     

    Attachments

    • RS_phillyThumb2_1200x800_041617_beirut1_1200.jpg
      RS_phillyThumb2_1200x800_041617_beirut1_1200.jpg
      736.1 KB · Views: 110
    Last edited:
    Chapter Five: Prepare for trouble and make it double (July - August 1983)
  • The Soviet leadership was more than happy to accept the deal proposed by Indira Gandhi. In return for modernization of the Indian Air Force, deployment of modern Soviet air-defence systems as well as anti-aircraft weapons to India, the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan would receive political, diplomatic and humanitarian support from India. The humanitarian support would include: shipments of supplies, foodstuff, clothing, emergency vehicles, medicine and medical equipment, and financing of community soup kitchens. For additional diplomatic support on the forum of the Non-Aligned Movement, USSR offered the Indian government a license to build the newly introduced MiG 29A and the S-300 system, with the condition of sharing the cost of any future modernization of the platform for both the Soviet Union and India - dragging India into a Joint-Future-Development contract for the next decade, and as a quick action the modernization of Indian-built fighter bomber aircraft HF-24 Marut with more powerful engines and electronics and extensive modernization programme of MiG-21 in service of the Indian Air Force.

    30366_1357696678.jpg

    (Soviet MiG 29A soon to be introduced to the Indian Air Force)

    The deal, albeit secret, eventually became known to the USA and China. While Reagan's administration harshly criticized the Indian government for their rapprochement with USSR on the international stage, Washington decided not to use economic embargoes against India, as it would close all channels of communication with New Delhi and bring the actual Indo-Soviet alliance into reality. At the same time, a ceremony was held in Beijing, where leaders of China and Pakistan signed the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation between the People's Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Deng Xiaoping stated that, "the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation between China and Pakistan consolidates the aspirations of the two peoples for lasting friendship for generations to come in the form of law and indicates that the all-weather friendship between China and Pakistan enters a new stage of development."

    640px-Deng_Xiaoping_and_Jimmy_Carter_at_the_arrival_ceremony_for_the_Vice_Premier_of_China._-_...jpg

    (Deng Xiaoping - paramount leader of People's Republic of China)

    China expressed in the treaty its respect for Pakistan's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and its support for Pakistan's efforts to settle peacefully problems with its neighboring countries. Both nations agreed not to join any alliance that infringes upon the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the other, nor will either allow its territory to be used by a third country to jeopardize the other party to the pact. Areas in which the two countries agreed to cooperate included fighting terrorism, separatism and extremism, as well as organized crime, illegal immigration and trafficking in drugs and weapons. The nations' security and military organizations would also step up cooperative efforts. Nevertheless, it was not the last word of Beijing as to put more pressure on the USSR, China with smaller input from the USA decided to increase support to Democratic Kampuchea in war against Soviet ally of Vietnam. The Chinese actions forced the USSR to increase its military and economic support to Vietnam.

    General Secretary Romanov also made a decision on how to redistribute recently recovered money and resources. The decision was made to spend them on the most pressing issues, which included: development of infrastructure, agriculture, light industry and increased production of consumer goods. The main goals of the Soviet government were to: improve the living conditions for Soviet citizens, increase the wellbeing of the populace, development of the Soviet economy, increase of agricultural production, which would allow limiting the grain export of grain from the USA and to develop Soviet internal market. Romanov focused also and reduction of food spoilage, reduction of waiting lines, overall improvement of the rural economy as well as modernization and mechanization of the Soviet agriculture system.

    In regard to overall Soviet strategy for a potential conflict between USSR and Warsaw Pact on the one side and NATO and China on the other, the Soviet leadership decided to adopt conventional offensive stance against NATO in Europe and nuclear defensive stance against China. The Soviet leadership quickly came to the conclusion that the Soviet Armed Forces would not be able to occupy China conventionally due to the sheer size of the country, nor do the USSR have the conventional ability to fight a two front war both in Europe and Asia at the same time. The new strategy would focus on conventional conflict with NATO in Europe, while preventing any Chinese offensives against the USSR or its allies in Asia with a prospect of nuclear exchange in such case, using enormous Soviet advantage over China in nuclear potential and technology.

    Samantha-Smith-1.jpg

    (Samantha Smith with a letter from General Secretary Romanov)

    Amid very tense international relations between superpowers and other regional powers, an opportunity has arisen for USSR to improve its tarnished international image. When Grigory Romanov succeeded Leonid Brezhnev as leader of the Soviet Union in November 1982, the mainstream Western newspapers and magazines ran numerous front-page photographs and articles about him. Most coverage was negative and tended to give a perception of a new threat to the stability of the Western World. At the same time much international tension surrounded both Soviet and American efforts to develop weapons capable of being launched from satellites in orbit. Both governments had extensive research and development programs to develop such technology. However, both nations were coming under increasing pressure to disband the project. In the United States, President Ronald Reagan came under pressure from a lobby of U.S. scientists and arms experts, while in the Soviet Union the government issued a statement that read, "To prevent the militarization of space is one of the most urgent tasks facing mankind". At the time, large anti-nuclear protests were taking place across both Europe and North America, nevertheless The two superpowers had by this point abandoned their strategy of détente and in response to the deployment of cruise and Pershing II missiles from Reagan in Europe, the Soviet Union deployed its SS-20s.

    In November 1982, a 10 year old girl - Samantha Smith, wrote to Soviet leader Grigory Romanov, seeking to understand why Soviet Union–United States relations were so tense:

    "Dear Mr. Romanov,

    My name is Samantha Smith. I am 10 years old. Congratulations on your new job. I have been worrying about Russia and the United States getting into a nuclear war. Are you going to vote to have a war or not? If you aren't please tell me how you are going to help to not have a war. This question you do not have to answer, but I would like it if you would. Why do you want to conquer the world or at least our country? God made the world for us to share and take care of. Not to fight over or have one group of people own it all. Please lets do what he wanted and have everybody be happy too.

    Samantha Smith"


    Her letter was published in the Soviet state-run newspaper Pravda. Smith was happy to discover that her letter had been published; however, she had not received a reply. She then sent a letter to Soviet ambassador to the United States Anatoly Dobrynin asking if Romanov intended to respond. On April 26, 1983, she received a response from Romanov. A media circus ensued, with Smith being interviewed by Ted Koppel and Johnny Carson, among others, and with nightly reports by the major American networks. On July 7, 1983, she flew to Moscow with her parents, and spent two weeks as Romanov's guest. During the trip she visited Moscow and Leningrad and spent time in Artek, the main Soviet pioneer camp, in the town of Gurzuf on the Crimean Peninsula.Later Smith wrote in her book that in Leningrad she and her parents were amazed by the friendliness of the people and by the presents many people made for them. Speaking at a Moscow press conference, she declared that the Russians were "just like us". In Artek, Smith chose to stay with the Soviet children rather than accept the privileged accommodations offered to her. For ease of communication, teachers and children who spoke fluent English were chosen to stay in the building where she was lodged. Smith shared a dormitory with nine other girls, and spent her time there swimming, talking and learning Russian songs and dances. While there, she made many friends, including Natasha Kashirina from Leningrad, a fluent English speaker. During a private meeting with Smith General Secretary Romanov discussed with her importance of international cooperation and understanding between United States and the Soviet Union. What is more, Romanov expressed his admiration for Smith's interest in current state of the world "as young people from around the globe are our future, and we must leave them the world in better state than we have received from previous generations". Smith's return to the U.S. on July 22, 1983, was celebrated by the people of Maine with roses, a red carpet, and a limousine and her popularity continued to grow in her native country. Some critics at the time remained skeptical, believing Smith was unwittingly serving as an instrument of Soviet propaganda.

    black-july-weighs-heavily-on-post-conflict-sri-lanka-60fba686c144b_600.jpeg

    (Black July in Sri Lanka)

    Just as the Soviet Union was once again perceived with more positive light thanks to the visit of Samantha Smith to USSR, a new front of struggle between USA and USSR has opened in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka was 74.9 percent Sinhalese and 11.2 percent Sri Lankan Tamil. Within these two groups, Sinhalese tend to be Buddhist and Tamils tend to be Hindu, displaying significant linguistic and religious divisions. However, the strife between the grounds purportedly began much further back in Sri Lanka’s ancient settlement history. Though the Sinhalese people’s arrival in Sri Lanka is somewhat ambiguous, historians believe that the Tamils arrived on the island both as invaders and traders from India’s Chola Kingdom. These origin stories suggest that the Sinhalese and Tamil communities have experienced tension from the very beginning—not out of cultural incompatibility, but rather out of power disputes. In July 1983 the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) launched a deadly ambush on Sri Lanka army patrol outside the town of Thirunelveli, killing an officer and 12 soldiers.Using nationalistic sentiments to their advantage, members of the ruling UNP party organized massacres and pogroms in Colombo, the capital, and elsewhere (known also as Black July). According to various sources 5,638 Tamils were massacred and 250,000 Tamils fled were displaced internally during Black July; majority of them fled Sinhala-majority areas. This is considered the beginning of the civil war.

    Because of its location, conflict in Sri Lanka quickly attracted attention of regional powers and other important players on the international stage. The government of Sri Lanka has received an extended military, financial, diplomatic and economic support from China, Pakistan, United States and United Kingdom. Nevertheless, this brought reaction from Indian government, who feared an encirclement from hostile states including Pakistan in the West, China in the East, and potentially hostile Sri Lanka to the South. All of these facts prompted for a direct involment of India in the Sri Lankan civil war on the side of rebels. From August 1983 the Indian government, through its intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), provided arms, training and monetary support to six Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups including LTTE, Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO), People's Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE), Eelam Revolutionary Organisation of Students (EROS) Eelam People's Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) and Tamil Eelam Liberation Army (TELA). LTTE's rise is widely attributed to the initial backing it received from RAW. It is believed that by supporting different militant groups, the Indian government hoped to keep the Tamil independence movement divided and be able to exert overt control over it. Nonwithstanding, Indian help was not enought against combined commitment from China, UK, US and Pakistan, as the government forces were able to score number of victories over rebel forces, which forced them to seek support in Moscow. The LTTE was a self-styled national liberation organisation with the primary goal of establishing an independent Tamil state. Tamil nationalism was the primary basis of its ideology. LTTE claimed to strive for a democratic, secular state that is based on socialism. Its leader Velupillai Prabhakaran was influenced by Indian freedom fighters such as Subhas Chandra Bose.The organisation denied being a separatist movement and saw itself as fighting for self-determination and restoration of sovereignty in what it recognised as Tamil homeland.

    Representatives of LTTE have arrived in Moscow to seek a meeting with General Secretary Romanov and other representatives of the Soviet leadership. From the very beginning both sides knew what they wanted from each other. LTTE's representatives asked for financial, military, diplomatic and economic support from USSR in order to fight back against Sri Lankan government. In exchange for support for Tamil independence and after gaining independence, LTTE promised to join the bloc of countries allied with the USSR, allow construction of military bases (including ports) for the Soviet Armed Forces, as well an access to natural resources and arable land located on their territories. Romanov and the Soviet leadership decided to think over all pros and cons of supporting LTTE in the Sri Lankan Civil War before giving a final answer.

    000_arp1905475_int.jpg

    (Thomas Sankara - Africa's Che Guevara)

    In the meantime, another opportunity presented itself for USSR to expand its influence in Africa. On 4 August 1983 a coup d'état was launched in the Republic of Upper Volta (Burkina Faso) in an event sometimes referred to as the August revolution or Burkinabé revolution. It was carried out by radical elements of the army led by Thomas Sankara and Blaise Compaoré, against the regime of Major Jean-Baptiste Ouédraogo. At the age of 33, Sankara became the President of the Republic of Upper Volta and launched social, ecological and economic programs and renamed the country from the French colonial name Upper Volta to Burkina Faso ('Land of Incorruptible People'), with its people being called Burkinabé ('upright people'). His foreign policies were centered on anti-imperialism, and he rejected aid from organizations such as the International Monetary Fund. Sankara welcomed foreign aid from other sources but tried to reduce reliance on aid by boosting domestic revenues and diversifying the sources of assistance. Now Sankara, known also as "Africa's Che Guevara" is now seeking a protection and patronage from USSR against former leadership and their French allies. On the side, Romanov thinks that Sankara ideologically is much closer to Maoism than to Marxism-Leninism, but can't deny the fact that USSR could always use a friendly country in Africa.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Six: Cold war goes hot? (September – November 1983)
  • The Central Committee of the CPSU in regard to the Sri Lankan Civil War has decided to indirectly support the rebels against the Western- and China-backed government via India, as not to worsen the already strained relationship between USSR and the West/China. The aid provided by the Soviet Union included not only military or financial aid, but also food and medicine, delivered by the Indian Air Force in airdropped parcels. The Soviet leadership had also agreed to support the newly-established government of Thomas Sankara, becoming protector of his rule over Burkina Faso. Sankara domestic policies included famine prevention, agrarian self-sufficiency, land reform, and suspending rural poll taxes. He also focused on a nationwide literacy campaign and vaccinating program against meningitis, yellow fever and measles. His government also focused on building schools, health centers, water reservoirs, and infrastructure projects. He also combated desertification of the Sahel by planting over 10 million trees. Moreover, he outlawed female genital mutilation, forced marriages and polygamy. Sankara set up Cuban-inspired Committees for the Defense of the Revolution. He set up Popular Revolutionary Tribunals to prosecute public officials charged with political crimes and corruption, considering such elements of the state counter-revolutionaries. This led to criticism by Amnesty International for human rights violations, including extrajudicial executions and arbitrary detentions of political opponents. In return for Soviet military, financial, diplomatic and political support, Sankara was forced to completely hand over mining industry to USSR, which included production of mineral commodities such as cement, gold, granite, marble or salt. Gold mining in Burkina Faso turned to be very profitable to USSR, as over a longer period of time Burkina Faso turned into one of the biggest sites for gold exploration and largest gold producer in Africa, however West African gold was not as high grade as gold from South Africa.

    0897150f57b603f27240bab36fa4d4f4.jpg

    (Soviet forces during Zapad-83)

    Exercise Zapad-83 conducted in late August 1983, which lasted approximately 9 days, was the largest military exercise ever carried by the Soviet Union and other member states of the Warsaw Pact. The exercise involved between 300,000 and 375,000 troops. The joint strategic exercise was much bigger in scale, scope and different in disposition and composition of the force than the previous exercises. The gravity of the threat assessment by the Western governments was intensified by the intelligence gathered on the actual thoughts and plans of the Soviet leadership concerning the forces. According to the Minister of Defense of the Soviet Union Marshal Dmitry Ustinov: "Zapad-1983 is purely defensive in nature, and its holding does not pose any threat, either to the European community as a whole, or to neighboring countries in particular. Zapad-1983 is planned and is the final stage in the system of joint training of the armed forces of USSR and Warsaw Pact members this year. First of all, it is aimed at increasing the training of troops from the regional grouping designed to ensure security in the Eastern European region." Nevertheless, the scope and time of the exercise brought very negative reaction from the West, as on the one hand the Zapad exercises illustrated strategic unity between USSR and Warsaw Pact members, but led to furthrer escalation of conflict with the West. What the world did not realize was that the Zapad exercise was the beginning of a larger chain of events that would put the world on the brink of World War III in just two months' time.

    Pershing_2.jpg

    (Pershing II missile in action)

    Amid the largest Soviet military exercises in history, U.S. president Ronald Reagan announced that the U.S. government will proceed with planned deployment of the Pershing II ballistic missiles in West Germany in November 1983, replacing the current Pershing 1a missiles. The West German Air Force also declared to replace their 72 Pershing 1a missiles with the short-range Pershing 1b. The Soviet Union began deployment of the RSD-10 Pioneer (NATO designation SS-20 Saber) in 1976. The weapon had a range of 1,800 kilometers (1,100 mi). Soviet estimates put the system's range at 2,500 kilometers (1,600 mi) and they also believed that the missile was armed with an earth-penetrating warhead. These two errors contributed to Soviet fears of the weapon, believing it could be used to decapitate the Soviet Union. In reality, from positions in West Germany, the system could not target Moscow. The deployment of Pershing II and GLCM missiles was a cause of significant protests in Europe and the US, many organized by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Protests against the short-range MGM-52 Lance nuclear missile began in July 1981 in Engstingen, West Germany. In October 1981, 300,000 protesters assembled in Bonn. European Nuclear Disarmament began a campaign for nuclear disarmament in 1982. The Seneca Women's Encampment for a Future of Peace and Justice was formed in 1983 to protest the deployment. In 1983, protesters went to court to stop the Pershing II deployment as a violation of Article 26(1) of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which prohibited West Germany from preparing for an offensive war. The Federal Constitutional Court rejected these claims. Again in Bonn in October 1983, as many as 500,000 people protested the deployment and a human chain was formed from the US Army headquarters in Stuttgart to the gates of Wiley Barracks in Neu-Ulm, the site of one of the Pershing battalions. If somebody hoped that September would bring calm between the two superpowers, couldn't be more wrong.

    korean-Airlines-flight-007-Times.jpg

    (The title say it all)

    On September 1, 1983, Korean Airlines (KAL) flight 007 was on the last leg of a flight from New York City to Seoul, with a stopover in Anchorage, Alaska. As it approached its final destination, the plane began to veer far off its normal course. In just a short time, the plane flew into Soviet airspace and crossed over the Kamchatka Peninsula, where some top-secret Soviet military installations were known to be located. The Soviets sent two fighters to intercept the plane. According to tapes of the conversations between the fighter pilots and Soviet ground control, the fighters quickly located the KAL flight and tried to make contact with the passenger jet. Failing to receive a response, one of the fighters fired a heat-seeking missile. KAL 007 was hit and plummeted into the Sea of Japan. All 269 people on board were killed. As a result of the incident, the United States altered tracking procedures for aircraft departing from Alaska, and President Ronald Reagan issued a directive making the American satellite-based radio navigation Global Positioning System freely available for civilian use, once it was sufficiently developed, as a common good. In 1983, Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union had escalated to a level not seen since the Cuban Missile Crisis because of several factors. These included the United States' Strategic Defense Initiative, its planned deployment of the Pershing II weapon system in Europe in March and April, and FleetEx '83-1, the largest naval exercise held to date in the North Pacific. The military hierarchy of the Soviet Union (particularly Minister of Defense Dmitry Ustinov) viewed these actions as bellicose and destabilizing; they were deeply suspicious of U.S. President Ronald Reagan's intentions and openly fearful he was planning a preemptive nuclear strike against the Soviet Union. These fears culminated in RYAN, the code name for a secret intelligence-gathering program initiated by Andropov to detect a potential nuclear sneak attack which he believed Reagan was plotting. Aircraft from USS Midway and USS Enterprise repeatedly overflew Soviet military installations in the Kuril Islands during FleetEx '83,resulting in the dismissal or reprimanding of Soviet military officials who had been unable to shoot them down. On the Soviet side, RYAN was expanded.

    Lastly, there was a heightened alert around the Kamchatka Peninsula at the time KAL 007 was in the vicinity, because of a Soviet missile test at the Kura Missile Test Range that was scheduled for the same day. However, the passenger jet again entered Soviet airspace as it passed over Sakhalin Island. This time, Soviet fighter jets began trailing the South Korean plane. A Soviet pilot noted that the aircraft’s navigational and strobe lights were blinking, which would suggest that it was not a spy plane. He allegedly fired warning shots, but they were not seen by the pilots of the civilian plane. By this time, the South Korean plane had received permission from Tokyo air traffic control to increase its altitude, and the aircraft slowed as the flight adjustments were made. To the Soviets, however, the plane was engaging in evasive maneuvers. With the aircraft fast approaching international airspace, a Soviet plane fired two air-to-air missiles. Although the Soviet pilot declared that the target was destroyed, the crippled plane continued to fly—estimates vary from 90 seconds up to 12 minutes—before crashing into the Sea of Japan (East Sea) approximately 30 miles (48 km) from Sakhalin Island. At the time of the attack, the plane had been cruising at an altitude of about 35,000 feet (11,000 m). Tapes recovered from the airliner's cockpit voice recorder indicate that the crew was unaware that they were off course and violating Soviet airspace.

    Immediately after the shoot-down, South Korea, the owner of the aircraft and therefore prime considerant for jurisdiction, designated the United States and Japan as search and salvage agents, thereby making it illegal for the Soviet Union to salvage the aircraft, providing it was found outside Soviet territorial waters. If it did so, the United States would now be legally entitled to use force against the Soviets, if necessary, to prevent retrieval of any part of the plane. The incident had widespread fallout and increased tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. U.S. officials immediately claimed that the Soviets had knowingly downed a civilian plane, and U.S. President Ronald Reagan decried it as “an act of barbarism.” Government officials continued to publicly promote this narrative, even after U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that the Soviets had likely mistaken the plane for a reconnaissance aircraft. U.S. authorities used the incident to stir anti-Soviet sentiment worldwide, especially as it was the second time Soviets had attacked a passenger plane; an incident involving another Korean Air Lines aircraft had occurred in 1978, but that plane had managed to make an emergency landing, and only two people died.

    DeCTVHjVQAEC0Y6.jpg

    (Marshal Ogarkov denies the Soviet responsibility)

    Initially the Soviet government and General Secretary Romanov, on the advice of Defense Minister Ustinov, but against the advice of Foreign Minister Gromyko, did not acknowledge shooting down the aircraft until September 6, five days after the flight was shot down. Eight days after the shoot-down, Marshal of the Soviet Union and Chief of General Staff Nikolai Ogarkov denied knowledge of where KAL 007 had gone down; "We could not give the precise answer about the spot where it [KAL 007] fell because we ourselves did not know the spot in the first place". Marshal Ustinov was completely convinced, and assured General Secretary Romanov, that the Korean airliner was in fact an intruding U.S. spy plane, send as a deliberate provocation by the United States to probe the Soviet Union's military preparedness. According to Ustinov, the incident was a made up American plot to escalate world-wide anti-Soviet sentiment. Nevertheless, the Soviet government had to quickly change its stance, as on September 7, Japan and the United States jointly released a transcript of Soviet communications, intercepted by the listening post at Wakkanai, to an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council. Faced with such evidence, General Secretary Romanov, to salvage the situation and the international reputation of the USSR, admitted downing the plane by mistake, much to the fury of Marshal Ustinov and more hardliner and militarist elements in the Soviet leadership, who still claimed that the whole incident was a political provocation carefully organized by the U.S. special services. On 29 September 1983, the Soviet government offered up to US$2.7 billion to settle claims by the families of the 270 killed in the incident, representing US$10 million per family. On 15 October 1983, Soviet UN ambassador, Oleg Troyanovsky, submitted a letter to the UN Security Council formally accepting "responsibility for the actions of its officials"in relation to the downing of Korean Air Lines Flight 007. Nevertheless, the Soviet leadership could not take a breath, as another incident just weeks later almost led to a full-scale nuclear war between the USSR and the West.

