Under what circumstances would NATO or the Warsaw Pact have actually gone to war with each other?

Copaczin

To my knowledge, most of the war plans made by both main camps of the cold war were defensive (one notable exception being "7 Days to the Rhine"), and both sides believed that the "big one" would come from the other side launching a major offensive in Europe. The "Fulda Gap" is a good example of this massive-invasion-from-the-enemy school of thought that pervaded much of NATO and the Warsaw Pact's thinking. With the power of hindsight we know that neither side really desired to perform such an attack against each other, with the circumstances of OTL.

How different would the Cold War have to have been for either side (or both) to give serious consideration for launching a major offensive against the other? If one side had discounted the idea of a conventional war and reduced their military spending, would NATO try for an Operation Barbarossa 2.0, or the Soviets pull a Red Alert? Would both sides have been against a war, regardless of an imbalance in conventional forces, as long as the friendly atom was in play? Would a lack of nuclear weapons have changed the calculus and emboldened the hardliners?

What were the conditions under which either NATO or the Warsaw Pact have said "we can win, let's go for it!"
 

mial42

Gone Fishin'
Neither side has to really want to go to war for war to result. Cuban Missile Crisis is the most obvious example. So... a major warning system f***up that isn't caught or a bluff that goes wrong.
 

Copaczin

Yes, a major mistake or cascade of errors can certainly bring them to war. I was primarily interested in what scenario would make one of them actually plan for, and execute, an intentional war.
 
marathag

marathag

Banned
1:Soviets decide to start WWIII. Why, because. NATO didn't have plans for driving East, at all. Soviet had plenty for going West
2: either side starts an accidental launch, like the Able Archer with the USSR in 1983 or the Test Tape with NORAD in 1979, leading to full exchange
 

David Floyd

The Soviets may "go for it" if they TRULY believe NATO is about to roll over the border and they have to preempt it.

NATO wouldn't just launch a conventional bolt from the blue under any circumstances, though I could maybe see a nuclear first strike if they TRULY believe the Soviets are about to launch.
 
Fuzzy Dunlop

Fuzzy Dunlop

Banned
I remember seeing news reports at the time of the Korean flt 007 shoot down were stating that it was tense along the West / East German border.

Could that tension, a possible firing of shots across the lines from some troops nerves getting edgy cause an escalation leading to war?
 

Monk78

Copaczin said:
Yes, a major mistake or cascade of errors can certainly bring them to war. I was primarily interested in what scenario would make one of them actually plan for, and execute, an intentional war.
Click to expand...
What if it started by incident at sea ? Soviets wipe out a CVBG by nukes or NATO nuke a Soviet naval base?
 

RousseauX

Donor
Able Archer 83 was actually a much closer call than most realized: the exercise actually met most of the pre-requisites the Soviets defined as signs NATO offensive
 

Geon

Donor
NATO was made as a defensive alliance. So supposedly was the Warsaw Pact. However, as stated above there are a number of scenarios where you would have the Warsaw Pact attacking NATO.

  1. To start with let's look at Red Storm Rising. A terrorist attack destroys a major refinery in the U.S.S.R. and reduces production of fuels such as gasoline, kerosene, and diesel by as much as 50 percent. Frantic to avoid economic collapse the Soviets plan to launch an invasion of the Middle Eastern oil producing nations in the Persian Gulf. But first they have to remove NATO from the board militarily. The Warsaw Pact (mostly Russia) stages a "limited" invasion of West Germany on a made up pretext to dismantle the NATO alliance.
  2. As noted above the Soviets overreact to the Able Archer '83 exercise. Fearing that NATO is preparing for an actual invasion of Eastern Europe the Soviets launch a preemptive strike against the NATO nations.
  3. This "mockumentary" from 1998 posits a very frighteningly plausible scenario.
    To put it briefly Gorbachev is removed from power before he can initiate many of his reforms. The new premier of the Soviet Union "tightens the screws" on the Eastern European nations resulting in riots in East Germany. The riots quickly escalate and Russia fearing NATO may soon try to capitalize on them decides to strike first.
  4. I could say NATO invading East Germany if a coup occurred there that unseated the communist government and a new government took power declaring it wanted to unite with West Germany. The Soviets decide to crush the new government and restore order and NATO is forced to send in troops to protect the fledgling new government.
 

Bob in Pittsburgh

marathag said:
How many Arms limitation Treaties did he promote?
Click to expand...
Just like Reagan the Kaiser promoted an arms race, Bonzo's Buddy had Star Wars; the Kaiser battleships. Reagan announced "I have just declared the end of the Soviet Union, The bombing begins in 5 minutes." Based upon his winning World War II on a Hollywood backlot Reagan was itching for a war.
 
marathag

marathag

Banned
Bob in Pittsburgh said:
Just like Reagan the Kaiser promoted an arms race, Bonzo's Buddy had Star Wars; the Kaiser battleships. Reagan announced "I have just declared the end of the Soviet Union, The bombing begins in 5 minutes." Based upon his winning World War II on a Hollywood backlot Reagan was itching for a war.
Click to expand...
Nice way to dodge.

Yet there was no War.

When that fool, Reagan, called the Soviet Union `the Evil Empire', I knew we were headed for war.
When that fool, Reagan, gave a blank check to the arms race, I knew the odds favored nuclear annihilation.
When that fool, Reagan, launched Star Wars on the premise that the Soviet Union would go broke trying to keep up, I knew he was a dangerous kook living in a never-never land.
When the Soviet Union went broke, surrendered its empire and called off the Cold War, I knew it was Gorbachev's genius and Reagan had nothing to do with it.
Because if that fool, Reagan, was right all along....
What kind of fool am I?

--Jules Feiffer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top