How long could the USSR keep fighting in Afghanistan?

Assuming that, through a PoD after the invasion of Afghanistan, neither the USSR nor any of her allies collapse nor reforme (some will say that's ASB, but that's not the point), and that the Cold War keeps going, how long could the USSR keep fighting before being forced to withdraw its troops?
 
Assuming that, through a PoD after the invasion of Afghanistan, neither the USSR nor any of her allies collapse nor reforme (some will say that's ASB, but that's not the point), and that the Cold War keeps going, how long could the USSR keep fighting before being forced to withdraw its troops?
In my view.. Assuming they had the will to keep going the answer is:

For as long as the USSR wants to in the absence of an existential threat to their existence that doesn't require them to station troops in Afghanistan.
 
Assuming that, through a PoD after the invasion of Afghanistan, neither the USSR nor any of her allies collapse nor reforme (some will say that's ASB, but that's not the point), and that the Cold War keeps going, how long could the USSR keep fighting before being forced to withdraw its troops?

Tough to tell, given the stalemate nature of the situation. I can see a TL where the USSR withdraws around the same as OTL and the Communist Afghan government is able to hang on for longer, due to continued USSR funding. In OTL, the ANA won a major battle against the rebels post-withdrawal and may have been in a position to consolidated their rule in the early 90s, but then their backer crapped out and they no longer had the funds to ensure people's loyalty. Of course, this arrangement would be a corrupt money pit for the Soviets, but they could possibly keep the arrangement going indefinitely.

Continuing to fight the Afghan War directly would have the same problems as OTL. Basically the Soviets had made too many enemies (USA, Pakistan, PRC) and the Afghanistan became the arena to indirectly maul the Soviet Army. They needed to win the war quick and early, but they couldn't.
 

missouribob

Banned
Question for USSR historians: How brutal was the USSR willing to get in that time period?

I feel like the answer that question will answer your question. At the end of the day you can win any counter-insurgency campaign if you are willing to kill any potential counter insurgents.
 
If they're somehow immune to collapse/internal instability without the need for reform... forever, in theory. If there's no political consequences for the body bags, the Mujaheddin will run out of men before the Reds do.

Now, weather that's DESIRABLE is another question entirely.
 
One thing that I read was that more and more Soviet soldiers were coming back addicted to opium. Just like the Viet Cong provided cheap drugs to the American soldiers, the insurgents were provide cheap heroin to the Soviets. The longer the war drags on the larger this problem becomes.
 
Question for USSR historians: How brutal was the USSR willing to get in that time period?

I feel like the answer that question will answer your question. At the end of the day you can win any counter-insurgency campaign if you are willing to kill any potential counter insurgents.

Not a USSR historian, but:

As brutal as the Soviets were in Afghanistan, they weren't "NKVD pacifying the Baltics" type brutal anymore. Anyway, brutally would be besides the point. As soon as foreign intervention (i.e. the enemies of the USSR arming the rebels) meaningfully began, the war was probably unwinnable.
 
If the foreign intervention aren't willing to put their bodies on the line at the end of day wouldn't a ruthless counter-insurgency campaign succeed by running through the available pool of rebels?

Hypothetically, sure. However, the rebels in Afghanistan had a few things in their favor that leveled the playing field.

1) Sanctuaries inside Pakistan that the USSR could not touch.

2) Foreign fighters, specially Arab muslims.

3) Weaponry that provided the great equalizer in many situations, such as stinger missiles.

4) Lots of money and logistics outside Afghanistan, thanks to the CIA,ISI, etc...

5) Equal ruthlessness. The Mujahideen killed children for joining the Young Pioneers, for crying out loud.

6) Overwhelming local support, which made for a great recruiting tool.

Despite all this, OTL USSR arguably managed to leave a competent Afghan army to fight in their place for a few years. They were never able to quell the insurgency though.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Not a USSR historian, but:

As brutal as the Soviets were in Afghanistan, they weren't "NKVD pacifying the Baltics" type brutal anymore. Anyway, brutally would be besides the point. As soon as foreign intervention (i.e. the enemies of the USSR arming the rebels) meaningfully began, the war was probably unwinnable.
if the USSR had survived and kept sending the Communist Kabul government aid there might still be a nominally USSR aligned government in kabul government controlling....some of the country today.
 
if the USSR had survived and kept sending the Communist Kabul government aid there might still be a nominally USSR aligned government in kabul government controlling....some of the country today.

I could see the "Communist" Afghan government evolving to be something like the current government in Cambodia, i.e. no longer communist, but run by former communists and fairly authoritarian.

The only thing is that one can assume the Taliban might happen anyway in some form (in OTL, it formed partly due to the chaos after the Kabul government fell and the rebel factions started fighting). How would the Reds deal with hordes of well-organized, angry religious fanatics?
 

RousseauX

Donor
I could see the "Communist" Afghan government evolving to be something like the current government in Cambodia, i.e. no longer communist, but run by former communists and fairly authoritarian.

The only thing is that one can assume the Taliban might happen anyway in some form (in OTL, it formed partly due to the chaos after the Kabul government fell and the rebel factions started fighting). How would the Reds deal with hordes of well-organized, angry religious fanatics?
The Kabul government successfully defeated the big 1989 US/Pakistan backed offensive islamists launched without direct Soviet intervention. This was a surprise as the CIA and ISI had expected the Afghan Communists to fold without the Soviet army/airforce. As long as the soviets keep shipping in weapons/fuel/$$$ the Kabul government could have held on. They wouldn't' be able to stamp out the insurgency but that's ok as long as the insurgents don't take Kabul.

Also there were serious divisions between the Pashtun Taliban (and their predecessors) and what became the northern alliance under Massoud in the Mujahadeen movement, the Communists might be able to cut a deal with Massoud to secure the northern part of the country.
 
Top