    Stanislav Petrov.jpg

    (Stanislav Petrov - a man who prevented (or only postponed? ) WW3))

    At the height of the Cold War, the USSR designed an early-warning radar system meant to track fast-moving threats to increase the chance of reprisal. On September 26, 1983, however, the system, code-named Oko, malfunctioned. At around midnight, Oko’s alarms rang out, alerting the base of one incoming nuclear missile. The screen read, “LAUNCH,” which was not a warning, but an automatic order to prepare for retaliation. Believing that a U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was incoming, the base went into a panic. However, some officers on duty were skeptical that the United States would choose to send only one ICBM, knowing that it could not affect the Soviets’ counterstrike capability. Stanislav Petrov, an officer that helped create the code for the early-warning software, also knew that Oko was prone to error. He reset the system, but the alarms persisted. Rather than following protocol, which entailed alerting superiors up the chain of command, Petrov awaited corroborating evidence. No evidence came, and the alarms soon stopped. Petrov’s actions, or inaction, almost certainly averted a nuclear disaster. It was subsequently determined that the false alarms were caused by a rare alignment of sunlight on high-altitude clouds and the satellites' Molniya orbits, an error later corrected by cross-referencing a geostationary satellite. In explaining the factors leading to his decision, Petrov cited his belief and training that any U.S. first strike would be massive, so five missiles seemed an illogical start. In addition, the launch detection system was new and in his view not yet wholly trustworthy, while ground radar had failed to pick up corroborative evidence even after several minutes of the false alarm. Learning about the whole incident, the Soviet leadership decided to hush up the whole incident. Although General Secretary Romanov stated that "Petrov made the right decision, but he could not be rewarded for his actions, as I would be forced to officially punish and embarrass the military leadership responsible for the missile detection system". The incident happened only weeks after the unfortunate downing of the Korean airliner, so the Soviet leadership could not allow this incident to see the day of light. At the end, Petrov was neither praised nor reprimanded for his actions, and remained at his post on the orders of Romanov. In the meantime, Soviet Space Program celebrated a successful mission of Soyuz T-10a, whose crew has successfully visited the Salyut 7 space station, which was occupied by the Soyuz T-9 crew.
    usmcberuit.jpg

    (Bombing in Beirut)

    On October 23, 1983, a terrorist attack took place in Beirut against U.S. and French armed forces, who were members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon (MNF), a military peacekeeping operation during the Lebanese Civil War that claimed the lives of 307 people (The attack killed 307 people: 241 U.S. and 58 French military personnel, six civilians, and two attackers). The multinational peacekeeping force, composed of troops from the United States, France, and Italy, arrived in Lebanon in August 1982 as part of a cease-fire agreement signed by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The troops were to oversee the safe and peaceful withdrawal of Yasser Arafat and the PLO from positions within Beirut and ensure the safety of the Palestinian civilians that remained behind. The withdrawal of the PLO was accomplished by early September, and the bulk of the multinational force soon withdrew to ships in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. However, the assassination on September 14, 1982, of Lebanese president-elect Bashir Gemayel—the Phalangist leader of the Lebanese Forces, a unified Christian militia—sparked a wave of violence. Christian militiamen retaliated for Gemayel’s death by killing hundreds of Palestinians (estimates range from several hundred to several thousand) at the Ṣabrā and Shātīlā refugee camps. In the wake of the killings, troops were swiftly returned to Lebanon. Israel and Lebanon signed a formal peace agreement the following month that called for the withdrawal of Israeli troops, contingent upon Syria’s withdrawal. Syria opposed the agreement, however, and refused to retreat. In July, Israeli troops began a unilateral withdrawal from positions within Lebanon that they had held since June 1982. Fighting between competing militias escalated in the wake of the Israeli withdrawal, and violence against the multinational force increased, with U.S. Marine positions routinely coming under small arms and mortar fire. Circumstances took a crucial turn, however, when U.S. gunships in the Mediterranean shelled Syrian-backed Druze militias in support of the Christian government; the perceived role of the multinational force thus shifted from that of unaligned peacekeepers to active support of a particular faction in the Lebanese civil war. A group called Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the bombings and said that the aim was to force the MNF out of Lebanon. According to Caspar Weinberger, the United States Secretary of Defense, there is no knowledge of who did the bombing. Some analysis highlights the role of Hezbollah and Iran, calling it "an Iranian operation from top to bottom".

    nara marines grenada 1200.jpg

    (Victorious U.S. troops in Grenada)

    It took only 2 days, for the international situation to get worse and more strained than it already was, as the U.S. invasion of Grenada took place at dawn on 25 October 1983. The United States and a coalition of six Caribbean nations invaded the island nation of Grenada, 100 miles (160 km) north of Venezuela. Codenamed Operation Urgent Fury by the U.S. military, it resulted in military occupation within a few days. It was triggered by the strife within the People's Revolutionary Government, which resulted in the house arrest and execution of the previous leader and second Prime Minister of Grenada, Maurice Bishop, and the establishment of the Revolutionary Military Council, with Hudson Austin as Chairman. The goal of the military operation was to overthrow the Communist government, expel Cuban troops, and abort the construction of a Soviet-funded airstrip.

    The Reagan administration mounted a US military intervention following receipt of a formal appeal for help from the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States, which had received a covert appeal for assistance from the Governor-General of Grenada, Paul Scoon (though he put off signing the formal letter of invitation until October 26th). President Reagan stated that he felt compelled to act due to "concerns over the 600 U.S. medical students on the island" and fears of a repeat of the Iran hostage crisis, which ended less than 3 years earlier. The invading force consisted of the 1st and 2nd battalions of the US Army's 75th ranger regiment, the 82nd Airborne, and elements of the former Rapid Deployment Force, U.S. Marines, US Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs, and ancillary forces, totaling 7,600 troops, together with Jamaican forces and troops of the Regional Security System (RSS). Marines and paratroopers, supported by air strikes, led the invasion on October 25. Fighting was fierce, especially around the airport defended by the Cubans—and, unexpectedly for the U.S., the Grenadian militia put up a stout fight. Inadequate communications and intelligence led to “friendly fire” casualties and accidental attacks on civilians. Helicopter gunships, naval gunfire, and reinforcements were deployed until, after three days, resistance ended. U.S. losses totaled 19 dead and 150 wounded out of about 7,000 people who participated in the invasion. Cuban casualties included 25 dead and 59 wounded among an estimated 600 to 800 fighters. Of up to 1,500 Grenadians who fought, 45 died and 337 were wounded. The American public largely supported the invasion, which was the first major fighting for U.S. forces since the Vietnam War, and U.S. President Ronald Reagan hailed it as a victory. Outside the U.S., however, many were outraged at the violation of Grenada’s sovereignty on such a flimsy pretext. Even Britain, whose queen was also Grenada’s nominal head of state, condemned it. The invasion of Granada was also heavily criticized by the Soviet government, General Secretary Romanov stated that "the invasion is a clear sign of American imperialism and aim of President Reagan to subjugate the whole region, tramping freedom and autonomy of local people".

    202115.jpg

    (NATO forces during Able Archer 83)

    By November 1983, diplomatic relations between the USA and the USSR were at the lowest point since 1962 and the Cuban Missile Crisis. By this point more and more people around the world feared the unleashing of World War III between the two superpowers, and unfortunately they were absolutely right, as events at the beginning of November confirmed. Chain of events started in March with Reagan's speech announcing of SDI, followed with deployment of Pershing II missiles in the West Germany, put the Soviet leadership on edge. The Soviet started to really believe, that NATO was preparing a nuclear first strike against USSR, which forced General Secretary Romanov to consider steps to prevent that. Able Archer 83 was the annual NATO Able Archer exercise conducted in November 1983. The purpose for the command post exercise, like previous years, was to simulate a period of conflict escalation, culminating in the US military attaining a simulated DEFCON 1 coordinated nuclear attack. The five-day exercise, which involved NATO commands throughout Western Europe, was coordinated from the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) headquarters in Casteau, Belgium.

    The 1983 exercise, which began on November 7, 1983, introduced several new elements not seen in previous years, including a new, unique format of coded communication, radio silences, and the participation of heads of government, including President Ronald Reagan altogether with Vice President George H.W. Bush. During Able Archer 83, NATO forces simulated a move through all alert phases, from DEFCON 5 to DEFCON 1. On November 8, NATO command began a simulation of nuclear attack, just as Soviet intelligence services were attempting to detect it, which alerted the Soviet leadership of inevitable upcoming American attack against USSR and the Warsaw Pact, however USSR had a time to react, as it was estimated that period between NATO’s preliminary decision and an actual strike would take between 7 and 10 days.

    All of the above fact, forced General Secretary Romanov to call extraordinary meeting of the State Defense Committee (GKO), the elite section of the Politburo who could take decisions about starting and managing a war. During a meeting, evidence suggesting imminent NATO attack was presented by KGB, along with the reports from Warsaw Pact intelligence agencies, who on the other hand were extremely skeptical about NATO first strike. Nevertheless, those reports were ignored by hardliners and militarist led by Marshal Ustinov, who perceived them as an "unreliable elements". Marshal Ustinov, along with hardliner, conservative and militarist factions, insisted that the Warsaw Pact forces should take action immediately, according to recently chosen strategy, to prevent the upcoming American strike. Ustinov argued that the Soviet forces in Europe were already mobilized from September and the end of Zapad-83 exercise and ready to attack. The goal of the Soviet preemptive attack would be to: reach the Rhine river, disrupt the enemy plans for nuclear war, neutralize West Germany and buy time for diplomatic negotiations from a position of strength. Foreign Minister since year 1957 Andrei Gromyko, strongly opposed a preemptive strike against NATO and dismissed the evidence provided by KGB and GRU. Gromyko was most convinced that NATO has no plans for a surprise nuclear strike. Nevertheless, during a voting majority of the GKO members voted for authorization of a preemptive strike against NATO forces in West Germany, hoping for a limited conflict. At the same time, the Soviet leadership issued orders for preparations for a worst case scenario (nuclear war), meaning relocation of most important figures in the USSR to top-secret complexes capable to withstand nuclear strikes.

    a8f80f7b8a6036cb17dc30d5458b2f28.jpg

    (Soviet troops in East Germany after receiving orders from Moscow)

    By the end of the day, the Kremlin issued orders to the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany under the command of General Mikhail Zaitsev to mobilize and be ready for a strike into West Germany within 36 hours. The upsurge of Soviet and Warsaw Pact military activity was, however, quickly noticed by Western intelligence services. Immediately in the morning, western leaders were informed about: burst in encrypted communication between Moscow and Soviet Group Forces in East Germany and Hungary, troop movement in both states, and heightened state of readiness of the Soviet Strategic Missile Forces. During a meeting between President Reagan and Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin, American concerns about recent Soviet actions were dismissed by Dobrynin as a large scale military drill, a second part of Zapad-83 exercise. The response from Dobrynin only consolidated Reagan's conviction that USSR is preparing for a war. Reagan's assumption was also confirmed with intelligence reports, which stated that the chance of the Soviet strike against West Germany within 36–72 hours is between 50 and 75 percent. As soon as possible, a DEFCON 3 order has been issued by Reagan, along with an order for NATO troops in West Germany to move to defensive positions along the anticipated axes of upcoming Soviet attack. As a last resort, President Reagan decided to use the Moscow-Washington hotline to dissuade Romanov from his plans and prevent World War III from happening. Now the fate of the world and human civilization hangs on the outcome of this conversation.
     

    Attachments

    • m60.jpg
      m60.jpg
      423.3 KB · Views: 131
    Last edited:
    15 Largest economies by GDP (1983)
  • As the next chapter will deal with new year, here is my short list of largest economies by GDP:
    1. United States - $3,650,000M
    2. USSR - $1,788,500M
    3. Japan - $1,278,620M
    4. West Germany - $757,912M
    5. France - $562,499M
    6. United Kingdom - $533,014M
    7. Italy - $445,612M
    8. Canada - $341,863M
    9. China - $318,428M
    10. India - $230,049M
    11. Australia - $179,513M
    12. Mexico - $173,714M
    13. Spain - $172,856M
    14. Iran - $156,927M
    15. Netherlands - $153,179M
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Seven: The Geneva Summit and Iran – Iraq War (December 1983)
  • The proposal made by President Reagan for a meeting with General Secretary Romanov had been accepted by Moscow. As a gesture of goodwill and in order to avoid any incidents which could spark the next world war, USA and NATO decided to end immediately the Able Archer Exercise, on the other hand, the USSR ordered its troops in East Germany to return to bases. What is more, a no-fly zone was declared over both German states.The Geneva Summit between president Reagan and general secretary Romanov was conducted amid suspicions and distrust on both sides. Both American and Soviet side wanted to discuss a number of topics – the USSR wanted to discuss the matter of American ballistic missiles in West Germany, the SDI program, as well as militarization of the outer space. At Reykjavík, Reagan sought to include discussion of human rights, emigration of Soviet Jews and dissidents, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Romanov sought to limit the talks solely to arms control. The Soviets acceded to the "double-zero" proposal for eliminating INF weapons from Europe, as initially proposed by President Reagan in November 1981 (INF denoting "Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces" as distinct from ICBMs, or intercontinental ballistic missiles). The Soviets also proposed to eliminate 50% of all strategic arms, including ICBMs, and agreed not to include British or French weapons in the count. All this was proposed in exchange for an American pledge not to implement strategic defenses for the next ten years, in accordance with SALT I. The Americans countered with a proposal to eliminate all ballistic missiles within ten years, but required the right to deploy strategic defenses against remaining threats afterward.

    1200px-President_Ronald_Reagan_says_goodbye_to_Soviet_General_Secretary_Mikhail_Gorbachev.jpg

    (President Reagan talks with members of the Soviet delegation in Geneva)

    Nevertheless, the US and USSR could not find common ground on issues of human rights, Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the presence of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles in Europe, to the displeasure of both delegations. However, after a long series of negotiations between Reagan and Romanov, an agreement was reached: both sides agreed to reduce their nuclear stockpiles by 20 percent as a gesture of a new opening in Soviet-American relations and to reduce tensions, which could be used as a basis for future cooperation between the two superpowers. In the meantime, a political purge took place in Moscow, as General Secretary Romanov with help of Marshal Ogarkov have decided to deal with Marshal Ustinov once and for all. Ustinov was forced by Romanov to resign from his position and to retire, as he was blamed by Romanov for misleading the Soviet leadership about American war plans (that never existed) against the USSR, which almost led to the World War 3 and potential destruction of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc. What is more, anyone loyal or connected to Ustinov and the militarist faction had been dismissed, replaced or relocated to other position, which in reality meant the destruction of the militarist faction, which till this point had an enormous influence over the Soviet Armed Forces and the industrial military-complex. Additionally, Yuri Andropov has resigned from his position as chairman of the KGB citing his severe health problems, as Andropov remained in hospital since his admission in August 1983, after he suffered total kidney failure.

    Iranian-soldier-wearing-gas-mask-during-Iran-Iraq-War-photo-via-Wikipedia-e1606371935891.jpg

    (Iranian soldier in a trench wearing a gas mask to guard against Iraqi chemical attack)

    Just when negotiations were held in Geneva and there was an ongoing purge in the USSR, the biggest since the reign of Stalin, the Iran-Iraq War entered a new phase and turned into a stalemate and war of attrition. Iraq's primary rationale for the attack against Iran cited the need to prevent Ruhollah Khomeini—who had spearheaded Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979—from exporting the new Iranian ideology to Iraq; there were also fears among the Iraqi leadership of Saddam Hussein that Iran, a theocratic state with a population predominantly composed of Shia Muslims, would exploit sectarian tensions in Iraq by rallying Iraq's Shia majority against the Baʽathist government, which was officially secular and dominated by Sunni Muslims. Iraq also wished to replace Iran as the power player in the Persian Gulf, which was not seen as an achievable objective prior to the Islamic Revolution because of Pahlavi Iran's economic and military superiority as well as its close relationships with the United States and Israel. The Iran–Iraq War followed a long-running history of territorial border disputes between the two states, as a result of which Iraq planned to retake the eastern bank of the Shatt al-Arab that it had ceded to Iran in the 1975 Algiers Agreement. Iraqi support for Arab separatists in Iran increased following the outbreak of hostilities; while claims arose suspecting that Iraq was seeking to annex Iran's Khuzestan province, Saddam Hussein publicly stated in November 1980 that Iraq was not seeking an annexation of any Iranian territory. It is believed that Iraq had sought to establish suzerainty over Khuzestan. While the Iraqi leadership had hoped to take advantage of Iran's post-revolutionary chaos and expected a decisive victory in the face of a severely weakened Iran, the Iraqi military only made progress for three months, and by December 1980, the Iraqi invasion had stalled. The Iranian military began to gain momentum against the Iraqis and regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. After pushing Iraqi forces back to the pre-war borderlines, Iran rejected United Nations Security Council Resolution 514 and launched an invasion of Iraq.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Eight - Internal development (January - March 1984)
  • The first half of 1984 saw extensive developments in the Soviet internal political and economic situation. In January, the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union ratified the nuclear agreement reached with the U.S. in Geneva, which resulted in a decrease in the Soviet nuclear stockpile from 30,000 to 24,000 warheads. This allowed the Soviet government to save additional money and resources, which were badly needed in other areas. Furthermore, three changes at the top of the Soviet political ladder took place: Viktor Kulikov replaced Dmitry Ustinov as the new Minister of Defense of the Soviet Union. During his tenure, the Soviet Armed Forces would undergo extensive reform and modernization. Nikolai Ogarkov was recalled from Afghanistan and would take over as Supreme Commander of the Unified Armed Forces of the Warsaw Treaty Organization. Another change took place in the KGB, where Victor Chebrikov was chosen by General Secretary Romanov as the new chairman of the KGB.Through information supplied by American spy Aldrich Ames, Chebrikov was able to dismantle the network of CIA operatives in the USSR. Chebrikov was highly respected for his skills among his American counterparts; according to Kenneth E. deGraffenreid, the senior White House intelligence official in the Ronald Reagan administration, "One has to say that Chebrikov's term as KGB chief was the heyday of the KGB in terms of foreign intelligence. In terms of intelligence production—spies, and dishing the Americans on the secrets—they were going strong right up to the end. We uncovered 80 spies during those years. These guys were on the rise, and there was no question about their influence."
    00-sovexcer-741x388.jpg

    (Starting from 1984, the Red Army would undergo a massive reform and reorganization)


    Facing the still difficult economic situation of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc in general, a decision was made to greatly reduce the budget of the Soviet Armed Forces, which in 1983 accounted for almost 25% of Soviet GDP. Romanov and Kunaev knew that, in the long run, such a situation would put immense pressure on the already struggling Soviet economy, so a sudden and drastic change of course was needed. In 1984, the budget of the Soviet Armed Forces would be reduced from 25% to 17.5% of Soviet GDP, in 1985 to 12.5% and in 1986 to 10%. Such a reduction would allow the Soviet government to save hundreds of billions of dollars. Additionally, the Soviet Armed Forces would undergo extensive reorganization and reform, which included the following elements:
    • reduction of the army to a more manageable number (down from 4,200,000 to 3,000,000)
    • focus on the development and integration of new technologies
    • withdrawal from human wave tactics and mentality: "the more tanks, the better."
    • Gradual specialization of the Soviet Army
    • more autonomy for non-commissioned officers and regular officers in battlefield conditions
    • reduction of bureaucracy in the Army
    • campaign against corruption
    • focus on computing, electronic warfare, and beyond the visual horizon engagement (both air and land).
    • higher professionalization.

    20496976419_f98a220165_k_0.jpg

    (Romanov's reorganization of the Soviet economy would put the wellness of Soviet citizens on the first place)

    Additionally, the Soviet government introduced a wide reform of the Soviet economy, which included:
    • development of agriculture and the pharmaceutical sector
    • development of army-factory collaboration
    • expansion of the "luxury" industry
    • reduction of bureaucracy and inclusion of more autonomy in economy
    • focus on mechanization
    afghan-soldiers-ride-a-soviet-made-t-62-main-battle-tank-during-a-military-parade-to-mark-the-...jpg

    (A column of newly supplied Soviet T-62 tanks to Iraq)

    On the topic of Iran-Iraq, a decision was made to remain neutral in the conflict, which allowed the USSR to sell weapons to both sides of the conflict. Thanks to the choice made by General Secretary Romanov, the USSR earned badly needed hard currency from both Iran and Iraq. Nevertheless, the USSR provided much more tanks, spare parts, ammunition, training of pilots, intelligence support, along with surface-to-air missiles, air defense systems, aircrafts and helicopters to Iraq than to Iran. The USSR feared the Iranian victory over Iraq, fearing Tehran would go on to export Islamic revolution elsewhere in the world. However, Iran, after the Western embargo of 1979, was motivated to expand its own manufacturing capability and to seek short-term, clandestine procurement of spares and replacements compatible with its Western equipment base. To the extent the Soviet Union could satisfy these needs, it had incentive to do so. Some equipment was shipped from satellite states such as Bulgaria, Poland and Romania. North Korea during the Iran–Iraq war both shipped Soviet-designed weapons it made, and acting as a conduit for shipments directly from the Soviet Union and the China, even though China was a rival of the Soviets for Middle East influence. Certainly, Soviet clients, such as Libya and Syria, were providing Soviet products to Iran, and the Soviets did not announce a general embargo on them. That the Soviets were willing to do so selectively, as when they proposed shipment of advanced naval mines from Libya to Iran, saying "opposed the unauthorized transfer of their military technology to a third country" indicates that some exports were tolerated.
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Nine: Problems at home and abroad (April - June 1984)
  • rul26557.jpg

    (Poster propagating a new course of COMECON)

    The main focus of the Romanov-Kunaev alliance in the following months was the reform and reorganization of the COMECON (Council for Mutual Economic Assistance). COMECON was an economic organization under the leadership of the Soviet Union that was established as a response to the formation of the Marshall Plan in Western Europe. The primary purpose of the organization was to strengthen international relationships at an economic level between member states. Nevertheless, COMECON proved to be a failure and an ineffective organization that failed its tasks. In order to make COMECON a more efficient and integrated economic organization, which would help in the transformation and development of the Soviet economy in an ever-changing world, General Secretary Romanov announced the establishment of the 1984 Comprehensive Program for Scientific and Technical Progress, which would help in the development and reorganization of socialist economies. The program would include:
    • decrease and elimination of trade barriers between member states;
    • deregulation of prices on goods procured from trade;
    • expansion of the student exchange program with a focus on the USSR as the target for exchange;
    • establishment of a series of consumer standards for trade goods;
    • creation of a standardized system of logos that will represent the origin of any given product;
    • establishment of as many common institutions across the newly created market as possible to disincentivize the dissolution of COMECON;
    • expansion of tourist programs.

    38th_siachen_day_significance_history.jpg

    (Indian troops during Operation Meghdoot)

    Operation Meghdoot was the codename for the Indian Armed Forces' operation to seize control of the Siachen Glacier in the then state of Jammu and Kashmir, precipitating the Siachen conflict. Executed in the morning of 13 April 1984 in the highest battlefield in the world, Meghdoot was the first military offensive of its kind. The operation preempted Pakistan's impending Operation Ababeel (which was intended to achieve the same objective as Meghdoot) and was a success, resulting in Indian forces gaining control of the Siachen Glacier in its entirety.
    The operation resulted in India gaining 70 kilometres (43 mi) long Siachen Glacier and all of its tributary glaciers, as well as three main passes of the Saltoro Ridge immediately west of the glacier, Sia La, Bilafond La, and Gyong La, thus presently giving India the tactical advantage of holding higher grounds. The AGPL runs roughly along the Saltoro Mountains from Point NJ9842 on the India-Pakistan LoC to near La Yongma Ri, Gyong La, Gyong Kangri, Chumik Kangri, Bilafond La (pass) and nearby Bana Post, Saltoro Kangri, Ghent Kangri, and Sia La to the India–Pakistan–China trijunction northwest of Indira Col West on the Sino-Indian LAC. The peaks and passes under Pakistan's control such as Gayari Camp, Chogolisa, Baltoro Glacier, Conway Saddle, Baltoro Muztagh, and Gasherbrum lie west of the AGPL.

    The operation and the continued cost of maintaining logistics to the area is a major drain on both militaries. Pakistan launched an all-out assault in 1987 and again in 1989 to capture the ridge and passes held by India. The first assault was headed by then-Brigadier-General Pervez Musharraf (later President of Pakistan) and initially managed to capture a few high points before being pushed back. Later the same year, Pakistan lost at least one major Pakistani post, the "Quaid", which came under Indian control as Bana Post, in recognition of Bana Singh who launched a daring daylight attack, codenamed Operation Rajiv, after climbing 1,500 ft (460 m) of ice cliff. Bana Singh was awarded the Param Vir Chakra (PVC) – the highest gallantry award of India for the assault that captured the post. Bana Post is the highest battlefield post in the world today at a height of 22,143 feet (6,749 m) above sea level. The second assault in 1989 was also unsuccessful as the ground positions did not change. The loss of most of the Siachen area and the subsequent unsuccessful military forays prompted Benazir Bhutto to taunt Zia ul Haq that he should wear a burqa as he had lost his manliness.

    15_big.jpg


    The Severomorsk Disaster was a deadly series of munitions fires that resulted in the detonation and destruction of large amounts of munitions that lasted from May 13 to 17, 1984, within the Okolnaya naval munitions depot, near the Severomorsk Naval Base (headquarters of the Northern Fleet of the Soviet Navy). The detonation occurred in the Northern Russian "closed" town of Severomorsk, over 900 miles (1,448.4 kilometers) from the Russian capital Moscow. Munitions had reportedly detonated after a fire started on May 13, which thus caused a massive chain of explosions on May 17, and resulted in the deaths of at least 200–300 people, and the destruction of at least 900 of the Northern Fleet's missiles and torpedoes. Most of the dead were allegedly ordnance technicians "sent into the fire in a desperate but unsuccessful effort to defuse or disassemble munitions before they exploded", according to the New York Times.The town of Severomorsk has long had history with the armed forces of both the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation, a history that dates to before the Second World War. It is a history in part signified by the presence of at least two Russian military airbases within 10 kilometers (6.2 mi) of the town, as well as a naval base and its munitions depot (the Okolnaya naval munitions depot), as well as serving as the main administrative base of the Northern Fleet. At the time of the disaster, the Northern Fleet was believed to have an aircraft carrier, 148 cruisers, destroyers and other warships, and 190 of the navy's 371 submarines, of which two were apparently stationed at the munitions depot.

    On May 13, 1984, a fire started in the Okolnaya munitions depot on the outskirts of Severomorsk, the cause of which allegedly was the fact that munitions had been stored too close together.On May 17, the fire caused the detonation of the munitions at the depot. For about an hour and a half, sporadic blasts occurred at the supply depot, that resulted in the deaths of between 200–300 people, most of whom were ordnance technicians that had been "sent into the fire in a desperate but unsuccessful effort to defuse or disassemble munitions before they exploded", according to The New York Times. Dozens of local civilians began to evacuate their apartments and head to the hills, as the blast was allegedly so powerful that it was first thought a nuclear accident had occurred. The blast and the evacuation were described by a witness:

    Women ran into the streets with children in their arms, many only half dressed in house coats and slippers, the men running henny-penny with them, certain of them in uniform, giving the scene a weird drama. People ran up the stairs that lead up the slopes of the hills. Someone fell, he was picked up and dragged. Cars jammed the routes out of town. The cars were packed, but despite this they stopped to pick up children which their mothers literally threw into the arms of strangers. Screams, cries, curses – all drowned out by the thunder and howl from the volcano that was Mount Okol'naya [the apparent namesake of the Okolnaya Naval Munitions depot, where the incident had begun days earlier]. Black with an orange-purple mushroom top, growing to its full height in an instant, nodding toward the town, but afterwards it began to slowly settle in the direction of the tundra and the ocean.

    June1984AkalTakhtSahibDarshanDeori.jpg


    Operation Blue Star was an Indian Armed Forces operation between 1 and 10 June 1984 to remove Sikh militant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and other Sikh separatists from the buildings of the Golden Temple, the holiest site of Sikhism. A long-standing movement advocating for greater political rights for the Sikh community had previously existed in the Indian state of Punjab, and in 1973, Sikh activists presented the Indian government with the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, a list of demands for greater autonomy for Punjab. The resolution was rejected by the Indian government. In July 1982, Harchand Singh Longowal, the president of the Sikh political party Shiromani Akali Dal, invited Bhindranwale, who was wanted by authorities, to take up residence in the Golden Temple to evade arrest. On 1 June 1984, after negotiations with the militants failed, the prime minister of India Indira Gandhi ordered the army to launch Operation Blue Star, attacking the Golden Temple and scores of other Sikh temples and sites across Punjab.

    The military underestimated the firepower possessed by the Sikh militants, whose armaments included Chinese-made rocket-propelled grenade launchers and ammunition with armour-piercing capabilities. Hoping to avoid damage to the holy site, Indian forces unsuccessfully assaulted the Temple using light weaponry and quickly resorted to using heavy arms, including tanks, helicopters and artillery to dislodge the well-fortified Sikh militants. Combat devolved into protracted urban warfare, with the Indian forces committing significant forces to slowly gain ground. Eventually, the Sikh militants ran out of most of their ammunition on 6 June, and by 10 June fighting had largely ceased, with the Indian forces in control of the complex. The Indian government attributed high civilian casualties to Sikh militants using pilgrims trapped inside the temple as human shields. However, Indian forces were aware that civilians were present inside, and the operation began on a Sikh religious day, the martyrdom day of Guru Arjan Dev, when many worshippers would be present. Many civilians were subject to extrajudicial killings by the military during the operation. The military action in the temple complex was criticized by Sikhs worldwide, who interpreted it as an assault on the Sikh religion and the entire Sikh community. Five months after the operation, on 31 October 1984, Indira Gandhi was assassinated in an act of revenge by two Sikh bodyguards. Public outcry over Gandhi's death led to the ensuing 1984 Anti-Sikh riots.

    Despite accomplishing its stated objectives, the operation has been described as "disastrous" for the Indian military and state. It greatly exacerbated tensions between the Indian government and the Sikh community, turning a series of police operations into widespread sectarian violence. The brutality of the operation and high civilian casualties spawned a insurgency in Punjab, which would be waged by Sikh militants for over a decade. The operation has been used as a case study highlighting the importance of respecting religious and cultural sensitivity prior to launching military operations. The complex would later be raided twice more as apart of Operation Black Thunder I and II, with both operations having little to no civilian casualties or damage to the Temple despite larger amounts of militants than Bluestar.

    0_6b9c8_a66647de_orig-777x437-1.jpg

    (Mental hospitals and similar facilities had been used in the USSR to silence critics of the CPSU)

    In the meantime, a question on Soviet policy towards dissent was raised in the Politburo, as in June when Vladimir Danchev, a broadcaster for Radio Moscow, referred to the Soviet troops in Afghanistan as "invaders" while conducting English-language broadcasts. After refusing to retract this statement, he was sent to a mental institution for several months. Furthermore, Valery Senderov, a leader of an unofficial union of professional workers, was sentenced to seven years in a labor camp early in the year for speaking out on discrimination practiced against Jews in education and the professions.
     
    Chapter Ten: The 1984 Summer Olympics (July - August 1984)
  • On the orders of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, it decided to immediately stop using mental hospitals and similar facilities to silence its critics. The decision was met with a positive response at home and abroad. Furthermore, General Secretary Romanov allowed the Soviet athletes to attend the upcoming Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles. This was part of a larger campaign started by the Soviet authorities to improve perceptions of the Soviet Union in the West. Nevertheless, before expected results could be observed, a lot of effort and time would be needed. In the meantime, the Soviet government began reforming the Warsaw Pact to make it a more capable and effective organization, which included:
    • standardization of equipment;
    • integration of Warsaw Pact armies, similar to NATO's strategy;
    • increased number of joint exercises;
    • rotation of leadership;
    • establishment of joint units;
    • higher professionalization of WP troops;
    • promotion of more initiative among WP commanders;
    • joint creation of new doctrines and tactics;
    • open cooperation between WP military leadership;
    • joint development of new technologies;
    • soviet transfer of equipment and production licenses;
    • increased independence of WP leadership.

    main-qimg-9014c3e0f7cc71a69e3b6c3b1e4786ab-lq.jpg

    (Warsaw Pact troops during the joint exercises in East Germany)

    On 25 July 1984 cosmonaut Svetlana Savitskaya became the first woman to perform a space walk. In 1979, Savitskaya participated in the selection process for the second group of female cosmonauts. On June 30, 1980, she was officially admitted to the cosmonaut group. Of the nine women selected, Savitskaya was the only test pilot. The groups’ training was announced during French Air force officer and astronaut Jean-Loup Chretien’s space mission. She passed her exams on February 24, 1982.In December 1981, Savitskaya prepared for her first space flight, a short-term flight to the space station Salyut 7. She held the position of research cosmonaut on this mission. The mission of this second visiting expedition of the Salyut 7 was to prove the Soviet superiority to America by flying another woman into space and to replace the Soyuz T-5 spacecraft the crew would use for their return with a new vehicle. The commander of this mission was Leonid Popov, with his third flight; it was flight engineer Alexander Serebrov's first flight.

    The launch of Soyuz T-7 took place on August 19, 1982. This made Savitskaya the second woman in space, 19 years after Valentina Tereshkova. During the journey, Savitskaya claimed to have tied herself down to prevent from being carried into another compartment of the craft due to the loss of gravity. The three cosmonauts docked with the space station the following day, where they were welcomed by Anatoly Berezovoy and Valentin Lebedev. This was the first time a space station had a mixed gender crew. Savitskaya was assigned the orbital module of Soyuz T-7 as a private area, but slept as well as the men in the space station. On August 27, 1982, Popov, Savitskaya, and Serebrov returned to Earth in Soyuz T-5. The total duration of the mission was 7 days, 21 hours, and 52 minutes. In December 1983 she was assigned to her second flight, including an extravehicular activity, or EVA, three weeks after American astronaut Kathy Sullivan's flight and EVA assignment were made public.The timing of her mission would become one of her last triumphs to further the Soviet propaganda agenda in performing the first woman's space walk before the Americans. Savitskaya was chosen above other female cosmonauts due to the extensive flight experience and physical ability to perform the necessary operations in a heavy, bulky space suit for multiple hours. Savitskaya participated in this mission under the title of flight engineer.

    1358349535462990509.jpg

    (Svetlana Savitskaya making history in space)

    Again, it was to be a short-term mission to Salyut 7, this time bringing tools to the station so that the third resident crew, the Salyut 7 EO-3, could repair a fuel line.On July 17, 1984, Savitskaya launched aboard Soyuz T-12, together with Commander Vladimir Dzhanibekov and research cosmonaut Igor Volk. On July 25, 1984, Savitskaya became the first woman to spacewalk, conducting EVA outside the Salyut 7 space station for 3 hours and 35 minutes, during which she cut and welded metals in space along with her colleague Vladimir Dzhanibekov. The importance of their mission was to test the Universal Hand Tool or Universalny Rabochy Instrument (URI). This tool created at the Paton Institute in Kiev, Ukraine could be used to cut, solder, weld, and braze in space. During the EVA, Savitskaya performed a total of 6 cuts of titanium and stainless steel, 2 coatings of anodized aluminum, 6 tests of tin and lead solder, and test cuts of a 0.5 mm titanium sample. Savitskaya recalled that, during her second mission, she expressed concern about the extravehicular welding exercises, as "I did not understand the point of it. We might burn our spacesuits or the exterior of the station." but her overall excellent performance on both flights silenced critics who questioned a woman's capability to perform space missions. Savitskaya's and Dzhanibekov's training and tests allowed for Dzhanibekov to direct two members of the Salyut 7 crew, Kizim and Solovyov, who had performed multiple EVA's to repair the ship, in the techniques to operate the URI in order to fully repair the fuel line. The total duration of their mission lasted 11 days, 19 hours, and 14 minutes.

    The 1984 Summer Olympics (officially the Games of the XXIII Olympiad and commonly known as Los Angeles 1984) were an international multi-sport event held from July 28 to August 12, 1984, in Los Angeles, California, United States. It marked the second time that Los Angeles had hosted the Games, the first being in 1932. California was the home state of the incumbent U.S. President Ronald Reagan, who officially opened the Games. These were the first Summer Olympic Games under the IOC presidency of Juan Antonio Samaranch. The United States won the most gold and overall medals, followed by the Soviet Union and West Germany. The 1984 Summer Olympics are widely considered to be the most financially successful modern Olympics, serving as an example on how to run an Olympic games. As a result of low construction costs, due to the use of existing sport infrastructure, coupled with a reliance on private corporate funding, the 1984 Games generated a profit of over US$250 million. Following the news of the massive financial losses of the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, the only two cities to express a genuine interest in hosting the 1984 Games were Los Angeles and New York. Given that only one city per country is allowed to bid for any one Games, the USOC vote for the American bid city was effectively the deciding vote for the 1984 Olympics host city. In this case, the Los Angeles bid received 55 votes compared with New York's 39 votes. The low level of interest among potential host cities for the 1984 Games had been viewed as a major threat to the future of the Olympic Games. However, after the financial success of the Los Angeles Games, cities began to show a renewed interest in bidding to become host again. The Los Angeles and Montreal Games are seen as examples of best and worst practice when organizing the Olympics and serve as valuable lessons to prospective host cities.

    1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics-min.png

    (Opening ceremony in Los Angeles)

    Ambitious construction projects for the two previous Summer Olympics, Montreal 1976 and Moscow 1980, had burdened organizers with substantial debts as expenses greatly exceeded revenues. Furthermore, the 1976 and 1980 Olympics were entirely government-funded. Unlike Montreal and Moscow, Los Angeles 1984 was privately funded, with strict controls imposed on expenditure; rather than constructing new venues with overly ambitious designs, the organizers chose instead to utilise existing venues and facilities wherever possible. The main example of this was the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, which was also the Olympic Stadium for the 1932 Summer Olympics. The only two new venues constructed specifically for the 1984 Summer Olympics were secured with the backing of corporate sponsors: the Olympic Velodrome was largely funded by the 7-Eleven corporation and the Olympic Swim Stadium by McDonald's. In addition to corporate support, the Olympic committee also used the income from the exclusive television rights, and for the first time these contracts would prove to be a significant source of revenue. Adjusted for inflation, the Los Angeles Games secured twice the amount of income received by the 1980 Moscow Summer Olympics and four times that of the 1976 Montreal Summer Olympics. Following the success of the 1984 Games, the Los Angeles OCOG, led by Peter Ueberroth, used the profits to create the LA84 Foundation for promoting youth sports in Southern California, educating coaches and maintaining a sports library.

    "We begin bombing in five minutes" was the last sentence of a controversial, off-the-record joke made by U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1984, during the Cold War. While preparing for a scheduled radio address from his vacation home in California, President Reagan joked with those present about outlawing and bombing Russia. This joke was not broadcast live, but was recorded and later leaked to the public. The Soviet Union criticized the president's joke, as did Reagan's opponent in the 1984 United States presidential election, Walter Mondale. Live at 9:06 a.m. (PST) on August 11, 1984, U.S. President Ronald Reagan made his weekly radio address from Rancho del Cielo, his vacation home near Santa Barbara, California. The address begins with the president announcing his signature on the Equal Access Act: "My fellow Americans: I'm pleased to tell you that today I signed legislation that will allow student religious groups to begin enjoying a right they've too long been denied—the freedom to meet in public high schools during nonschool hours, just as other student groups are allowed to do."

    Before the speech, while the president was joking with the National Public Radio audio engineers during a soundcheck, he riffed on his own speech, saying, "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes. "This sort of levity was common for Reagan; he injected his humor into soundchecks, outtakes, and downtime throughout his careers in show business and politics. In the minutes before the president gave his speech, a live feed from Rancho del Cielo was being transmitted to radio stations around the United States. Many rebroadcasters were already recording the feed to be ready for the official transmission, therefore also recording Reagan's pre-speech joke. Many in the media heard the president's impromptu remarks as he gave them, but they were not broadcast live.

    President_Ronald_Reagan_during_a_radio_address_to_the_nation_from_Rancho_del_Cielo_(cropped).jpg

    (Reagan during a radio speech)

    In October 1982, President Reagan had made similarly impolitic remarks about the Polish People's Republic. As he prepared to announce his cancellation of Poland's most favored nation status (in retaliation for suppression of the Polish trade union Solidarity), Reagan called the military government "a bunch of no-good, lousy bums." This was later aired by the American Broadcasting Company and NBC News. Because of this leak, members of the White House Correspondents' Association agreed not to publish such unprepared, off-the-record presidential remarks in the future. Both CBS News and Cable News Network recorded the 1984 joke, but kept the president's remarks under wraps in accordance with the White House agreement. However, rumors of the joke quickly spread, and by August 13 the quotation had been published by outlets such as Gannett. White House Press Secretary Larry Speakes declined to comment that same day, saying, "I don't talk about off-the-record stuff." On August 13, the deputy minister of Soviet foreign affairs, Valentin Kamenev, told reporters, "I have nothing to say."The next day, President Reagan's leaked comments were denounced by the Soviet government, Pravda, Izvestia, and TASS as "unprecedentedly hostile", evidence of the United States' insincerity at trying to improve Soviet Union–United States relations, and as abuse of the office of the president. Western diplomats described the Soviet response as over the top, suggesting that it was an effort to give themselves more collateral at the negotiating table with the United States. U.S. officials were compelled to mollify the Soviet Union and assure the United States' Cold War adversary that "Reagan's offhand remark did not reflect White House policies or U.S. military intentions."

    By August 14, the recording of Reagan's joke had become world news. On August 15, someone, whom the National Security Agency described to U.S. Representative Michael D. Barnes as "a wayward operator in the Soviet Far Eastern command", sent a coded message from Vladivostok that said, in part, "We now embark on military action against the U.S. forces." Japanese and U.S. intelligence decoded the message and raised the alert state in that part of the world; Soviet naval vessels in the North Pacific contacted Vladivostok in confusion. The U.S. never saw any evidence of Soviet attack preparations, and the alert status as promulgated by Vladivostok was canceled within 30 minutes. Reagan's poll numbers took a hit from the political gaffe, temporarily raising the hopes of Walter Mondale's supporters in the 1984 United States presidential election campaign. Mondale said of Reagan's joke, "A [p]resident has to be very, very careful with his words."However, in the analysis of Reagan historian Craig Shirley, the leak of Reagan's joke was poorly used by the Democratic Party: "[criticism of the joke] actually worked against the Democrats and for Reagan […] as they came across as hypersensitive, and Reagan as calm, cool and collected."

    gettyimages-543861574-1024x1024.jpg

    (Prisoners in Soviet forced labor camp)

    In the meantime, more liberal member of the CPSU raised the topic of correctional labour camps, which in reality were a vast network of forced labour camps, originally set up by the orders of Vladimir Lenin, reaching its peak during Stalin's rule from the 1930s to the early 1950s.
     
    Chapter Eleven: Assasinations of Jerzy Popiełuszko and Indira Gandhi (September - October 1984)
  • General Secretary Romanov and the Soviet leadership on the topic of the network of forced (correctional) labor camps decided for a liberal approach: the network of camps throughout the USSR would be reformed and reorganized into a more efficient system that would serve its original purpose, which is the reeducation of criminals and turning them into productive Soviet citizens. Furthermore, the Soviet government decided to grant amnesty to political prisoners and prisoners with the lightest sentences. Additionally, political prisoners were allowed to migrate to the West with their families without many problems, which was met with a positive response in the West. To sum up, Romanov's new approach to the topic of labor camps improved the opinion of the Communist Party and the Soviet government at home and abroad, and Romanov himself began to be seen as a moderate and pragmatic leader.

    5971221735_222e630b1e_b.jpg

    (PW Botha inaugurated as State President of South Africa)

    On 3 September 1984, Pieter Willem Botha was appointed as the first executive president of South Africa. In 1983, Botha proposed a new constitution, which was then put to a vote of the white population. Though it did not implement a federal system as established in 1961, it implemented what was ostensibly a power-sharing agreement with Coloureds and Indians. The new constitution created two new houses of parliament alongside the existing, white-only House of Assembly—the House of Representatives for Coloureds and the House of Delegates for Indians. The three chambers of the new Tricameral Parliament had sole jurisdiction over matters relating to their respective communities. Legislation affecting "general affairs," such as foreign policy and race relations, had to pass all three chambers after consideration by joint standing committees. The plan included no chamber or system of representation for the black majority. Each Black ethno-linguistic group was allocated a 'homeland' which would initially be a semi-autonomous area. However, blacks were legally considered citizens of the Bantustans, not of South Africa, and were expected to exercise their political rights there. Bantustans were expected to gradually move towards a greater state of independence with sovereign nation status being the final goal. During Botha's tenure, Ciskei, Bophutatswana and Venda all achieved nominal nationhood. These new countries, set up within the borders of South Africa, never gained international recognition, and economically all remained heavily dependent on South Africa. Over half of the Bantustans, most notably KwaZulu led by Mangosuthu Buthelezi, rejected independence due to their leaders' commitment to opposing Apartheid from within.

    The new constitution also changed the executive branch from the parliamentary system that had been in place in one form or another since 1910, to a presidential system. The prime minister's post was abolished, and its functions were merged with those of the state president, which became an executive post with sweeping powers. He was elected by an electoral college whose members were elected by the three chambers of the Parliament. The state president and cabinet had sole jurisdiction over "general affairs." Disputes between the three chambers regarding "general affairs" were resolved by the President's Council, composed of members from the three chambers and members directly appointed by the state president. In practice, the composition of the President's Council and the electoral college made it impossible for the Coloured and Indian chambers to outvote the white chamber on any substantive matter, even if they voted as a bloc. Thus, the real power remained in white hands—and in practice, in the hands of Botha's National Party, which commanded a large majority in the white chamber.

    Though the new constitution was criticised by the black majority for failing to grant them any formal role in government, many international commentators praised it as a "first step" in what was assumed to be a series of reforms. On 14 September 1984, Botha was elected as the first state president under the newly approved constitution. Implementing the presidential system was seen as a key step in consolidating Botha's personal power. In previous years, he had succeeded in getting a number of strict laws that limited freedom of speech through parliament, and thus suppressed criticism of government decisions. In many western countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom (where the Anti-Apartheid Movement was based) and the Commonwealth, there was much debate over the imposition of economic sanctions in order to weaken Botha and undermine the white regime. By the late 1980s – as foreign investment in South Africa declined – disinvestment began to have a serious effect on the nation's economy.

    StreetViewAP8304180261.png

    (Bombed U.S. embassy in Beirut)

    On September 20, 1984, the Shi'a Islamic militant group Hezbollah, with support and direction from the Islamic Republic of Iran, carried out a suicide car bombing targeting the U.S. embassy annex in East Beirut, Lebanon during the Lebanese Civil War. The attack killed 23 people and 1 attacker. Hezbollah had also used suicide car or truck bombs in the April 1983 U.S. embassy bombing and the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings. In July 1984, the U.S. had relocated its embassy operations from West Beirut to the relative security of Aukar, a Christian suburb of East Beirut. When on September 20, 1984, the attacker sped his van laden with 3,000 pounds (1360 kg) of explosives toward the six-story embassy, crucial security measures had not yet been completed at the complex, including a massive steel gate. The van was heading for the entrance of the diplomatic facility, but did not get within ten yards of the building after the driver was shot by a bodyguard of the British ambassador and Lebanese embassy guards and lost control of the vehicle. The vehicle detonated at 11:44 a.m. after striking a parked van.

    The explosion "ripped off the front of the embassy, shredding glass, bending steel bars and destroying cars in a nearby parking lot." The attack killed a total of 23 people (+1 suicide bomber). Only two of the dead were American: Chief Warrant Officer Kenneth V. Welch of the U.S. Army and Petty Officer 1st Class Michael Ray Wagner of the U.S. Navy, who were both assigned to the U.S. Defense Attache Office in Beirut. The majority of those killed were Lebanese, "either local employees or people seeking visas". Of the injured, the U.S. Ambassador, Reginald Bartholomew, was slightly hurt, as well as the British Ambassador, David Miers, who was meeting with Bartholomew at the time of explosion. The Islamic Jihad Organization (IJO) claimed responsibility for the attack in a telephone call a few hours after the explosion. The caller said, "The operation goes to prove that we will carry out our previous promise not to allow a single American to remain on Lebanese soil." The U.S. government understood that Hezbollah had carried out the attack under the cover name of IJO with the support of Iran. Through satellite reconnaissance, U.S. intelligence discovered that a mock-up of the annex had been created at the Iranian Revolutionary Guard-run Sheikh Abdullah barracks in Baalbek to practice for the attack.

    Jerzy_Popieluszko-min.jpg


    Jerzy Popiełuszko was a Polish Roman Catholic priest who became associated with the opposition Solidarity trade union in communist Poland. He was murdered in 1984 by three agents of Służba Bezpieczeństwa (Security Service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs). Popiełuszko was born on 14 September 1947 in Okopy, near Suchowola. After finishing school, he attended the priests' seminary at Warsaw. In 1966–1968, he served his army duties in a special force in Bartoszyce, aimed at keeping young men from becoming priests. This treatment had no effect on Popiełuszko's beliefs, as, after finishing his army service, he continued his studies, however, the repeated punishments for his resistance affected his health for the rest of his life.Popiełuszko was ordained a priest by Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński in May 1972. As a young priest he first served in Ząbki near Warsaw in 1972–1975. Afterwards, he served in parishes in Warsaw, which consisted of the common people as well as students. In 1981, Jerzy Popiełuszko joined the workers, taking part with strikers in the Warsaw Steelworks. Thereafter he was associated with workers and trade unionists from the Solidarity movement who opposed the communist regime in Poland.

    Popiełuszko was a staunch opponent of the communist regime and, in his sermons, interwove spiritual exhortations with political messages, criticizing the government, expressing solidarity with the interned and motivating people to protest. During the period of martial law, the Catholic Church was the only force that could voice protest comparatively openly, with the regular celebration of Mass presenting opportunities for public gatherings in churches.Popiełuszko's sermons were routinely broadcast by Radio Free Europe, and thus became famous throughout Poland for their uncompromising stance against the regime. The Służba Bezpieczeństwa tried to silence or intimidate him. When those techniques did not work, they fabricated evidence against him; he was arrested in 1983, but soon released on intervention of the clergy and pardoned by an amnesty.

    Jerzy_Popieluszko_4.jpg

    (Jerzy Popiełuszko was a symbol of Polish Catholic resistance to communist rule over Poland)

    Invited by the Pastoral Care of the Working People (Polish: Duszpasterstwa Ludzi Pracy), Jerzy Popiełuszko arrived in Bydgoszcz on 19 October 1984. At 18:00, he celebrated his last Holy Mass at the Church of the Holy Polish Brothers Martyrs. A car accident was set up to kill Jerzy Popiełuszko on 13 October 1984 but he evaded it. The alternative plan was to kidnap him; it was carried out on 19 October 1984. The priest was beaten to death by three Security Police officers: Captain Grzegorz Piotrowski, Leszek Pękala, and Waldemar Chmielewski. They pretended to have problems with their car and flagged down Jerzy Popiełuszko's car for help. Popiełuszko was severely beaten, tied up and put in the trunk of the car. The officers bound a stone to his feet and dropped him into the Vistula Water Reservoir near Włocławek from where his body was recovered on 30 October 1984. News of the political murder caused an uproar and mass demonstrations throughout Poland. More than 250,000 people, including Lech Wałęsa, attended his funeral on 3 November 1984. The Polish government was afraid of a repeat of year 1981, when the Martial Law was introduced in Poland and asked the Soviet government for instructions of how to proceed.

    image050.jpg


    Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated at 9:30 a.m. on 31 October 1984 at her residence in Safdarjung Road, New Delhi. She was killed by her bodyguards Satwant Singh and Beant Singh in the aftermath of Operation Blue Star, an Indian military action carried out between 1 and 8 June 1984 ordered by Indira Gandhi to remove Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and his followers from the Golden Temple of Harmandir Sahib in Amritsar, Punjab. The collateral damage included the death of many pilgrims, as well as damage to the Akal Takht. The military action on the sacred temple was criticized both inside and outside India. At about 9:20 a.m. Indian Standard Time, on 31 October 1984, Gandhi was on her way to be interviewed by British actor Peter Ustinov, who was filming a documentary for Irish television. She was accompanied by Constable Narayan Singh, personal security officer Rameshwar Dayal and Gandhi's personal secretary, R. K. Dhawan. She was walking through the garden of the Prime Minister's Residence at No. 1 Safdarjung Road in New Delhi towards the neighboring 1 Akbar Road office.

    Gandhi passed a wicket gate guarded by Satwant and Beant Singh, and the two men opened fire. Beant fired three rounds into her abdomen from his .38 (9.7 mm) revolver; then Satwant fired 30 rounds from his Sterling sub-machine gun after she had fallen to the ground. Both men then threw down their weapons and Beant said, "I have done what I had to do. You do what you want to do." In the next six minutes, Border Police officers Tarsem Singh Jamwal and Ram Saran captured and killed Beant, while Satwant was arrested by Gandhi's other bodyguards and an accomplice trying to escape; he was seriously wounded. Satwant Singh was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for killing Gandhi. He was hanged in 1989, along with accomplice Kehar Singh. Salma Sultan gave the first news of the assassination of Gandhi on Doordarshan's evening news on 31 October 1984, more than ten hours after she was killed. It is alleged by the Indian government that Gandhi's secretary R. K. Dhawan overruled intelligence and security officials who had ordered the removal of policemen as a security threat, including her assassins.

    gettyimages-607440254-612x612.jpg

    (Funeral of Indira Gandhi)

    Beant was one of Gandhi's favorite guards, whom she had known for ten years. Because he was a Sikh, he had been taken off her staff after Operation Blue Star; however, Gandhi had made sure that he was reinstated. Satwant was 22 years old at the time of the assassination, and had been assigned to Gandhi's guard just five months previously. Gandhi was taken to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi at 9:30 a.m. Doctors operated on her. She was declared dead at 2:20 p.m. The postmortem examination was conducted by a team of doctors headed by Tirath Das Dogra, who stated that 30 bullets had struck Gandhi from a Sterling sub-machine gun and a revolver. The assailants had fired 33 bullets at her, of which 30 had hit; 23 had passed through her body, while seven remained inside. Dogra extracted bullets to establish the identity of the weapons and to correlate each weapon with the bullets recovered by ballistic examination. The bullets were matched to the weapons at CFSL Delhi. The Indian government ordered a national mourning from November 1 to November 12 with flags half-masted and canceled entertainment and cultural events and offices closed for several days. Pakistan declared three days of mourning and Bulgaria declared a day of national mourning.
     

    Attachments

    • Jerzy_Popieluszko-min.jpg
      Jerzy_Popieluszko-min.jpg
      1.1 MB · Views: 61
    Chapter Twelve: Rising Star of Mikhail Gorbachev (November 1984 - January 1985)
  • The death of Indira Gandhi opened the possibility of a pro-American prime minister in India, which could be a geopolitical disaster for the USSR. This is why the Soviet leadership decided to support Rajiv Gandhi, who became the youngest Indian prime minister at the age of 40. Rajiv Gandhi continued the pro-Soviet stance and sought very close diplomatic and economic relations between India and the USSR to counterbalance the alliance between Pakistan and China in Asia. On the topic of mass demonstrations in Poland after the assassination of Jerzy Popiełuszko, General Secretary Romanov ordered the Polish government to punish the killers in a public trial to calm down the Polish population and to give the Communist government the appearance of accountability and responsibility. The trial was followed by the reorganization and reform of the Polish secret services to avoid such incidents in the future. Furthermore, the Soviet leadership pressured First Secretary Jaruzelski to adopt a more liberal policy towards the Catholic Church to gain more support among the Polish population.

    Rajiv_Gandhi_Congress_Sandesh_8a39aec172.jpg

    (Rajiv Gandhi - new Indian prime minister who maintained pro-Soviet course of India and laid foundations of modern India)

    The 1984 anti-Sikh riots, also known as the 1984 Sikh massacre, was a series of organised pogroms against Sikhs in India following the assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. Government estimates project that about 2,800 Sikhs were killed in Delhi and 3,350 nationwide, whilst independent sources estimate the number of deaths at about 8,000–17,000. The assassination of Indira Gandhi itself had taken place shortly after she had ordered Operation Blue Star, a military action to secure the Harmandir Sahib Sikh temple complex in Amritsar, Punjab, in June 1984. The operation had resulted in a deadly battle with armed Sikh groups who were demanding greater rights and autonomy for Punjab and the deaths of many pilgrims. Sikhs worldwide had criticized the army action and many saw it as an assault on their religion and identity.

    In the aftermath of the pogroms, the government reported that 20,000 had fled the city; the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons. The most-affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods of Delhi. Human rights organisations and newspapers across India believed that the massacre was organised. The collusion of political officials connected to the Indian National Congress in the violence and judicial failure to penalise the perpetrators alienated Sikhs and increased support for the Khalistan movement. The Akal Takht, Sikhism's governing body, considers the killings a genocide. A few days after the massacre, many surviving Sikh youths in Delhi had joined or created Sikh militant groups. This led to more violence in Punjab, including the assassination of several senior Congress Party members. The Khalistan Commando Force and Khalistan Liberation Force claimed responsibility for the retaliation, and an underground network was established.

    Operation Moses was the covert evacuation of Ethiopian Jews (known as the "Beta Israel" community or "Falashas") from Sudan during a civil war that caused a famine in 1984. Originally called Gur Aryeh Yehuda ("Cub of the Lion of Judah") by Israelis, the United Jewish Appeal changed the name to "Operation Moses" The operation, named after the biblical figure Moses, was a cooperative effort between the Israel Defense Forces, the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States embassy in Khartoum, mercenaries, and Sudanese state security forces. Years after the operation completed, it was revealed that Sudanese Muslims and the secret police of Sudan also played a role in facilitating the mass migration of Ethiopian Jews out of Sudan. Operation Moses was the brainchild of then Associate U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs, Richard Krieger. After receiving accounts of the persecution of Ethiopian Jews in the refugee camps, Krieger came up with the idea of an airlift and met with Mossad and Sudanese representatives to facilitate the Operation.

    After a secret Israeli cabinet meeting in November 1984, the decision was made to go forward with Operation Moses. Beginning November 21, 1984, it involved the air transport by Trans European Airways of some 8,000 Ethiopian Jews from Sudan via Brussels to Israel, ending January 5, 1985. Over those seven weeks, over 30 flights brought about 200 Ethiopian Jews at a time to Israel. Trans European Airways had flown out of Sudan previously with Muslims making the pilgrimage to Mecca, so using TEA was a logical solution for this semi-covert operation because it would not provoke questions from the airport authorities. Before this operation, there were approximately as few as 250 Ethiopian immigrants in Israel. Thousands of Beta Israel had fled Ethiopia on foot for refugee camps in Sudan, a journey which usually took anywhere from two weeks to a month. It is estimated as many as 4,000 died during the trek, due to violence and illness along the way. Sudan secretly allowed Israel to evacuate the refugees. Two days after the airlifts began, Jewish journalists wrote about “the mass rescue of thousands of Ethiopian Jews.”

    _100781434_gettyimages-51425930-min.jpg

    (Refugees from Ethiopia enroute to Israel)

    Operation Moses ended on Friday, January 5, 1985, after Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres held a press conference confirming the airlift while asking people not to talk about it. Sudan killed the airlift moments after Peres stopped speaking, ending it prematurely as the news began to reach their Arab allies. Once the story broke in the media, Arab countries pressured Sudan to stop the airlift. Although thousands made it successfully to Israel, many children died in the camps or during the flight to Israel, and it was reported that their parents brought their bodies down from the aircraft with them. Some 1,000 Ethiopian Jews were left behind, approximately 500 of whom were evacuated later in the U.S.-led Operation Joshua. More than 1,000 so-called "orphans of circumstance" existed in Israel, children separated from their families still in Africa, until five years later Operation Solomon took 14,324 more Jews to Israel in 1991. Operation Solomon in 1991 cost Israel $26 million to pay off the dictator-led government, while Operation Moses had been the least expensive of all rescue operations undertaken by Israel to aid Jews in other countries.

    The Kent and Dollar Farm massacres were the first massacres of Sinhalese civilians carried out by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam during the Sri Lankan Civil War. The massacres took place on 30 November 1984, in two tiny farming villages in the Mullaitivu district in north-eastern Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan government labeled this as an attack on civilians by the LTTE. The Kent and Dollar farms were located near Manal Aru, a divisional Secretariat in the Tamil district of Mullaitivu. Manal Aru was of immense importance since it was situated on the border of three districts, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee and Anuradhapura, and more importantly it was the sole gateway between the North and the Eastern parts of the island where the Tamil community was the majority. Realising its strategic importance and in a bid to quell the rising threat of Tamil separatism, Manal Aru was renamed as Weli Oya (Sinhalese translation of the Tamil name) and an attempt was sought to colonize the area with Sinhalese people.

    The Kent and Dollar farms were donated by a wealthy Tamil landowner in 1978 for the resettlement of Hill Country Tamil refugees displaced by the 1977 anti-Tamil pogrom. The farms were prosperous and the Tamil farmers were cultivating minor crops. However, by October 1983 the Superintendent of Police Arthur Herath saw the farms as being obstacles to the northward expansion of Sinhalese colonization in Padaviya and accused the farmers of being "terrorists" or of "harbouring terrorists". In June 1984, the Vavuniya police led by Arthur Herath raided the farms and the Tamil families were driven away. The government subsequently took over the farms, converted them into open prisons and settled 450 Sinhalese prisoners and their families as part of a program sponsored by the National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali to solve the "Tamil problem". The settlement of prisoners was used to further harass Tamils into leaving the area. The Sinhalese settlers admitted that young Tamil women were abducted, brought there and gang-raped, first by the security forces, next by prison guards and finally by prisoners.

    About 50 LTTE cadres travelled in the night in two buses armed with rifles, machine guns and grenades. One of the buses went to Dollar Farm and the other to Kent Farm. The attacks was timed to start at about the same time in the early hours of the morning. The LTTE fighters shot and killed the guards, the women and children and most of the male members of the families. Some of the prisoners were thrust into a room in a building and blasted with explosives. 62 Sinhalese; including 3 jail-guards, 31 women and 21 children were killed. The second bus proceeded to the Kent Farm 8 kilometres away and killed 20 more home guards. The death toll of Sinhalese civilians killed by the LTTE attack numbered 65 Sinhalese villagers; including 3 jail-guards, 31 women and 21 children were killed. The second bus that proceeded to Kent Farm killed 20 more home guards. The next morning, the police and the troops conducted a cordon and search operation and the government claimed that the troops had killed 30 "terrorists", but Tamil sources stated that the victims were all civilians from the neighboring Tamil villages. The LTTE also stated their cadres had returned without suffering any loss.

    In the two days immediately after the massacre, Tamil civilians in the surrounding areas were subjected to killings, arrests and disappearances by the Sri Lankan security forces. According to an affidavit of a former detainee provided to the Amnesty International, over 100 Tamil men detained from these areas were brought to the Iratperiyakulam army camp in the northern Vavuniya District, shot dead and their bodies were burned by the Sri Lankan Army. From 1988 to 1989 Sinhalese villages in Weli Oya was put on a war-footing. A total of 3,364 families, most of them landless peasants, were settled in Weli Oya. A further 35,000 persons comprising 5,925 families were also settled under the same scheme.

    skynews-thatcher-gorbachev_4934226.jpg

    (Meeting between Gorbachev and Thatcher in London)

    On December 16, 1984, the leader of the reformist wing of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Since 1983, Gorbachev, on the orders of General Secretary Romanov, has been meeting with Western leaders on a regular basis instead of the conservative Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko, as Gorbachev represented the new and more open policy of the USSR. During the meeting between Gorbachev and Thatcher, a number of issues were raised, including arms control, the role of nuclear weapons, the virtues and vices of socialism and capitalism, and the most pressing issues of international relations. Most of the time they argued and enjoyed the argument, but then they found some middle ground and were able to agree on surprisingly many issues, such as resolving local conflicts, reforming the Soviet economy, and even working through the intensely controversial issue of the Afghan War. Nevertheless, Gorbachev's visit to London was a diplomatic success, and many within the Soviet leadership suggested that Gorbachev should replace Gromyko as the new foreign minister. In the meantime, in January 1985, Prime Minister Nikolai Tikhonov announced his retirement at the age of 80 after serving the Soviet State and the Communist Party for many decades. Now the question is who should replace Tikhonov as the new Soviet prime minister, as many politicians were eager to take the role.

    1704144.jpg

    (Nikolai Tikhonov - Soviet Prime Minister between 1980 and 1985)
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Thirteen: A new chapter in Soviet politics (February – April 1985)
  • In February 1985, two important changes occurred at the top of the Soviet leadership. Firstly, the leader of the liberal faction, Mikhail Gorbachev, replaced Andrei Gromyko, indicating Moscow's willingness to open a new chapter in relations with the West. Gromyko, after his replacement, was appointed to the post of Chairman of Security Council of the USSR. Subsequently, he retired from political life in 1988, and died the following year in Moscow. Secondly, the leader of the technocrat faction, Nikolai Ivanovich Ryzhkov became the new prime minister, beginning a new alliance between conservatives, liberals and technocrats who wanted to transform the Soviet state and the Communist Party. Ryzhkov was born to Russian parents on September 28, 1929, in Dzerzhynsk, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Soviet Union. He graduated from the Ural Polytechnic Institute in 1959. A technocrat, he started work as a welder, rose through the ranks at the Sverdlovsk Uralmash Plant to become chief engineer, and then, between 1970 and 1975, Factory Director of the Uralmash Production Amalgamation. Ryzhkov joined the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in 1956. He was transferred to Moscow in 1975 and appointed to the post of First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Heavy and Transport Machine Building. Ryzhkov became First Deputy Chairman of the State Planning Committee in 1979 and was elected to the CPSU Central Committee in 1981. He was one of several members of the Soviet leadership affiliated with the "Andrei Kirilenko faction". Yuri Andropov appointed Ryzhkov head of the Economic Department of the Central Committee, where he was responsible for overseeing major planning and financial organs, excluding industry. As head of the department, he reported directly to Mikhail Gorbachev, and as head of the Central Committee's Economic Department, he met with Andropov once a week. Ryzhkov became convinced that had Andropov lived at least another five years, the Soviet Union would have seen a reform package similar to that implemented in the People's Republic of China. Now Ryzhkov wants to put technocratic ideas into practice for the benefit of the Soviet people.

    sputnik-841480-preview.jpg

    (Nikolai Ryzhkov - technocrat and new Soviet prime minister)

    The Reagan Doctrine was stated by United States President Ronald Reagan in his State of the Union address on February 6, 1985: "We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives—on every continent from Afghanistan to Nicaragua—to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth." It was a strategy implemented by the Reagan Administration to overwhelm the global influence of the Soviet Union in the late Cold War. The doctrine was a centerpiece of United States foreign policy from the early 1980s. Under the Reagan Doctrine, the United States provided overt and covert aid to anti-communist guerrillas and resistance movements in an effort to "roll back" Soviet-backed pro-communist governments in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The doctrine was designed to diminish Soviet influence in these regions as part of the administration's overall strategy to win the Cold War. The Reagan Doctrine followed in the tradition of U.S. presidents developing foreign policy "doctrines", which were designed to reflect challenges facing international relations, and to propose foreign policy solutions. The practice began with the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, and continued with the Roosevelt Corollary, sometimes called the Roosevelt Doctrine, introduced by Theodore Roosevelt in 1904.

    The post–World War II tradition of Presidential doctrines started with the Truman Doctrine in 1947, under which the US provided support to the governments of Greece and Turkey as part of a Cold War strategy to keep both nations out of the Soviet sphere of influence. It was followed by the Eisenhower Doctrine, the Kennedy Doctrine, the Johnson Doctrine, the Nixon Doctrine, and the Carter Doctrine, all of which defined the foreign policy approaches of these respective U.S. presidents on some of the largest global challenges of their presidencies. With the arrival of the Reagan administration, The Heritage Foundation and other conservative foreign policy think tanks saw a political opportunity to significantly expand Carter's Afghanistan policy into a more global "doctrine", including U.S. support to anti-communist resistance movements in Soviet-allied nations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. According to political analysts Thomas Bodenheimer and Robert Gould, "it was the Heritage Foundation that translated theory into concrete policy. Heritage targeted nine nations for rollback: Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Iran, Laos, Libya, Nicaragua, and Vietnam".'

    s-l1200.jpg


    Throughout the 1980s, the Heritage Foundation's foreign policy expert on the Third World, Michael Johns, the foundation's principal Reagan Doctrine advocate, visited with resistance movements in Angola, Cambodia, Nicaragua, and other Soviet-supported nations and urged the Reagan administration to initiate or expand military and political support to them. Heritage Foundation foreign policy experts also endorsed the Reagan Doctrine in two of their Mandate for Leadership books, which provided comprehensive policy advice to Reagan administration officials. The result was that, unlike in Afghanistan, the Reagan Doctrine was rather quickly applied in Angola and Nicaragua, with the United States providing military support to the UNITA movement in Angola and the "contras" in Nicaragua, but without a declaration of war against either country. Addressing the Heritage Foundation in October 1989, UNITA leader Jonas Savimbi called the Heritage Foundation's efforts "a source of great support. No Angolan will forget your efforts. You have come to Jamba, and you have taken our message to Congress and the Administration". U.S. aid to UNITA began to flow overtly after Congress repealed the Clark Amendment, a long-standing legislative prohibition on military aid to UNITA. Following these victories, Johns and the Heritage Foundation urged further expanding the Reagan Doctrine to Ethiopia, where they argued that the Ethiopian famine was a product of the military and agricultural policies of Ethiopia's Soviet-supported Mengistu Haile Mariam government. Johns and Heritage also argued that Mengistu's decision to permit a Soviet naval and air presence on the Red Sea ports of Eritrea represented a strategic challenge to U.S. security interests in the Middle East and North Africa.

    The Heritage Foundation and the Reagan administration also sought to apply the Reagan Doctrine in Cambodia. The largest resistance movement fighting Cambodia's communist government was largely made up of members of the former Khmer Rouge regime, whose human rights record was among the worst of the 20th century. Therefore, Reagan authorized the provision of aid to a smaller Cambodian resistance movement, a coalition called the Khmer People's National Liberation Front, known as the KPNLF and then run by Son Sann; in an effort to force an end to the Vietnamese occupation. While the Reagan Doctrine enjoyed strong support from the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute, the libertarian-oriented Cato Institute opposed the Reagan Doctrine, arguing in 1986 that "most Third World struggles take place in arenas and involve issues far removed from legitimate American security needs. U.S. involvement in such conflicts expands the republic's already overextended commitments without achieving any significant prospective gains. Instead of draining Soviet military and financial resources, we end up dissipating our own."

    pobrane.jpg

    (President Reagan in spite of Soviet willingness to open a dialogue with the West remained completely committed to his anti-Soviet stance)

    Even Cato, however, conceded that the Reagan Doctrine had "fired the enthusiasm of the conservative movement in the United States as no foreign policy issue has done in decades". While opposing the Reagan Doctrine as an official governmental policy, Cato instead urged Congress to remove the legal barriers prohibiting private organizations and citizens from supporting these resistance movements. Within the Reagan administration, the doctrine was quickly embraced by nearly all of Reagan's top national security and foreign policy officials, including Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, and a series of Reagan National Security advisers including John Poindexter, Frank Carlucci, and Colin Powell. Reagan himself was a vocal proponent of the policy. Seeking to expand Congressional support for the doctrine in the 1985 State of the Union Address in February 1985, Reagan said: "We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives ... on every continent, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua ... to defy Soviet aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth. Support for freedom fighters is self-defense".

    As part of his effort to gain Congressional support for the Nicaraguan contras, Reagan labeled the contras "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers", which was controversial because the contras had shown a disregard for human rights. There also were allegations that some members of the contra leadership were involved in cocaine trafficking.Reagan and other conservative advocates of the Reagan Doctrine advocates also argued that the doctrine served U.S. foreign policy and strategic objectives and was a moral imperative against the former Soviet Union, which Reagan, his advisers, and supporters labeled an "evil empire". The Reagan Doctrine was especially significant because it represented a substantial shift in the post–World War II foreign policy of the United States. Prior to the Reagan Doctrine, U.S. foreign policy in the Cold War was rooted in "containment", as originally defined by George F. Kennan, John Foster Dulles, and other post–World War II U.S. foreign policy experts. In January 1977, four years prior to becoming president, Reagan bluntly stated, in a conversation with Richard V. Allen, his basic expectation in relation to the Cold War. "My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple, and some would say simplistic," he said. "It is this: We win and they lose. What do you think of that?"

    Although a similar policy of "rollback" had been considered on a few occasions during the Cold War, the U.S. government, fearing an escalation of the Cold War and possible nuclear conflict, chose not to confront the Soviet Union directly. With the Reagan Doctrine, those fears were set aside and the United States began to openly confront Soviet-supported governments through support of rebel movements in the doctrine's targeted countries. One perceived benefit of the Reagan Doctrine was the relatively low cost of supporting guerrilla forces compared to the Soviet Union's expenses in propping up client states. Another benefit was the lack of direct involvement of American troops, which allowed the United States to confront Soviet allies without sustaining casualties.

    xzaqpyrgyrjcddrwyj6b.jpg

    (Funeral of victims of the Apartheid regime in South Africa)

    On 21 March 1985, on the 25th anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre, members of the South African Police opened fire on a crowd of people gathered on Maduna Road between Uitenhage and Langa township in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. The crowd had been attending a funeral of one of the six who had been slain by the apartheid police on 17 March 1985. They had gathered at Maduna Square and were heading towards the house where the funeral was held when the police blocked the road with two armoured vehicles and ordered the crowd to disperse. When the crowd failed to comply immediately, police opened fire on the crowd, killing 35 people and leaving 27 wounded. The incident became known as the Uitenhage/Langa massacre. In March 1985, tensions between the African population in Uitenhage's townships and the apartheid government reached boiling point. Between 8 and 10 March, police reported 23 incidents of arson and 18 of stone-throwing, causing damage estimated at R220 000. Minister of Law and Order Louis le Grange, had visited Uitenhage with the commissioner of police, General Johan Coetzee, on 19 February. They had been told that ‘soft’ weaponry was no longer effective for riot control purposes. On 14 March, Uitenhage's most senior police officers, the Order Group, decided to take stronger action to regain control. As from 15 March, police patrols were no longer issued with teargas, rubber bullets and birdshot; instead they were given heavy ammunition.

    The increased police presence and use of heavy ammunition in the townships of Uitenhage resulted in the killing of six black youth. The funeral of four of the six was to be held on Sunday 17 March 1985 and a stay away was called for Monday 18 March as part of ‘Black Weekend’. The name 'Black Weekend' comes from the fact that the KwaNobuhle township community had chosen that weekend to bury four people killed by the apartheid police earlier in March 1985. Police said that three petrol bombs were thrown at a police vehicle in Langa during this weekend. Police also shot and killed a young man on 17 March 1985. The houses of two police officers in Langa were destroyed by fire. Captain Goosen from the Uitenhage branch applied for a court order which banned all funerals on weekends, Mondays and public holidays from Chief Magistrate MH Steyn. The order was granted on the grounds that limiting funerals would help curb political actions against the apartheid government. The community of Langa then rescheduled the funerals for Thursday, 21 March 1985. Goosen realised that the 21 March marked the 25 anniversary of the 1960 Sharpeville massacre, where the apartheid police killed 69 black Africans. He then applied for another order to have the funeral postponed yet again, this time approaching Uitenhage Magistrate M. J. Groenwald, who accordingly ruled that funerals could only be held on a Sunday. The first orders which banned funeral on weekends, Mondays and public holidays and the second which banned funerals except on Sundays were both in effect at the same time, leading to a sense of confusion and resentment in the township of Uitenhage. On 21 March 1985, Lieutenant John Fouche and his team patrolled the township of Langa until 8am and found it quiet, they then headed to KwaNobuhle township. Warrant Officer F.W Pentz and his team patrolled KwaNobuhle township and did not find any signs of protest or marching. However, a warrant officer Lekubo noticed a crowd gathering at Maduna Square. He relayed the message to the police headquarters in Uitenhage. Pentz and his team then drove through the crowd and parked the police vehicle on the side of the road. Pentz, who had been in KwaNobuhle township, headed to the police headquarters in Uitenhage, returned with a white police officer who had not been part of original patrol squad that morning. He then drove down the 23rd Street and came across the crowd had seen. Pentz sent a message to Lieutenant Fouche via radio that his patrol needed assistance before accelerating along Maduna Road to small hill between the crowd and the white residential area. A team led by Fouche joined Pentz's team and the two vehicles formed a cordon facing the crowd in a "V" position.

    Police teams led by Fouche and Pentz tried to disperse the crowd. However, the crowd continued to march peacefully. Realising that the crowd was not following their (police) orders, the police fired 41 rounds of SSG shotgun ammunition, three round of R1 ammunition and an unrecorded number of rounds of 9mm bullets from their automatic rifles. The shooting left 35 people dead and 27 wounded. On Saturday, 13 April 1985, a mass burial was held to mourn the deaths of 29 people who had died after being shot by police in Langa township, Uitenhage on 21 March was held at KwaNobuhle Stadium. The 29 deceased people were buried in a mass grave in KwaNobuhle Cemetery. The families of the other six people who died from the massacre opted for private burials. The Kannemeyer Commission was appointed the day after the shooting with Judge Donald Kannemeyer as its chairperson and sole member. The Kannemeyer Commission reported that 20 people were shot dead and at least 27 were wounded, and that the majority had been shot in the back. He found that, in the circumstances, the police could not be blamed for issuing orders to open fire. Although, Kannemeyer did not find the police guilty, he added that the police were armed with lethal weapons rather than standard riot control gear because of a deliberate policy adopted by senior officers, and the police should thus have foreseen that an order to open fire would result in fatalities. The report went on to say that police evidence of the weapons carried by the crowd was exaggerated. Charges of public violence laid against 31 people following the Langa massacre of March 1985 were dropped a year later. Of the 31 charged, 21 had been injured by police gunfire.

    In 1986, an inquest at the New Brighton courts in Port Elizabeth found that the deaths were not the result of any act or negligence constituting a crime on the part of anyone. The inquest findings were based on the evidence heard by Kannemeyer and it was considered unnecessary to call any of the witnesses to give their evidence to the inquest. As a result of this decision, the families of the deceased withdrew from the inquest proceedings. In 1987, Minister of Law and Order paid out R2,3-million to 51 people injured or widowed in the Uitenhage massacre. The government had admitted that the police had acted wrongfully and negligently and that this was the cause of the incident.

    19850412-es-m-el-descanso-1.jpg

    (Destruction caused by bombing in Madrid)

    On 12 April 1985, the El Descanso restaurant in Madrid, Spain was bombed in a terrorist attack. The explosion caused the three-story building to collapse, crashing down on about 200 diners and employees, killing 18 people, all Spanish citizens, and injuring 82 others, including eleven Americans working at the nearby Torrejón Air Base who frequented the restaurant. At the time it was the deadliest attack in Spain since the Spanish Civil War. At about 22:30, a bomb exploded in the El Descanso-La Casa de las Costillas restaurant, causing the three-story building housing the restaurant to collapse. The building crashed down on about 200 diners and employees present in the restaurant, killing 18 people and injuring 82. Fifteen American servicemen of the nearby American Torrejón Air Base were among the injured, but while being frequented by air base staff the timing of the bomb occurred at an hour few Americans typically were present. The police investigation concluded that the explosion was caused by a 13-pound chloratite bomb planted near the bathroom of the restaurant, consisting of a chemical compound made up of potassium, sulfur and chlorate, a type of explosive said to be rarely used by domestic Spanish terrorist groups.

    Groups claiming responsibility for the attack included Basque separatist group ETA, the First of October Anti-Fascist Resistance Groups (GRAPO), Unity of the Abu Zeinab Martyrs, Wa'd (a front of the PFLP-SC) and the Islamic Jihad Organization. The callers from ETA claimed the bomb had gone off earlier than planned and that the bombing was meant to target American soldiers who would have been in the restaurant later, and apologised to the victims of the bombing. After first blaming ETA, Spanish Interior Minister José Barrionuevo concluded the Islamic Jihad Organization and Wa'd had the most credible claim of responsibility following investigations by the National Police. The claim by Wa'd, distributed by the Kuwait News Agency was noted as it included the anagram of the sugar envelopes from the El Descanso restaurant. ETA was also known to have had ties to extremists in Lebanon and Syria where they had access to training camps, and investigators suspected links between Islamic Jihad, ETA and GRAPO. Islamic Jihad had itself been implicated in several attacks in Spain the previous year, including a machine gun attack on a Kuwaiti newspaper publisher and the killing and wounding of two Saudi Arabians, both attacks in Marbella, and the shooting of a Lebanese embassy employee in Madrid. According to the El País newspaper and the Group of Strategic Studies, which cite the attack as "the first attack of Islamist terrorism in Spain," the credibility of Islamic Jihad eventually gained weight, also as a letter circulated two weeks after the bombing stated: "Islam is ready. Spain and Italy are the first targets. The attack in Madrid has been the beginning of the Islamic holy war. Death to the United States. The apostles of death are ready to resume the holy war".
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Fourteen: Soviet spies in the West (May - October 1985)
  • After Hoxha's death, Ramiz Alia maintained firm control of the country and its security apparatus, but Albania's desperate economic situation required Alia to seek help from abroad and to introduce some reforms. Continuing a policy set by Hoxha, Alia reestablished diplomatic relations with West Germany in return for development aid and also courted Italy and France. Furthermore, the Soviet willingness for rapprochement was more than welcomed by Alia, as, in the end, Albania and the USSR reestablished normal diplomatic relations and expanded trade and economic cooperation, which brought relief to struggling Albania. The flow of Soviet goods and capital helped Alia calm down the situation in the country and the embittered population of Albania. In the meantime, the Soviet government announced a halt to nuclear tests, which was welcomed by the international community, but the U.S. President called it an empty gesture. Following a series of Islamist terrorist attacks in Europe and the Middle East, the Soviet leadership decided to prevent a similar situation from happening in the USSR by implementing the following policies:
    • establishment of an intelligence branch dedicated to combating the Islamist threat
    • collaboration with friendly governments in the Middle East
    • preventive destruction of terrorist organizations and their infrastructure
    • relaxation of anti-Islamist laws in the Soviet Caucasus and Central Asia
    • establishment of friendly to the USSR Islamist organizations in the Soviet Union
    • propagation of Islamic socialism among the Muslim population in the USSR.

    ErEiKNcXIAERs5Z.jpg

    (KGB Alfa Unit officers were responsible for combating Islamist troops in Afghanistan)

    Just as the Soviet government was busy with the prevention of terrorist attacks, new Soviet prime minister Nikolai Ryzhkov introduced the so-called Ryzhkov Programme, which was a series of technocratic laws and initiatives aimed at modernizing the Soviet state, society and the Communist Party. The Ryzhkov Programme included:
    • review of labor laws
    • propagation of female employment
    • promotion of tourism
    • closer economic relations with Western Europe
    • computerization of the Soviet apparatus
    • Computerization of Soviet businesses and companies
    • investments in the automation of the economy
    • further decrease in bureaucracy.

    d055292d0d0ed9326524cf6ef6b91604.jpg

    (Moscow Victory Parade)

    The 1985 Moscow Victory Day Parade was held on 9 May 1985 on the Red Square in Moscow to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Victory in Europe. The parade marked the Soviet Union's victory in the Great Patriotic War. It was the first V-Day parade held since 1965, and the third of four Victory Day parades held during the Soviet Union's existence. Prior to 1965 Victory Day was not a major holiday and parades were not held, with the exception of the 1945 Victory Day Parade. The Victory Parade of 1985 was the third made after the 1945 Victory Day Parade. After this parade next would be held in 1990. The parade was observed by Soviet leaders from the Lenin Mausoleum. The parade was commanded by the Moscow Military District Commander General of the Army Pyotr Lushev, and was his last major national parade in this capacity. During this parade veterans marched in Red Square for the first time, the next time being in 1990.

    The Bitburg controversy concerned a ceremonial visit by Ronald Reagan, the incumbent President of the United States, to a German military cemetery in Bitburg, West Germany in May 1985. The visit was intended to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe but aroused considerable criticism from Jewish communities within the United States and around the world when it became known that 49 of the 2,000 German soldiers buried at the site had been members of the Waffen-SS, the military arm of Nazi Germany's Schutzstaffel (SS). The entire SS had been judged to be a criminal organisation at the Nuremberg trials. Although not part of the original itinerary, as part of their own reconciliatory gesture, Reagan and West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl made an impromptu visit to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp before visiting Bitburg, thus reducing the time Reagan had to spend at Kolmeshöhe Military Cemetery to only eight minutes. Reagan was scheduled to attend the G7 economic summit in Bonn the week of the 40th anniversary of V-E Day. Chancellor Kohl saw an opportunity to demonstrate the strength of the friendship that existed between West Germany and its former foe. During a November 1984 visit to the White House, Kohl appealed to Reagan to join him in symbolising the reconciliation of their two countries at a German military cemetery. It was suggested that the Kolmeshöhe Cemetery, near Bitburg, was both suitably close and relevant, as 11,000 Americans attached to a nearby airbase lived in harmony with the same number of Germans.

    Reagan agreed, and later told an aide he felt he owed Kohl, who despite considerable public and political opposition had stood steadfast with Reagan on the deployment of Pershing II missiles in West Germany. In February 1985, then White House Deputy Chief of Staff Michael Deaver made a planning visit to Bitburg. At Kolmeshöhe Cemetery, the 32 rows of headstones were covered with snow. Deaver and his team failed to notice that among them were 49 members of the Waffen-SS. A decision was made by the Reagan team not to include a visit to a concentration camp, as had been previously suggested by Kohl. The President said he didn't want to risk "reawakening the passions of the time" or offend his hosts by visiting a concentration camp. On April 11, 1985, then White House Press Secretary Larry Speakes informed the media of the planned visit to Bitburg. When asked who was buried at Kolmeshöhe, Speakes said he thought both American and German soldiers were there.

    gettyimages-615295834-1024x1024.jpg

    (President Reagan visiting Bitburg Cementery in West Germany)

    Reporters soon discovered that no American servicemen were in the cemetery (in fact, the remains of all U.S. soldiers had long since been removed from German soil) and that Waffen-SS graves were located close to the proposed ceremony. When questioned, Bitburg Mayor Theo Hallet stated that all German military cemeteries were likely to contain some SS graves. Decorations and memorials on the Waffen-SS graves were removed just prior to Reagan's visit. This planned visit caused a great deal of anger within the United States. Many prominent government officials, U.S. Army officers and celebrities, each with ties, or friends with ties to their respective Jewish communities, all protested the planned visit. 53 senators (including 11 Republicans), signed a letter asking the president to cancel and 257 representatives (including 84 Republicans) signed a letter urging Chancellor Kohl to withdraw the invitation. Chancellor Kohl responded in an interview with The New York Times: "I will not give up the idea. If we don't go to Bitburg, if we don't do what we jointly planned, we will deeply offend the feelings of [my] people." A poll revealed that 72% of West Germans thought the visit should go forward as planned. Kohl admitted that rarely had German-American relations been so strained, and in the days leading up to the visit, the White House and the Chancellery were each blaming the other. The White House claimed that the Germans had given assurances that nothing in the Bitburg visit would be an "embarrassment" for the President: "As clumsily as we handled it, Kohl and his Co. have surpassed us in spades." A German official said: "The Americans also have a responsibility toward the president. They must also check on the history that is beneath their ground. It was not very intelligent." Reagan defended himself by saying:

    These [SS troops] were the villains, as we know, that conducted the persecutions and all. But there are 2,000 graves there, and most of those, the average age is about 18. I think that there's nothing wrong with visiting that cemetery where those young men are victims of Nazism also, even though they were fighting in the German uniform, drafted into service to carry out the hateful wishes of the Nazis. They were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps.

    Visit_by_U.S._President_Ronald_Reagan_to_Bitburg_military_cemetery_1985,_protester_with_transp...jpg

    (Reaction to Reagan's visit in West Germany)


    Reagan was criticised for this statement by opponents of the visit. Equating Nazi soldiers with Holocaust victims, responded Rabbi Alexander M. Schindler, president of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, was "a callous offence for the Jewish people". Some believed Communications Director Pat Buchanan had written the statement, which he denied in 1999. Kohl confirmed an earlier press comment that in the last days of the war he was able to avoid service in the SS because he was only 15, "but they hanged a boy from a tree who was perhaps only two years older with a sign saying 'traitor' because he had tried to run away rather than serve." Kohl made a call to the White House days before Reagan's visit to make sure the President was not wavering in the face of criticism, not to mention pressure from Reagan's wife, Nancy. The Chancellor's aide, Horst Teltschik, later said: "Once we knew about the SS dead at Bitburg – knowing that these SS people were seventeen to eighteen years of age, and knowing that some Germans were forced to become members of the SS, having no alternative – the question was, Should this be a reason to cancel?" Reagan aide Robert McFarlane later said: "Once Reagan learned that Kohl would really be badly damaged by a withdrawal, he said 'We can't do that; I owe him.'" Prior to sending Deaver back to West Germany for the third time, just two days before the scheduled visit, Reagan told his deputy chief of staff: "I know you and Nancy don't want me to go through with this, but I don't want you to change anything when you get over there, because history will prove I'm right. If we can't reconcile after forty years, we are never going to be able to do it".

    On Sunday 5 May, Reagan and Kohl appeared at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. The U.S. President's speech there, according to Time, was a "skilful exercise in both the art of eulogy and political damage control". Reagan said:
    All these children of God, under bleak and lifeless mounds, the plainness of which does not even hint at the unspeakable acts that created them. Here they lie, never to hope, never to pray, never to live, never to heal, never to laugh, never to cry... And then, rising above all this cruelty, out of this tragic and nightmarish time, beyond the anguish, the pain and suffering, and for all time, we can and must pledge: never again.

    Reagan spent only eight minutes at the Kolmeshöhe Cemetery along with Kohl, 90-year-old General Matthew Ridgway, who had commanded the 82nd Airborne in World War II and Luftwaffe ace and former head of NATO, General Johannes Steinhoff. After Reagan placed a wreath at the cemetery memorial, they all stood to attention while a short trumpet salute was played. At the end, Steinhoff turned and, in an unscripted act, shook hands with Ridgway. A surprised Kohl later thanked Steinhoff, who said that it seemed to be the right thing to do. Security was heavy for the three-mile route from the NATO airbase at Kolmeshöhe, lined with 2,000 policemen – one posted every twelve feet: few protesters showed up. When Reagan arrived at the cemetery, Michael Moore and a Jewish friend of his whose parents were at Auschwitz were there with a banner that read "We came from Michigan, USA to remind you: They killed my family". They were shown live on TV networks across the country. Reagan made one last appearance with Kohl at the airbase, before 7,500 spectators waving American and West German flags. Kohl thanked the President for staying the course: "This walk... over the graves of soldiers was not an easy walk. I thank you personally as a friend that you undertook this walk with me". Reagan responded: "This visit has stirred many emotions in the American and German people too. Some old wounds have been reopened, and this I regret very much, because this should be a time of healing".

    44161-min.jpg


    John Anthony Walker Jr. was a United States Navy chief warrant officer and communications specialist convicted of spying for the Soviet Union from 1967 to 1985 and sentenced to life in prison. In late 1985, Walker made a plea bargain with federal prosecutors, which required him to provide full details of his espionage activities and testify against his co-conspirator, former senior chief petty officer Jerry Whitworth. In exchange, prosecutors agreed to a lesser sentence for Walker's son, former Seaman Michael Walker, who was also involved in the spy ring. During his time as a Soviet spy, Walker helped the Soviets decipher more than one million encrypted naval messages, organizing a spy operation that The New York Times reported in 1987 "is sometimes described as the most damaging Soviet spy ring in history." After Walker's arrest, Caspar Weinberger, President Ronald Reagan's Secretary of Defense, concluded that the Soviet Union made significant gains in naval warfare attributable to Walker's spying. Weinberger stated that the information Walker gave Moscow allowed the Soviets "access to weapons and sensor data and naval tactics, terrorist threats, and surface, submarine, and airborne training, readiness and tactics."

    John Walker was promoted to warrant officer in March 1967 and in April was assigned as a communications watch officer at the headquarters of COMSUBLANT in Norfolk, Virginia, where his responsibilities included "running the entire communications center for the submarine force...."Walker began spying for the Soviets in late 1967, when, distraught over his financial difficulties, he walked into the old Soviet embassy in Washington, D.C., sold a top-secret document (a radio cipher card) for several thousand dollars, and negotiated an ongoing salary of US$500 (equivalent to $4,388 in 2022) to US$1,000 (equivalent to $8,776 in 2022) a week. Soviet KGB general Boris Aleksandrovich Solomatin "played a key role in the handling of John Walker". Walker justified his treachery by claiming that the first classified Navy communications data he sold to the Soviets had already been completely compromised when the North Koreans had captured the U.S. Navy communications surveillance ship, USS Pueblo. Yet the Koreans captured Pueblo in late January 1968 – many weeks after Walker had betrayed the information. Furthermore, a 2001 thesis presented at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College using information obtained from Soviet archives and from Oleg Kalugin, indicated that the Pueblo incident may have taken place because the Soviets wanted to study equipment described in documents supplied to them by Walker. It has emerged in recent years that North Korea acted alone and the incident actually harmed North Korea's relations with most of the Eastern Bloc.

    In the spring of 1968 John Walker's wife discovered items in his desk at home causing her to suspect he was acting as a spy. Walker continued spying, receiving an income of several thousand dollars per month for supplying classified information. Walker used most of the money to pay off his delinquent debts and to move his family into better neighborhoods, but he also set aside some for future investment, such as turning around the fortunes of his money-losing bar by hiring a skilled bartender. While Walker occasionally used the services of his wife, Barbara Walker, he anticipated the possibility of losing access due to reassignment. Walker's chance to seek further assistance came in September 1969 when he became the deputy director of the radioman A and B schools at the Naval Training Center San Diego. There, Walker befriended student Jerry Whitworth. Walker was transferred from San Diego in December 1971 to become the communications officer aboard the supply ship USS Niagara Falls. Whitworth, who would become a Navy senior chief petty officer/senior chief radioman, agreed to help Walker gain access to highly classified communications data in 1973; and served aboard Niagara Falls after Walker retired from the Navy. Transfer to the staff of commander of the Amphibious Force, Atlantic Fleet had stopped Walker's access to the data the Soviets wanted; but he recruited Whitworth to keep the data flowing – softening the idea of espionage by telling him the data would go to Israel, an ally of the United States. Later, when Whitworth realized the data was going to the Soviets instead of Israel, he nonetheless continued supplying Walker with information, until Whitworth's retirement from the Navy in 1983.

    In 1976, Walker retired from the Navy in order to give up his security clearance, as he believed certain superior officers of his were too keen on investigating lapses in his records. Walker and Barbara had also divorced. However, Walker did not end his espionage, and began looking more aggressively among his children and family members for assistance (Walker was a private investigator during this time). By 1984, he had recruited his older brother Arthur James Walker, a retired lieutenant commander who served from 1953 until 1973 and then went to work at a military contractor, and his son Michael Lance Walker (born November 2, 1962), an active duty seaman since 1982. Walker had also attempted to recruit his youngest daughter, who had enlisted in the United States Army, but she cut her military career short when she became pregnant and refused her father's offer to pay for an abortion, instead deciding to devote herself to full-time motherhood. Walker then turned his attention to his son, who had drifted during much of his teenage years and dropped out of high school. Walker gained custody of his son, put him to work as an apprentice at his detective agency in order to prepare him for espionage and encouraged him to re-enroll in high school to earn a diploma, then to enlist in the Navy. When Walker began spying, he worked as a key supervisor in the communications center for the U.S. Atlantic Fleet's submarine force, and he would have had knowledge of top-secret technologies, such as the SOSUS underwater surveillance system, which tracks underwater acoustics via a network of submerged hydrophones. It was through Walker that the Soviets became aware that the U.S. Navy was able to track the location of Soviet submarines by the cavitation produced by their propellers. After this, the propellers on the Soviet submarines were improved to reduce cavitation. The Toshiba-Kongsberg scandal was disclosed in this activity in 1987. It is also alleged that Walker's actions precipitated the seizure of USS Pueblo. CIA historian H. Keith Melton states on the show Top Secrets of the CIA, which aired on the Military Channel, among other occasions, at 0400CST, February 5, 2013:

    [The Soviets] had intercepted our coded messages, but they had never been able to read them. And with Walker providing the code cards, this was one-half of what they needed to read the messages. The other half they needed were the machines themselves. Though Walker could give them repair manuals, he couldn't give them machines. So, within a month of John Walker volunteering his services, the Soviets arranged, through the North Koreans, to hijack a United States Navy ship with its cipher machines, and that was the USS Pueblo. And in early 1968 they captured the Pueblo, they took it into Wonsan Harbor, they quickly took the machines off ... flew 'em to Moscow. Now Moscow had both parts of the puzzle. They had the machine and they had an American spy, in place, in Norfolk, with the code cards and with access to them.

    In 1990, The New York Times journalist John J. O'Connor reported, "It's been estimated by some intelligence experts that Mr. Walker provided enough code-data information to alter significantly the balance of power between Russia and the United States". Asked later how he had managed to access so much classified information, Walker said, "KMart has better security than the Navy". According to a report presented to the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive in 2002, Walker is one of a handful of spies believed to have earned more than a million dollars in espionage compensation, although The New York Times estimated his income at only $350,000. Theodore Shackley, the CIA station chief in Saigon, asserted that Walker's espionage may have contributed to diminished B-52 bombing strikes, that the forewarning gleaned from Walker's espionage directly affected the United States' effectiveness in Vietnam. Independent analysis of Walker's methods by an American Naval officer in Cold War London, Lieutenant Commander David Winters, led to operational introduction of technologies – such as over-the-air rekeying – that finally closed security gaps previously exploited by the Walker spy ring.

    G5Plazaaccord.jpg

    (Signatories of the Plaza Accord)

    The Plaza Accord was a joint–agreement signed on September 22, 1985, at the Plaza Hotel in New York City, between France, West Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, to depreciate the U.S. dollar in relation to the French franc, the German Deutsche Mark, the Japanese yen and the British pound sterling by intervening in currency markets. The U.S. dollar depreciated significantly from the time of the agreement until it was replaced by the Louvre Accord in 1987. Some commentators believe the Plaza Accord contributed to the Japanese asset price bubble of the late 1980s. From 1980 to 1985, the dollar had appreciated by about 50% against the Japanese yen, Deutsche Mark, French franc, and British pound, the currencies of the next four biggest economies at the time. In March 1985, just before the G7, the dollar reached its highest valuation ever against the British pound, a valuation which would remain untopped for over 30 years. This caused considerable difficulties for American industry but at first their lobbying was largely ignored by the government. The financial sector was able to profit from the rising dollar, and a depreciation would have run counter to the Reagan administration's plans for bringing down inflation. A broad alliance of manufacturers, service providers, and farmers responded by running an increasingly high-profile campaign asking for protection against foreign competition. Major players included grain exporters, the U.S. automotive industry, heavy American manufacturers like Caterpillar Inc., as well as high-tech companies including IBM and Motorola. By 1985, their campaign had acquired sufficient traction for Congress to begin considering passing protectionist laws. The negative prospect of trade restrictions spurred the White House to begin the negotiations that led to the Plaza Accord.

    The devaluation was justified to reduce the U.S. current account deficit, which had reached 3.5% of the GDP, and to help the U.S. economy to emerge from a serious recession that began in the early 1980s. The U.S. Federal Reserve System under Paul Volcker had halted the stagflation crisis of the 1970s by raising interest rates. The increased interest rate sufficiently controlled domestic monetary policy and staved off inflation. By the mid-1970s, Nixon successfully convinced several OPEC countries to trade oil only in USD, and the US would in return, give them regional military support. This sudden infusion of international demand for dollars gave the USD the infusion it needed in the 1970s. However, a strong dollar is a double edged sword, inducing the Triffin dilemma, which on the one hand, gave more spending power to domestic consumers, companies, and to the US government, and on the other hand, hampered US exports until the value of the dollar re-equilibrated. The U.S. automobile industry was unable to recover. While for the first two years the US deficit only worsened, it then began to turn around as the elasticities had risen enough that the quantity effects began to outweigh the valuation effect. The devaluation made U.S. exports cheaper to purchase for its trading partners, which in turn allegedly meant that other countries would buy more American-made goods and services. The Plaza Accord failed to help reduce the U.S.–Japan trade deficit, but it did reduce the U.S. deficit with other countries by making U.S. exports more competitive. And thus, the US Congress refrained from enacting protectionist trade barriers.

    Joseph E. Gagnon describes the Plaza's result being more due to the message that was sent to the financial markets about policy intentions and the implied threat of further dollar sales than actual policies. Intervention was far more pronounced in the opposite direction following the 1987 Louvre Accord when the dollar's depreciation was decided to be halted. The Plaza Accord was successful in reducing the U.S. trade deficit with Western European nations, but largely failed to fulfill its primary objective of alleviating the trade deficit with Japan. This deficit was due to structural conditions that were insensitive to monetary policy, specifically trade conditions. The manufactured goods of the United States became more competitive in the exports market, though were still largely unable to succeed in the Japanese domestic market due to Japan's structural restrictions on imports. The Louvre Accord was signed in 1987 to halt the continuing decline of the U.S. dollar.

    Following the subsequent 1987 Louvre Accord, there were few other interventions in the dollar's exchange rate such as by the first Clinton Administration in 1992-95. However, since then currency interventions have been few among the G7. The European Central Bank supported in 2000 then over-depreciated euro. The Bank of Japan intervened for the last time in 2011, with the cooperation of the US and others to dampen strong appreciation of the yen after the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. In 2013 the G7 members agreed to refrain from foreign exchange intervention. Since then the US administration has demanded stronger international policies against currency manipulation (to be differentiated from monetary stimulus). The signing of the Plaza Accord was significant in that it reflected Japan's emergence as a real player in managing the international monetary system. However, the rising yen may also have contributed to recessionary pressures for Japan's economy, to which the Japanese government reacted with massive expansionary monetary and fiscal policies. That stimulus in combination with other policies led to the Japanese asset price bubble of the late 1980s. Because of this some commentators blame the Plaza Accord for the bubble, which when burst led into a protracted period of deflation and low growth in Japan known as the Lost Decade, which has effects still heavily felt in modern Japan. Jeffrey Frankel disagrees on the timing, pointing out that between the 1985-86 years of appreciation of the yen and the 1990s recession, came the bubble years of 1987-89 when the exchange rate no longer pushed the yen up. The rising Deutsche Mark also didn't lead to an economic bubble or a recession in Germany. Economist Richard Werner says that external pressures such as the accord and the policy of Ministry of Finance to reduce the official discount rate are insufficient in explaining the actions taken by the Bank of Japan that led to the bubble.

    Operation_Wooden_Leg.jpg

    (Israeli attact on PLO headquarters in Tunisia)

    Operation "Wooden Leg" was an attack by Israel on the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) headquarters in Hammam Chott, near Tunis, Tunisia, on October 1, 1985. With a target 1,280 miles (2,060 km) from the operation's starting point, this was the most distant publicly known action undertaken by the Israel Defense Forces since Operation Entebbe in 1976. It has been condemned by the United Nations Security Council. The strike was carried out by ten F-15 Eagles, six from 106 "Edge of Spear" Squadron and four from 133 "Knights of the Twin Tail" Squadron. Eight of the jets would attack the target with two remaining as backup. The attack was led by Lieutenant Colonel Avner Naveh. At 07:00 on October 1, the aircraft took off from Tel Nof Airbase. Two Boeing 707 tankers accompanied the fighters to refuel them mid-flight over the Mediterranean Sea en route to the target and again while returning from the mission while another Boeing served as an airborne command, control, and communications center. Two E-2 Hawkeye spy planes were deployed to jam Tunisian, Libyan, and Algerian radars. The Israeli Navy stationed a helicopter-carrying vessel near Malta to recover downed pilots, but this was never needed. The route was designed to avoid detection by Egyptian and Libyan radars and United States Navy vessels patrolling the Mediterranean. Israeli Air Force commander Amos Lapidot saw little chance of resistance from the Tunisian Air Force or Tunisian air defenses, but believed that on such a long flight, technical problems could arise.

    The F-15s flew low over the shore, and fired GBU-15 precision-guided munitions on the PLO headquarters, a cluster of sand-colored buildings along the seaside. The planes attacked the southern location first, so that the northern wind would not pull smoke over the northern targets. The attack lasted for six minutes, after which the strike force returned to Israel. The PLO headquarters were completely destroyed, although Yasser Arafat, the head of the organization, was not there at the time and escaped unharmed. Israel claimed that some 60 PLO members were killed, including several leaders of Force 17, and several of Arafat's bodyguards. In addition, the operation resulted in casualties among civilian bystanders. According to other sources, 56 Palestinians and 15 Tunisians were killed and about 100 wounded. Hospital sources put the final count at 47 dead and 65 wounded. Amnon Kapeliouk, who was a close friend of Yasser Arafat and a founder of the Israeli advocacy group B’tselem, was the only Israeli reporter allowed to report from the scene. Because the attack was conducted so far from Israel, Tunisian President Habib Bourguiba said in a 1990 article that he believed that attack plan must have been known of by the United States, if not actually involving American collaboration.

    The attack provoked a strong outcry, even in the United States, Israel's strongest ally. Though initially labeling the strike a "legitimate response to terror", the Reagan administration later said the attack "cannot be condoned". The attack also harmed relations between the US administration and the Tunisian president, Habib Bourguiba. Believing the US knew about the attack, and was possibly involved, Tunisia considered breaking diplomatic ties with the US. Egypt suspended negotiations with Israel over the disputed border town of Taba. Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres was quoted as saying "It was an act of self-defense. Period." In the United Nations Security Council Resolution 573 (1985), the Security Council voted (with the United States abstaining) to condemn the attack on Tunisian territory as a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and considered that Tunisia had the right to appropriate reparations. Following the arrest of Jonathan Pollard in November 1985, it was reported that Israeli reprisal was assisted thanks to satellite images that Pollard transmitted to Israel.

    In Pollard's court defense memorandum he stated that his Israeli handlers "stressed the fact that the mission could not have been undertaken without the information I made available." Within Tunisia, there was public outrage. For a week after the attack, the country's small Jewish community found itself the target of individual acts of antisemitism, such as insults and stone-throwing against Jewish shops. On October 8, 1985, on the island of Djerba, a Tunisian police officer whose brother had been killed at the PLO headquarters fired into the El Ghriba synagogue during Simchat Torah services, killing 5-year-old Yoav Hadad, 14-year-old Yehudit Bucharis and 56-year-old Haim Cohen. It is possible that Israel attempted a similar attack in Algeria in 1988. Following Operation Wooden Leg, the PLO searched for an alternative location to hold its next congress, as it was assumed that Israel would launch a similar attack against it. The PLO's congress was ultimately held at the Club des Pins Hotel near Algiers. As it was assumed that Israel would launch a similar raid, the Algerian military established a twenty-kilometer no-fly zone around the Club Des Pins, stationed an anti-aircraft missile battery nearby, and kept four fighter jets flying a combat air patrol over the area and additional fighter jets on standing alert at their bases every time PLO representatives were meeting. On 10 November 1988, Algerian early warning radars detected a formation of suspicious radar contacts approaching from the east at a medium level. Two more fighter jets were scrambled to reinforce the combat air patrol over the Club des Pins, which was ordered to turn and take a position in front of the incoming aircraft. Additional Algerian radars began tracking the incoming aircraft, as did Tunisian radars. The contacts were identified as two formations of aircraft coming in at high speed. The incoming aircraft eventually turned back. While the two incoming formations were never spotted or identified by other means, it was presumed that they were Israeli aircraft en route to bomb the Club des Pins. According to a Tunisian Air Force officer who had been serving at the time, the Israelis likely turned back because they detected the electromagnetic activity of the Algerian and Tunisian radars and wanted to complete the mission without suffering any losses.
     
    Chapter Fifteen: Second Geneva Summit and Sino - Soviet relations (November 1985 - March 1986)
  • The Soviet leadership, including Second General Secretary Kunaev, were able to convince General Secretary Romanov that the best approach in regard to restoring the cult of Joseph Stalin would be following a middle path, that is, presenting Stalin as a symbol of the unbroken will of the Soviet Union, though it would also be made clear that his rule wasn't without mistakes, presenting his tenure as 70 percent victories and 30 percent mistakes. Stalin reentered the public sphere as a statesman who transformed the USSR from a destroyed country into a true superpower, albeit at the cost of millions of lives. Furthermore, the remaining members of the Old Guard—Lazar Kaganovich and Vyacheslav Molotov—were restored as members of the Communist Party after they were expelled by Nikita Khrushchev in 1961.

    RS6HOCFRBIHE2ZJMIR6AKDB7IY-min.jpg

    (Foreign Minister Gorbachev greets President Reagan in Geneva)

    The Second Geneva Summit of was meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. It was held on November 19 and 20, 1985, between U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Grigory Romanov. The two leaders met for the first time to hold talks on international diplomatic relations and the arms race. In the mid-1980s, both the Soviet Union and the United States were engaged in a Cold War struggle, but both nations sought to reduce the total number of nuclear weapons. The Soviets sought to halve the number of nuclear-equipped bombers and missiles, and the U.S. sought to ensure that neither side gained a first-strike advantage, and that the protect rights of defensive systems were not endangered. Diplomats struggled to come up with planned results in advance, with Soviets rejecting the vast majority of the items that U.S. negotiators proposed. The Geneva Summit was planned months in advance, so both superpowers had the opportunity to posture and to stake their positions in the court of public opinion. Reagan's security advisor Robert McFarlane said that the United States was having "real trouble establishing a dialogue" with the Soviets, and announced that the U.S. would be conducting its test of the missile defense system known as the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Soviets, in turn, announced a unilateral moratorium on underground nuclear tests and invited the Americans to also cease such testing, a request that was rebuffed.

    On November 19, 1985, U.S. president Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Grigory Romanov met for the second time, in Geneva, to hold talks on international diplomatic relations and the arms race. The meeting was held at Fleur d'Eau, a villa in Versoix. Romanov later said: "We viewed the Geneva meeting realistically, without grand expectations, yet we hoped to lay the foundations for a serious dialogue in the future." Similar to former president Eisenhower in 1955, Reagan believed that a personal relationship among leaders was the necessary first step to breaking down the barriers of tension that existed between the two countries. Reagan's goal was to convince Romanov that America desired peace above all else. Reagan described his hopes for the summit as a "mission for peace". The first thing Reagan said to Romanov was "The United States and the Soviet Union are the two greatest countries on Earth, the superpowers. They are the only ones who can start World War 3, but also the only two countries that could bring peace to the world". He then emphasized the personal similarities between the two leaders, with both being born in similar "rural hamlets in the middle of their respective countries" and the great responsibilities they held. At one point during the 1985 Geneva Summit, President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Romanvov took a break from negotiations to take a walk. Only their private interpreters were present and for years, the details of what they talked about were kept secret from both the Russian and American public. During a 2009 interview with Charlie Rose and Reagan's Secretary of State George Shultz, Romanov revealed that Reagan asked him point-blank if they could set aside their differences in case the world was invaded by aliens.

    Their second meeting exceeded their time limit by over a half an hour. A Reagan assistant asked Secretary of State George Shultz whether he should interrupt the meeting to end it by its allotted time. Shultz responded, "If you think so, then you shouldn't have this job." The first day, Grigory Romanov argued that the United States did not trust them and that its ruling class was trying to keep the people uneasy. Ronald Reagan countered that the Soviets had been acting aggressively and suggested the Soviets were overly paranoid about the United States (The Soviets had refused to allow American planes use Soviet airfields in post-World War II Germany). They broke for lunch and Reagan promised Romanov he'd have a chance to rebut. They talked outside for about two hours on the Strategic Defense Initiative, but both stood firm. Romanov accepted Reagan's invitation to the United States in a year, and Reagan was invited to do the same in 1987. On the second day, Reagan went after human rights, saying that he did not want to tell Romanov how to run his country, but that he should ease up on emigration restrictions. Romanov claimed that the Soviets were comparable to the United States and quoted some feminists. The next session started with arguments about the arms race, then went into SDI. They agreed to a joint statement.

    Antonov_An-12_RA-11924,_Aeroflot_AN0962737.jpg

    (Antonov An - 12 in Moscow Airport)

    The 1985 Aeroflot Antonov An-12 shoot down occurred on November 25, 1985, in Angola during the Angolan Civil War. An Aeroflot Antonov An-12BP cargo aircraft operated by the Soviet Air Force flying from Cuito Cuanavale to Luanda was shot down, allegedly by South African Special Forces, and crashed approximately 43 kilometres (27 mi) east of Menongue in Angola's Cuando Cubango province. The incident took place in the aftermath of the Soviet Union-backed People's Armed Forces for the Liberation of Angola's (FAPLA) operation 2 Congresso do Partido conducted against units of the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA, which received support from South Africa). The transport was carrying eight crew members, 13 passengers and two tank diesel engines in need of repairs. According to eyewitnesses from the local populace and investigative reports, the aircraft was shot down by a surface-to-air missile (SAM). All people on board the aircraft died in the crash. The aircraft involved in the incident was an Antonov An-12BP, a large Soviet-built four-engine turboprop transport, tail registration SSSR-11747. Officially a civil aircraft, it was part of an air transportation military detachment consisting of several An-12 transports and their crews, under the direct command of the Soviet Chief Military Advisor in Angola. The detachment was part of the 369th Military Transport Aviation Regiment, 7th Military Transport Aviation Division, Military Transport Aviation, based at that time in the city of Jankoi/Dzhankoy, Crimea, Ukrainian SSR. The An-12s were primarily used to support FAPLA and its military operations. All eight crew members and four of the passengers were Soviet nationals. Nine other passengers were Angolans.

    According to eyewitness reports and the black box recordings, the An-12BP took off from Cuito Cuanavale at 11:20 am. About 15 minutes into the flight at the altitude of approximately 10,000 feet (3,000 m) the pilot reported an explosion to air traffic control on the aircraft's port side next to the wing and engines. Seconds later the pilot also reported that the transport was experiencing problems with engines three and four and stated his intention to turn towards Menongue airport, located less than 50 kilometres (31 mi) away, for an emergency landing. After the explosion, the cargo of two massive tank engines came loose and shifted, altering the aircraft's center of gravity and causing it to bank to the port side. The black box recordings indicated that the crew tried to level the An-12 and turn it towards Menongue's airport for an emergency landing; however, 47 seconds after the missile detonated, the port wing exploded and separated from the aircraft. The burning aircraft then crashed in a field about 43 kilometres (27 mi) away from Menongue, with the main part of the widespread wreckage landing in close proximity to the Menongue-Cuito Cuanavale road. The next day, several officers from the Soviet Military Mission in Menongue, accompanied by Cuban and Angolan troops, arrived at the crash site where they found all 21 bodies – the crew of 8 and 13 passengers – at the scene. The human remains were first transported to Menongue for identification and later to Luanda. Coffins containing the remains of the Soviet crew and passengers were then transported to the Soviet Union. Civilians from local villages and members of the local people's defense organization (ODP – Organização de Defesa Popular), who had witnessed the midair explosion and the crash, said they had heard and seen what they believed to be a surface-to-air missile being launched immediately before the accident. They described the sound and fume trails that originated from the ground to the point of impact in midair. The recordings of the An-12BP crew's air traffic conversation with Menongue air-defense radar operators were obtained by Angolan authorities. These were later passed on to Soviet investigators conducting their own probe into the crash. The recordings revealed that the crew had reported a missile explosion on the aircraft's port side. In the Soviet Union a specially designated commission under the direct supervision of the Chief of the Air Military Transportation Command of the Soviet Armed Forces was created to establish the cause of the crash. The commission's examination of parts of the aircraft's fuselage revealed multiple traces of an explosive matter and fragments from the surface-to-air missile.

    In his book Journey Without Boundaries, SADF Colonel André Diedericks, a former South African Special Forces officer, claims that he was the person who gave the order to launch the missile that brought down the An-12. During the early summer of 1985 one of the previously captured Strela-l (SA-9) systems, manned and operated by a South African Recce group under the command of then-Captain Diedericks, crossed into the Cuando Cubango province, Angola, and with UNITA's help, protection and escort was secretly deployed around the Menongue area. The main mission of the group was to carry out covert combat operations, code names "Catamaran 1" and "Catamaran 2", with the goal of disrupting air traffic in Cuando Cubango province by shooting down both Cuban and Angolan transports, combat aircraft and gunships with the Strela-l (SA-9). Diedericks' account is reiterated by Koos Stadler, another Reconnaissance Regiment soldier (colloquially known as the "Recces") in his 2015 book, RECCE: Small Team Missions Behind Enemy Lines . In the 12 hours after the crash, the after-midnight news reports issued by the BBC, the Voice of America African Service and UNITA's radio station Galo Negro made almost identical announcements: UNITA was reported as having shot down a Cuban military cargo aircraft with Cuban personnel on board, in the same area that the An-12BP was shot down, using a surface-to-air missile. The next day, on November 26, 1985, UNITA officially claimed responsibility for shooting down the aircraft. However, several months later information obtained through various intelligence sources indicated that the An-12 was brought down by a missile launched from a Soviet-made 9K31 Strela-1, a vehicle-mounted short-range guided surface-to-air missile system. Several Strela-1s had been captured by the South African Defence Force (SADF) during a prior incursion into Angola.

    In the aftermath of the crash, on December 5, 1985, a Mil Mi-8 helicopter was shot down. Two Mi-8 crews were tasked to provide close air support to a Cuban-reinforced infantry battalion that had orders to secure the crash area for the arrival of a team to conduct on-site investigation and help remove the wreckage for further investigation. As the battalion approached the area of the crash, it was ambushed by a far superior combined SADF/UNITA force deployed along the Menongue-Cuito Cuanavale road. A fierce fight ensued, resulting in a high number of dead and wounded from both sides. The two Mi-8s, both manned by Soviet Air Force crews, were called in to provide support for the Cuban battalion. On their arrival they came under heavy anti-aircraft ground fire. One was shot down; it crashed and burst into flames, killing the Soviet crew. There were also two Angolan soldiers from the newly formed 29th Airborne Assault Brigade, manning door-mounted guns on the helicopter, who also died in the crash.

    s-l1600.jpg


    The Rome and Vienna airport attacks were two major terrorist attacks carried out on 27 December 1985. Seven Arab terrorists attacked two airports in Rome, Italy, and Vienna, Austria, with assault rifles and hand grenades. Nineteen civilians were killed and over a hundred were injured before four of the terrorists were killed by El Al Security personnel and local police, who captured the remaining three. At 08:15 GMT, four Arab gunmen walked to the shared ticket counter for Israel's El Al Airlines and Trans World Airlines at Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino Airport outside Rome, Italy, fired assault rifles and threw grenades. They killed 16 and wounded 99, including American diplomat Wes Wessels, before three of the attackers were killed by El Al security, while the remaining one, Mohammed Sharam, was wounded and captured by the Italian police. The dead included General Donato Miranda Acosta, Mexican military attache, and his secretary, Genoveva Jaime Cisneros. Minutes later, at Schwechat Airport (Vienna International Airport) in Vienna, Austria, three terrorists carried out a similar attack. Hand grenades were thrown into crowds of passengers queuing to check in for a flight to Tel Aviv, killing two people instantly and wounding 39 others. A third victim died on 22 January 1986, of hand grenade wounds sustained in the attack. First response came from several Austrian police officers, who opened fire on the terrorists. They were supported by two plainclothes El Al security guards who helped to repel the attackers. Over 200 bullets were fired during the fight. The terrorists seized a Mercedes outside the terminal and fled, with Austrian police and El Al security guards giving chase. They killed one terrorist and captured the other two several miles from the airport after a short car chase and gun battle. In all, the two strikes killed 19, including a child, and wounded around 140. Some contemporary reports claimed the gunmen originally intended to hijack El Al jets at the airports and blow them up over Tel Aviv; others concluded that the attack on waiting passengers was the original plan and that the Frankfurt airport was meant to be hit as well. The attacks came after increased security due to recent hijackings and official Interpol warnings that airports might be targeted by terrorists during the holiday season.

    Italian authorities stated that receipts uncovered on the terrorists indicated that they had entered Italy a few weeks earlier and had stayed in hotels near Rome. They all had Moroccan passports. It was also reported that a note in Arabic was found on the body of one of the attackers, addressed to ''Zionists'' and announcing, ''the war has begun.'' The note was reportedly signed, ''the martyrs of Palestine.'' Israeli authorities first blamed the attacks on the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), but its leader, Yasser Arafat, denied the accusations and denounced the strikes. The PLO expressed 'indignation at the criminal act'' and asserted that the attacks were coordinated as part of a ''plot against the Palestinian cause'', intending to force Austria and Italy into severing ties with the Palestinians. PLO officials recalled that Arafat had recently pledged that coordinated armed Palestinian resistance would be confined to Israel and the occupied territories. Responsibility for the two attacks was later claimed by the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) in retaliation for Operation Wooden Leg, the Israeli bombing of PLO headquarters in Tunis on 1 October 1985. Libya was accused by the US of funding the terrorists who carried out the attacks; although they denied the charges, they did praise the assaults. According to published reports, sources close to Abu Nidal said Libyan intelligence supplied the weapons and the ANO's head of the Intelligence Directorate's Committee for Special Missions, Dr. Ghassan al-Ali, organized the attacks. Libya denied these charges as well, notwithstanding that it claimed they were "heroic operations carried out by the sons of the martyrs of Sabra and Shatila. Italian secret services blamed Syria and Iran. The surviving terrorist in the Rome airport attack, Syrian national Mahmoud Ibrahim Khaled (Khalid Ibrahim), was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment in 1988. He was released early on good behavior in June 2010 and was living in Rome in 2011. He was employed, and had a girlfriend. In an interview with Il Messaggero, he condemned terrorism, expressed remorse for the attacks, and said that he prays for God's forgiveness. In 1987, an Austrian court sentenced the two surviving terrorists in the Vienna airport attack to life imprisonment.

    Pn-pravez-class-5.jpg

    (A computer programming classroom in the USSR)

    As in the United States, early computers were intended for scientific and military calculations. Automatic data processing systems made their debut by the mid-1950s with the Minsk and Ural systems, both designed by the Ministry of Radio Technology. The Ministry of Instrument Making also entered the computer field with the ASVT system, which was based on the PDP-8. The Strela computer, commissioned in December 1956, performed calculations for Yuri Gagarin's first crewed spaceflight. The Strela was designed by Special Design Bureau 245 (SKB-245) of the Ministry of Instrument Making. Strela chief designer Y. Y. Bazilevsky received the Hero of Socialist Labor title for his work on the project. Setun, an experimental ternary computer, was designed and manufactured in 1959. The Khrushchev Thaw relaxed ideological limitations, and by 1961 the government encouraged the construction of computer factories. The Mir-1, Mir-2 and Mir-3 computers were produced at the Kiev Institute of Cybernetics during the 1960s. Victor Glushkov began his work on OGAS, a real-time, decentralised, hierarchical computer network, in the early 1960s, but the project was never completed. Soviet factories began manufacturing transistor computers during the early years of the decade. At that time, ALGOL was the most common programming language in Soviet computing centers. ALGOL 60 was used with a number of domestic variants, including ALGAMS, MALGOL and Alpha. ALGOL remained the most popular language for university instruction into the 1970s.

    The Soviets realized the strategic implications of semiconductors already in the late 1950s, and new facilities were set up to manufacture them in cities like Leningrad and Riga. Soviet scientists took advantage of student exchange agreements with the US to study the technology, attending lectures by pioneers of the field such as William Shockley. The first Soviet integrated circuit was produced in 1962, under the direction of Yuri Osokin. Joel Barr, an American-born Soviet spy who had previously infiltrated US-based technology companies, successfully lobbied Khrushchev to build a new city devoted to the production of semiconductors. The new city was given the name of Zelenograd. As a local semiconductor industry began to develop in the 1960s, Soviet scientists were increasingly ordered to copy Western designs (such as the Texas Instruments SN-51) without any changes. In hindsight, the historian Chris Miller regards the approach as poorly suited to the fast-evolving world of chip manufacturing, which continued to change due to Moore's Law. By the early 1970s, the lack of common standards in peripherals and digital capacity led to a significant technological lag behind Western producers. Hardware limitations forced Soviet programmers to write programs in machine code until the early 1970s. Users were expected to maintain and repair their own hardware; local modifications made it difficult (or impossible) to share software, even between similar machines.

    According to the Ninth five-year plan (1971–1975), Soviet computer production would increase by 2.6 times to a total installed base of 25,000 by 1975, implying about 7,000 computers in use as of 1971. The plan discussed producing in larger quantities the integrated circuit-based Ryad, but BESM remained the most common model, with ASVT still rare. Rejecting Stalin's opinion, the plan foresaw using computers for national purposes such as widespread industrial automation, econometrics, and a statewide central planning network. Some experts such as Barry Boehm of RAND and Victor Zorza thought that Soviet technology could catch up to the West with intensive effort like the Soviet space program, but others such as Marshall Goldman believed that such was unlikely without capitalist competition and user feedback, and failures of achieving previous plans' goals. The government decided to end original development in the industry, encouraging the pirating of Western systems. An alternative option, a partnership with the Britain-based International Computers Limited, was considered but ultimately rejected. The ES EVM mainframe, launched in 1971, was based on the IBM/360 system. The copying was possible because although the IBM/360 system implementation was protected by a number of patents, IBM published a description of the system's architecture (enabling the creation of competing implementations).

    The Soviet Academy of Sciences, which had been a major player in Soviet computer development, could not compete with the political influence of the powerful ministries and was relegated to a monitoring role. Hardware research and development became the responsibility of research institutes attached to the ministries. By the early 1970s, with chip technology becoming increasingly relevant to defense applications, Zelenograd emerged as the center of the Soviet microprocessing industry; foreign technology designs were imported, legally or otherwise. The Ninth five-year plan approved a scaled-back version of the earlier OGAS project, and the EGSVT network, which was to link the higher echelons of planning departments and administrations. The poor quality of Soviet telephone systems impeded remote data transmission and access. The telephone system was barely adequate for voice communication, and a Western researcher deemed it unlikely that it could be significantly improved before the end of the 20th century. In 1973, Lebedev stepped down from his role as director of the Institute of Precision Mechanics and Computer Engineering. He was replaced by Vsevolod Burtsev, who promoted development of the Elbrus computer series. In the spirit of detente, in 1974 the Nixon administration decided to relax export restrictions on computer hardware and raised the allowed computing power to 32 million bits per second. In 1975, the Soviet Union placed an order with IBM to supply process-control and management computers for its new Kamaz truck plant. IBM systems were also purchased for Intourist to establish a computer reservation system before the 1980 Summer Olympics.

    Soviet_electronics_in_the_1980s.JPEG

    (Soviet personal computers in 1985)

    Following the choice of Grigory Romanov as the next General Secretary of the CPSU and introduction of the Ryzhkov programme, the situation began to slowly but surely improve in the USSR. The Soviet industry abandoned cloning of existing Western systems and focused only development of original computer designs. Though the Soviet-built systems still lagged behind their Western counterparts, the raise in quality standarts was visible. Furthemore, the Soviet government focused on developments of personal computers, which would be made avaiable to the Soviet population. The increase of avaiability of computer systems in Soviet companies was increasing steadily throughout the 1980s. One of most important intiatives was to expand computer literacy in schools. The Elektronika BK-0010 was the first Soviet personal computer manufactured in mass numbers. Between years 1985 and 1989 the Soviet industry produced over one million personal computers and 10 million floppy disks. The Ryzhkov programme led to a rapid proliferation of companies trading computers and hardware components. Many software cooperatives were established, employing as much as one-fifth of all Soviet programmers by 1988. The Tekhnika cooperative, created by Artyom Tarasov, managed to sell its own software to state agencies including Gossnab. IBM-compatible Soviet-made computers were introduced during the late 1980s, but their cost put them beyond the reach of Soviet households. The Poisk, released in 1989, was the most common IBM-compatible Soviet computer, which was mass-produced.

    Sino-US rapprochement, a major break with previous foreign policies seeking to create a new balance of power in East Asia, greatly affected the Sino-Soviet relationship. Threatened by the potential of a crippling Soviet attack, China turned to the United States. While visiting China, American President Richard Nixon and National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger worked to allay Chinese fears of a joint US-Soviet attack and instead promote ties with China that would undermine the Soviet Union. Li Danhui and Xia Yafeng argue that Mao Zedong's ideological shift toward Sino-US relations was heavily influenced by the continuing threat of the USSR. Pivoting away from military confrontation, Mao declared a policy of "opposing the Soviet Union, irrespective of ideological position." This opened the door for continued cooperation and negotiation with the United States and cooperation balancing against Soviet power in East Asia. According to historian Li Danhui, "after the Zhenbao Island Incident in March 1969, the Sino-Soviet state-to-state relationship was on the brink of war. This prompted Mao to attempt a new policy of aligning with the United States to oppose the Soviet Union."

    In the midst of Sino-American reproachment in 1972, the Sino-Soviet border continued to be heavily fortified, with nearly 1 million Soviet troops, armed with tanks, airplanes, artillery and backed by ballistic missiles. The Soviet Army faced approximately 1.5 million troops consisting of the PLA and People's Militia. The border tensions increased from 1973 through 1976, as both sides sought political victories while also continuing to militarize the border. Brezhnev spoke of China's failure to accept peaceful coexistence between the two nations, while the PRC continued to view the Soviet Union as an existential threat. The presence of the Soviet Navy in the Indian and Pacific oceans as well as well-armed troops across the length of the border reinforced a view of Soviet encirclement. The death of Mao in September 1976 brought no immediate changes in the Sino-Soviet conflict, although each side had significantly reduced the number of troops stationed along the border. Brezhnev attempted to congratulate Hua Guofeng in October 1976, and was strongly rebuffed with a reinforcement of the late Chairman's anti-Soviet rhetoric. In 1976, each side had approximately 300,000 soldiers deployed on the border, while the Soviet troops were backed by airpower and strategic forces. In 1978, the Soviets began deploying SS-20 missiles throughout the Far East, allowing them to strike any target in the PRC. In addition, large military exercises were performed in both Mongolia and Siberia, specifically modelling different scenarios of a Sino-Soviet war.

    uw47cj7d28f61.jpg


    The Sino-Soviet Treaty lapsed in February 1979, and Deng Xiaoping announced that China would not attempt to renew the treaty provisions. The stationing of Soviet naval vessels throughout unified Socialist Vietnam gave further evidence of Soviet attempts to encircle the PRC. The increased Soviet presence in the Gulf of Tonkin raised tensions further. In the midst of these worries, Vietnam invaded Cambodia, toppling the Chinese-backed Khmer Rouge. In response, China invaded northern Vietnam on February 17, and occupied a small area for a month. Declaring that China had realized its objective of "punishing Vietnamese and Soviet hegemony," the PLA withdrew in March 1979, ending the brief third Indochina War. After China's withdrawal from Vietnam, Sino-Soviet relations remained locked in tense military confrontation along the border, while diplomatic relations remained frozen. While the Soviet Union continued to supply and support the Vietnamese government in Cambodia, China remained opposed to all Soviet involvement in Southeast Asia; the regime continued to lambaste Soviet and Vietnamese "regional hegemony." Minor skirmishes continued along the southern border with Vietnam and the northern border remained heavily militarized. Historian Péter Vámos estimates that "about one fourth of Soviet ground forces and one third of its air force were stationed along or in the region of the Sino-Soviet border" in the early 1980s. Many of these units were stationed in the nominally independent People's Republic of Mongolia, as per the 1980 Soviet-Mongolian Mutual Defense treaty. The massive troop build-up along the border into the 1980s led to an imbalance of military power; the Chinese remained overwhelmed by the Soviet show of force. Meanwhile, the Soviet treaty with Vietnam allowed Soviet troops and the use of former American naval bases along the Vietnamese coast. The presence of the Soviet Navy and Air Force in its southern neighbor further enforced the feeling of encirclement.

    For China, the instability on the northern border was increasingly seen as an unnecessary threat to the regime's existence and a thorn in the side of Chinese economic reforms. According to Gilbert Rozman, the rise of Deng Xiaoping and Chen Yun meant "the leftist line of opposing most post-Stalin reforms in the Soviet Union could now be replaced by appreciation for reforms in a socialist system." The post-Stalinist Soviet Union was no longer seen as a revisionist empire but instead a potential trade partner in economic reform. This ideological turn brought about a political and diplomatic shift, as China tentatively reached out to the USSR.

    "Having normalized its relations with the United States, for the purpose of providing a peaceful environment, Deng also sought improved relations with the Soviet Union. The Chinese had good reasons to seek normalization with the Soviet Union. The Sino-Soviet conflict remained a destabilizing factor for China. With the border issue unsettled and Soviet military deployments in Siberia and Mongolia, the Soviet Union was perceived as the gravest threat to China’s security." - Gilbert Rozman

    Getting to the negotiating table proved troublesome. In September 1979, the parties began meeting, but failed to agree on what issues should be covered. The USSR sought to focus on bilateral relations between the two nuclear powers, while the PRC was concerned with current Soviet engagements in neighboring countries, specifically Vietnam and Mongolia; the PRC remained worried about the potential of Soviet military encirclement. While the Soviet Union sought to establish bilateral diplomatic relations, for China, there were two major issues that needed to be tackled before normalization of diplomatic relations. These "obstacles" were the Soviet military deployment in Mongolia and along the PRC borders, and Soviet aid in support of Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia. China refused to begin any discussion of diplomatic or party relations until these obstacles were removed. The Soviets responded by refusing to unilaterally agree to any of the demands, instead insisting on bilateral relations first. Since neither side would negotiate, the attempts to meet stalled.

    The Soviet–Afghan War ended this brief warming of Sino-Soviet relations and led to increased military cooperation between China and the United States. The growing semi-official military alliance with the United States allowed the Chinese to strike back at the Soviets. The US and PRC established joint intelligence listening posts in Manchuria to monitor the Soviet Union, and these facilities remained staffed by Chinese intelligence. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan raised tensions between the US and USSR, and provided another realm for Sino-US military cooperation. It also opened another military front on the Sino-Soviet border, and while this border was never the site of direct confrontations, the PRC was worried about the additional Soviet presence. In 1980, the US and PRC jointly opened two further listening stations in Xinjiang, specifically focused on tracking Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Furthermore, Xinjiang became the base of Chinese aid to the Mujahideen, with PLA soldiers training and providing weapons to the anti-Soviet guerillas. According to Yitzhak Shichor, "PLA personnel provided training, arms, organization, financial support, and military advisers to the Mujahideen resistance throughout nearly the entire Soviet military presence in Afghanistan, with the active assistance and cooperation of the CIA." These PLA and CIA joint training camps were located near Kashgar and Khotan, spending $200–400 million training and arming the rebels. In the wake of the invasion, China solidified its terms for establishing bilateral relations, demanding the end of Soviet military deployment in Mongolia and along PRC borders, the cessation of Soviet aid in support of Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia, and total withdrawal from Afghanistan; making a total of "three major obstacles." There was more to the Afghanistan conflict than just another front for border confrontations. Historian Péter Vámos argues that "the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which had initially seemed so threatening to China’s security, led to a change in the balance of forces between the superpowers and made the prospects of war seem more distant, partly as a result of a tacit strategic partnership between China and the United States described euphemistically as the pursuit of parallel actions." The new listening posts and cooperation between the US and PRC counter-balanced Soviet threats in the West, while the increasing quagmire of the Soviet war appeared to weaken the Soviet Army.

    Deng_Xiaoping_at_the_arrival_ceremony_for_the_Vice_Premier_of_China_(cropped).jpg

    (Deng Xiaoping)

    Deng Xiaoping pursued a policy of balance between the US and USSR. While warming relations with the US led to an informal military alliance, the PRC also sought to improve relations with the Soviets. In 1981–82, Chinese fears of Soviet encirclement and a coming war diminished; however, the desire to remove these threats remained the top priority for normalization of Sino-Soviet relations. In 1982, Leonid Brezhnev took a big step towards normalization with a speech in Tashkent, Uzbek SSR. In this speech, "the Soviet leader called China a socialist country, supported China’s position on Taiwan, expressed his willingness to improve relations with China, and proposed consultations between the two sides." Deng reacted immediately, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded saying "We paid attention to the sections concerning Sino-Soviet relations in President Brezhnev’s speech in Tashkent on March 24. We categorically refute its attacks against China. In Sino-Soviet relations and in international affairs, we attach importance to the Soviet Union’s real actions." In response, Deng sent Yu Hongliang to give the following message to the Soviet government via the PRC embassy in Moscow.

    "There has been an abnormal relationship between China and the Soviet Union for many years, and the two peoples do not want to see the continuation of such a situation. Now it is time to do something to improve Sino-Soviet relations. Of course, the problems cannot be solved in one day, but the Chinese side holds that the important thing is the existence of true willingness to improve relations. It is fully possible to find a fair and reasonable solution through negotiations. The Chinese side proposes that the Soviet Union should persuade Vietnam to withdraw its troops from Cambodia as a starting point, or it is also possible to start with other problems that influence the relationship between our two countries, such as the reduction of military force in the border region. At the same time, both sides should work on finding mutually acceptable measures in order to solve the problem of withdrawal of Soviet troops from Mongolia. The Chinese side also hopes that a fair solution can be found for the Afghan issue. To sum up, only if both sides think about the prospects for the development of the relationship are willing to resume good neighborly relations between our two great countries, starting with solving one or two of the important problems, will it then be possible to open up a new phase in bilateral relations. As to the form of exchanging views, it can be done by consultations between the two sides."- Yu Hongliang

    gorbachevdengbanner.jpg

    (Mikhail Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping in Beijing)

    Following Soviet offensive in Afghanistan coupled with bombardment campaing in Pakistan, relations between China and the USSR once again were very tense, which lead to unofficial alliance between China and the United States. Nevertheless, seeing a great potential of developing China, General Secretary Romanov send Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs Mikhail Gorbachev to Beijing to seek an agreement with China, which could led to permament normalization of diplomatic relations between two states, as well as to draw China away from the United States.

    On 11 February 1986 human rights activist Natan Sharansky was released by Soviet authorities and leaves the country for Israel. Sharansky was born into a Jewish family on 20 January 1948 in the city of Stalino (now Donetsk) in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union. His father, Boris Shcharansky, a journalist from a Zionist background who worked for an industrial journal, died in 1980, before Natan was freed. His mother, Ida Milgrom, visited him in prison and stubbornly waged a nine-year battle for her son's release from Soviet prison and labor camps. She was permitted to follow her son to Israel six months after he left the Soviet Union. Sharansky attended physics and mathematics high school No.17 in Donetsk. As a child, he was a chess prodigy. He performed in simultaneous and blindfold exhibitions, usually against adults. At the age of 15, he won the championship in his native Donetsk. Sharansky graduated with a degree in applied mathematics from Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. When incarcerated in solitary confinement, he claims to have maintained his sanity by playing chess against himself in his mind. Sharansky beat the world chess champion Garry Kasparov in a simultaneous exhibition in Israel in 1996.

    After Sharansky graduated from university, he began working for a secret state research laboratory. Sharansky lived near Sokolniki Park, on Kolodezniy Pereulok (Water Well Lane) in Moscow. In his spare time, Sharansky would coach young chess players at the famous chess club in the park. He took his current Hebrew name in 1986 when he was freed from Soviet incarceration as part of a prisoner exchange and received an Israeli passport with his new name. Natan Sharansky is married to Avital Sharansky and has two daughters, Rachel and Hannah. In the Soviet Union, his application to marry Avital was denied by the authorities. They were married in a friend's apartment, in a ceremony not recognized by the government, as the USSR only recognized civil marriage and not religious marriage. Sharansky was denied an exit visa to Israel in 1973. The reason given for denial of the visa was that he had been given access, at some point in his career, to information vital to Soviet national security and could not now be allowed to leave. After becoming a refusenik, Sharansky became a human rights activist, working as a translator for dissident and nuclear physicist Andrei Sakharov, and spokesman for the Moscow Helsinki Group and a leader for the rights of refuseniks. On 15 March 1977 Sharansky was arrested by the KGB, then headed by Yuri Andropov, on multiple charges, including high treason and spying for several Americans. The accusation stated that he passed to the West lists of over 1,300 refuseniks, many of whom were denied exit visas because of their knowledge of state secrets, which resulted in a publication by Robert C. Toth, "Russ Indirectly Reveal 'State Secrets': Clues in Denials of Jewish Visas". High treason carried the death penalty. The following year, in 1978, he was sentenced to 13 years of forced labor.

    Sharansky spent time in Moscow's Lefortovo Prison, followed by Vladimir and Chistopol prisons, where for part of the time he was placed in solitary confinement. His health deteriorated, to the point of endangering his life. Later he was detained in Perm 35, a post-Stalin-Gulag-type so-called "strict regimen colony" in Perm Oblast. During his imprisonment, he embarked on hunger strikes to protest confiscation of his mail, and he was force-fed at least 35 times, which he describes as "a sort of torture". Sharansky later opposed force-feeding of Palestinian detainees. Sharansky appeared in a March 1990 edition of National Geographic magazine. The article, "Last Days of the Gulag" by Mike Edwards, profiles through photographs and text one of the few remaining Soviet prison labor camps. The article featured a photo of Natan Sharansky and his wife Avital in their home in Israel viewing photos of the same Gulag where he had been imprisoned, but as it appeared in 1990. Sharansky remarked in the article that after viewing images of the prisoner's faces, he could discern that the protocol of oppression was still at work. The author also showed Sharansky a photo of the cold isolation cell where he had himself been confined. Sharansky commented with irony that conditions had improved slightly: the stark cell now featured a thin bench bolted to the middle of the floor. He said that if that bench had existed when he was there, he could have slept on it, albeit uncomfortably.

    As a result of an international campaign led by his wife, Avital Sharansky (including assistance from East German lawyer Wolfgang Vogel, New York Congressman Benjamin Gilman, and Rabbi Ronald Greenwald), Sharansky was released on 11 February 1986 as part of a larger exchange of detainees. Sharansky and three low-level Western spies (Czech citizen Jaroslav Javorský and West German citizens Wolf-Georg Frohn, and Dietrich Nistroy) were exchanged for Czech spies Karl Koecher and Hana Koecher held in the United States, Soviet spy Yevgeni Zemlyakov, Polish spy Marian Zacharski, and East German spy Detlef Scharfenorth (the latter three held in West Germany). The men were released in two stages, with Sharansky freed first then whisked away, accompanied by the United States Ambassador to West Germany, Richard R. Burt. The exchange took place on the Glienicke Bridge between West Berlin and East Germany, which had been used before for this purpose.

    9wmT59kcwb5rdfXxM6sAgH.jpg

    (Mir space station)

    On 19 February 1986 the Soviet Union launched the Mir space station. Mir was the first modular space station and was assembled in orbit from 1986 to 1996. It had a greater mass than any previous spacecraft. At the time it was the largest artificial satellite in orbit. he station served as a microgravity research laboratory in which crews conducted experiments in biology, human biology, physics, astronomy, meteorology, and spacecraft systems with a goal of developing technologies required for permanent occupation of space. Following the success of the Salyut programme, Mir represented the next stage in the Soviet Union's space station programme. The first module of the station, known as the core module or base block, was launched in 1986 and followed by six further modules. Proton rockets were used to launch all of its components. The station was launched as part of the Soviet Union's crewed spaceflight programme effort to maintain a long-term research outpost in space. As a result, most of the station's occupants were Soviet; through international collaborations such as the Interkosmos, Euromir and Shuttle–Mir programmes, the station was made accessible to space travellers from several Asian, European and North American nations. Mir was authorised by a 17 February 1976 decree, to design an improved model of the Salyut DOS-17K space stations. Four Salyut space stations had been launched since 1971, with three more being launched during Mir's development. It was planned that the station's core module (DOS-7 and the backup DOS-8) would be equipped with a total of four docking ports; two at either end of the station as with the Salyut stations, and an additional two ports on either side of a docking sphere at the front of the station to enable further modules to expand the station's capabilities. By August 1978, this had evolved to the final configuration of one aft port and five ports in a spherical compartment at the forward end of the station.

    It was originally planned that the ports would connect to 7.5-tonne (8.3-short-ton) modules derived from the Soyuz spacecraft. These modules would have used a Soyuz propulsion module, as in Soyuz and Progress, and the descent and orbital modules would have been replaced with a long laboratory module. Following a February 1979 governmental resolution, the programme was consolidated with Vladimir Chelomei's crewed Almaz military space station programme. The docking ports were reinforced to accommodate 20-tonne (22-short-ton) space station modules based on the TKS spacecraft. NPO Energia was responsible for the overall space station, with work subcontracted to KB Salyut, due to ongoing work on the Energia rocket and Salyut 7, Soyuz-T, and Progress spacecraft. KB Salyut began work in 1979, and drawings were released in 1982 and 1983. New systems incorporated into the station included the Salyut 5B digital flight control computer and gyrodyne flywheels (taken from Almaz), Kurs automatic rendezvous system, Luch satellite communications system, Elektron oxygen generators, and Vozdukh carbon dioxide scrubbers. By early 1984, work on Mir had halted while all resources were being put into the Buran programme in order to prepare the Buran spacecraft for flight testing. Funding resumed in early 1984 when Valentin Glushko was ordered by the Central Committee's Secretary for Space and Defence to orbit Mir by early 1986, in time for the 27th Communist Party Congress. It was clear that the planned processing flow could not be followed and still meet the 1986 launch date. It was decided on Cosmonaut's Day (12 April) 1985 to ship the flight model of the base block to the Baikonur Cosmodrome and conduct the systems testing and integration there. The module arrived at the launch site on 6 May, with 1100 of 2500 cables requiring rework based on the results of tests to the ground test model at Khrunichev. In October, the base block was rolled outside its cleanroom to carry out communications tests. The first launch attempt on 16 February 1986 was scrubbed when the spacecraft communications failed, but the second launch attempt, on 19 February 1986 at 21:28:23 UTC, was successful, meeting the political deadline.

    bff5cae888d330dba24177976440f7f0.jpg


    On March 13, 1986, the American cruiser USS Yorktown and the destroyer USS Caron tried to exercise the right of innocent passage under international law through Soviet territorial waters in the Black Sea near the southern Crimean Peninsula. They were confronted by Soviet frigate Ladny and border guard vessels Dozorny and Izmail. Yorktown and Caron stayed in Soviet territorial waters for roughly two hours. The situation de-escalated when the U.S. ships left; diplomatic repercussions continued for several weeks. "The Rules of Navigation and Sojourn of Foreign Warships in the Territorial Waters and Internal Waters and Ports of the USSR", enacted by the Soviet Council of Ministers in 1983, acknowledged the right of innocent passage of foreign warships only in restricted areas of Soviet territorial waters in the Baltic, Sea of Okhotsk and the Sea of Japan. There were no sea lanes for innocent passage in the Black Sea. The United States, starting from 1979, conducted a freedom of navigation program as the U.S. government believed that many countries were beginning to assert jurisdictional boundaries that far exceeded traditional claims. The program was implemented because diplomatic protests seemed ineffective. The U.S. actions in the Black Sea were challenged by the Soviet Union several times prior to the 1986 incident, particularly on December 9, 1968, August 1979 and on February 18, 1984.

    At the time, the Soviet Union recognized the right of innocent passage for warships in its territorial waters solely in designated sea lanes. The United States believed that there was no legal basis for a coastal nation to limit warship transits to sea lanes only. Subsequently, the U.S. Department of State found that the Russian-language text of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Article 22, paragraph 1 allowed the coastal state to regulate the right of innocent passage whenever necessary, while the English-language text did not. On March 10, 1986, the Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Yorktown, accompanied by the Spruance-class destroyer USS Caron, entered the Black Sea via the Turkish Straits.Their entrance was observed by a Krivak-class frigate, Ladny, which was ordered to continue observation. On March 13, Yorktown and Caron entered the Soviet territorial waters and sailed west along the southern Crimean Peninsula, approaching within 6 nautical miles (11 km) of the coast. Having entered from the direction of Feodosia, the US warships sailed for two hours and 21 minutes. Both American warships also confronted the Soviet border guard vessels Dozorny and Izmail. The commander of Ladny, Captain Zhuravlev, reported the incident to his superiors.

    The Soviet state-run Izvestiya editor Vyacheslav Lukashin claimed that "at the time of the incident the Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Navy Vladimir Chernavin knew that the order for the U.S. warships to proceed into Soviet waters was given by the U.S. Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger with the consent of President Ronald Reagan."
     
    Last edited:
    15 Largest economies by GDP (1985)
  • 1. United States - $4,399,000M
    2. USSR - $2,420,000M
    3. Japan - $1,427,354M
    4. West Germany - $661,037M
    5. France - $557,561M
    6. United Kingdom - $537,245M
    7. Italy - $454,653M
    8. Canada - $366,184M
    9. China - $347,133M
    10. India - $267,618M
    11. Brazil - $226,938M
    12. Mexico - $217,388M
    13. Spain - $181,620M
    14. Iran - $180,541M
    15. Australia - $174,418M
     
    USSR - Factions and Power Blocs (1986)
  • 1. Conservatives - Grigory Romanov
    2. Old Guard - Volodymyr Shcherbytsky
    3. Moderates - Dinmukhamed Kunaev
    4. Reformers - Mikhail Gorbachev
    5. Liberals - Yegor Ligachyov
    6. Technocrats - Nikolai Ryzhkov
    7. Bureaucracy - Nikolai Ryzhkov
    8. National Minorities - Dinmukhamed Kunaev

    9. "Russian" Faction - Volodymyr Shcherbytsky
    10. Neo - Stalinists - Grigory Romanov
    11. KGB/Secret Services - Viktor Chebrikov
    12. Soviet Armed Forces - Marshal Viktor Kulikov
    13. "New Left" - NCPSU
     
    Soviet leadership (1986)
  • 490b9de40e096874b1058b414a1ee293.jpg


    Soviet government & other positions
    General Secretary - Grigory Romanov (Conservatives/Neo-Stalinists)
    Second General Secretary - Dinmukhamed Kunaev (Moderates/National Minorities)
    Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet - Vasily Kuznetsov (Old Guard/Bureaucracy/Russian Faction)
    Premier - Nikolai Ryzhkov (Technocrats/Bureaucracy)
    First Deputy Premier - Eduard Shevardnadze (Moderates/National Minorities)
    Deputy Premier & Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Mikhail Gorbachev (Reformists)
    Deputy Premier & State Planning Comittee - Yegor Ligachyov (Liberals)
    Ministry of Industry - Vitalyi Konopalov (Technoctats/Moderates)
    Ministry of Internal Affairs - Alexandr Vlasov (Conservatives/Moderates)
    Ministry of Education - Pyotr Demichev (Conservatives/Russian Faction)
    Ministry of Defence - Viktor Kulikov (Soviet Armed Forces)
    Comittee of State Security - Viktor Chebricov (KGB/Conservatives)
    Main Intelligence Directorate - Pyotr Ivashutin (Secret Services/Old Guard/Russian Faction)
    First Secretary of Komsolom - Gury Marchuk (Technocrats/Liberals)
    Ministry of Agriculture - Grigoryi Zolotukhin (Technocrats/Conservatives)
    Security Council of the USSR - Andrei Gromyko (Moderates/Bureaucracy)

    PP1432_1_l.jpg


    Soviet Republics

    1. Armenian SSR - Karen Demirchyan (Conservatives)
    2. Azerbaijan SSR - Ayaz Mutallibov (Moderates/Technocrats)
    3. Byelorussian SSR - Mikhail Kovalev (Conservatives)
    4. Estonian SSR - Karl Vaino (Conservatives/Russian Faction)
    5. Georgian SSR - Dmitry Levanovich Kartvelishvili (Conservatives/National Minorities)
    6. Kazakh SSR - Nursultan Nazarbayev (Conservatives/National Minorities)
    7. Kirghiz SSR - Turdakun Usubaliev (Old Guard/Moderates)
    8. Latvian SSR - Boris Pugo (Conservatives)
    9. Lithuanian SSR - Ringaudas Songaila (Moderates)
    10. Moldavian SSR - Semion Grossu (Technocrat/Russian Faction)
    11. Russian SFSR - Mikhail Yasnov (Old Guard/Bureacracy)
    12. Tajik SSR - Qahhor Mahkamov (Conservatives/Moderates)
    13. Turkmen SSR - Muhammetnazar Gapurow (Old Guard/Conservatives)
    14. Ukrainian SSR - Volodymyr Shcherbytsky (Old Guard/Russian Faction)
    15. Uzbek SSR - Inomjon Usmonxoʻjayev (Conservatives)
     
    Last edited:
    Chapter Sixteen: the Beijing Agreement (April 1986 Part I)
  • 448421.jpg

    (Protests demanding right for emigration for the Soviet Jews)

    In response to growing international pressure, in April 1986, Soviet General Secretary Grigory Romanov decided to lift restrictions on Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union. That same year, 71,000 Soviet Jews emigrated, of whom only 12,117 immigrated to Israel. In Vienna, a major transit point for immigration to Israel, some 83% chose to go to the United States. In October 1986, the US government stopped treating Soviet Jews as refugees, as another country, Israel, was willing to accept them unconditionally. However, granting refugee status to Soviet Jews persisted in some form, as the Lautenberg Amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act (Section 599D) required the executive branch to establish refugee processing categories for Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics, and Ukrainian Orthodox Church members and give members of these categories an enhanced opportunity to qualify for refugee status. In 1987, 185,227 Soviet immigrants arrived in Israel (out of about 228,400 Jews who left the Soviet Union that year). Approximately 148,000 more Soviet immigrants arrived in Israel in 1988. Immigration to Israel dropped off significantly from then on but remained steady between 1989 and 1992. In 1989, 65,093 Soviet immigrants arrived in Israel, followed by 66,145 in 1990, 68,079 in 1991, and 64,848 in 1994. From then on, Soviet immigration dipped below 60,000 per year for the next few years, though a spike occurred in 1999 when 66,848 immigrants arrived in Israel. This decline continued into the 2000s. Direct flights from the Soviet Union to Israel carrying immigrants took place in May and June 1986. The first direct flight, which carried 125 immigrants, departed Moscow on May 1, 1986.

    The abruptness and extensiveness of this immigration wave brought about an immediate severe shortage of housing in Israel, in the Gush Dan area in particular, and a corresponding drastic rise in the prices of residential apartments. As a result, Israel's Minister for Housing Construction, initiated several programs to encourage the construction of new residential buildings, which partly included the concession of different planning procedures. When those resources were inadequate to the growing immigration wave, and many immigrants remained lacking a roof, within two years about 430 caravan sites were set up across Israel, comprising 27,000 caravans. The largest caravan site was founded in Beersheba, consisting of 2,308 housing units. After that period, the immigrants dissipated throughout Israel. But this immigration wave exhibited a phenomenon common to previous Israeli immigration waves: the efforts of the state to transfer the immigrants to the periphery primarily affected immigrants of lower socio-economic status, while those from higher socio-economic levels, who had the resources to resist these efforts, moved to residential areas of their own choice instead, mostly in Gush Dan. (Additional cities to which many of the immigrants moved (willingly and unwillingly) were Haifa and the Krayot urban area, Petah Tikva, Ariel and Ashdod).

    Abrams-3.jpg

    (Soviet Jews arriving to Israel)

    The absorption laws changed with time. The basic government grants given to each immigrant changed rapidly from the late 1980s to the late 1990s. Most of the immigrants initially located on the periphery and later dispersed to the "Russian" neighborhoods. There were cities, mainly in the medium and lower socio-economic levels, in which immigrants constituted over 50% of all the residents. Many of the immigrants integrated into the Israeli labor market, but the majority remained confined in their own communities. The closed nature of this immigration wave may have been due to its large size, which resulted in neighborhoods of sometimes tens of thousands of people. Also, many immigrants failed to adapt to the receiving society and the society's expectancy that they change to facilitate their social absorption. Many of the new immigrants found that their former education was not recognized by many Israeli employers, though it was recognized by institutions of higher education. Many had to work in jobs which did not match their expertise, or undergo retraining. Some of the immigrants chose to stick to the strategy of dissimilation, keeping the originating culture and rejecting the absorbing culture. Other groups of immigrants (the political leadership and younger people) chose to stick with the strategy of intertwining, involving themselves in the surrounding culture while conserving their original culture. These strategic choices were different from those of the previous immigration waves, which commonly chose either to assimilate, rejecting the originating culture and welcoming the absorbing culture, or to intertwine. The immigrants' Israeli-born children, however, have completely assimilated into Israeli society.

    Phobos_Marte.jpg

    (Soviet Phobos 2 Mars mission)

    Following the Black Sea incident, the Soviet government publicly condemned the American lack of respect for Soviet naval laws and demanded an official apology from the White House and President Reagan; nevertheless, the demand was rebuffed by the Americans, as they claimed that the incident happened solely due to the Soviet provocation. Observing the success of the Mir space station, the Soviet government allocated additional funds to the Soviet space program. The additional funds were redistributed towards the following space-related projects:
    • the Phobos program;
    • projects focused on the exploration of Venus and Mars;
    • joint space projects with allied states;
    • projects dedicated to finding water on the moon;
    • Soviet space plane;
    • the Energia/Buran shuttle program;
    • the Zenit-2 rocket;
    • the anti-SDI Polyus spacecraft;
    • a dedicated cargo pod for the Energia rocket;
    • development of satellites;
    • further development of GLONASS.

    2z91j68au2291.jpg

    (Emancipation of the Soviet women lead to break with old Soviet traditions)

    Another step in reorganizing the Soviet state and building modern socialist society was a true emancipation of Soviet women, and to truly make them free and equal to men. The Soviet government began a campaign to promote increased female participation in Soviet cultural, scientific and political life. Furthermore, a propaganda campaign emphasizing the role of women in the October Revolution was started. A commission of prominent women to address the issue of sexism within the USSR was also established. The works of Alexandra Kollontai became mandatory reading in schools across the Soviet Union. Additionally, the Soviet government expanded the child care to free up women on the Soviet job market. Adequate birth control and sex education began to be taught in Soviet secondary schools.

    computer.jpg

    (Early days of the Soviet IT industry)

    Uskorenie (acceleration) was a slogan and a policy announced by Communist Party General Secretary Grigory Romanov on 2 April 1986 at a Soviet Party Plenum, aimed at the acceleration of political, social and economic development of the Soviet Union. The basis for the acceleration policy was the twelfth five-year plan, which included:
    • scientific developments in all Soviet Socialist Republics;
    • modernization and automation of factories;
    • expansion of computer production;
    • expansion of the consumer goods manufacturing sector;
    • anti-black market policies;
    • increased worker’s self-management at the local level;
    • improvement of modern technological standards;
    • automation of the Soviet industry;
    • construction of semiconductor and microchip factories.

    China-Cartoon.jpg

    (Sino - Soviet relations in the nutshell)

    After a series of tough and long negotiations in Beijing between the Soviet and Chinese delegations, the USSR and China reached an agreement, which would result in: normalization of diplomatic relations, large increase in trade, construction of pipelines from Siberia to China. The main points of agreement between the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China included:
    • withdrawal of Vietnamese troops from Cambodia, cessation of China's help to Khmer rebels, establishment of a new neutral socialist government, including a pro-Chinese faction in power
    • Soviet mediation in Sino-Vietnamese and Sino-Indian border disputes;
    • Mongolia remains in the Soviet sphere, but the Soviet troops would leave Mongolia;
    • reduction of the number of Soviet and Chinese troops in the Far East;
    • recognition of Taiwan as a part of China;
    • recognition of the Chinese path to socialism;
    • Soviet military and economic aid to China;
    • USSR gains mining rights in China;
    • joint investment zones (Irkutsk Oblast in the USSR, Wuhan Province in China).
    Nevertheless, due to American diplomatic and economic pressure, China refused to reach any agreement with the USSR in regard to Afghanistan, so the current status quo remains in place for the time being.
     
    Last edited:
    Top