What were the reasons that the USSR invaded Afghanistan? What were the goals of the invasion?
The ostensible reason was that (a) communists had just overthrown the existing afghan govt. and (b) they were having trouble staying in power in the ensuing chaos so © the USSR came to the aid of a fellow socialist republic.
Of course, there are any other number of benefits, including trying to stop the rising power of Islamic states (Iran had just kicked out the US-backed shah, and was Afghanistan’s neighbor), having closer access to the Persian Gulf, and scaring the bejeezus out of its own peripheral provinces, whose ethnic groups might have thought of breaking away.
I don’t think the importance of the oil and natural gas reserves of the region had yet been grasped, so that probably was not a factor at the time.
see wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Afghanistan#Political_and_military_motivations
The Dour Revolution, which had put a communist government in power in Afghanistan, happened back in 1978, and an intra-party coup occured in early 1979. Neither of these really explain the invasion very well.
Throughout 1979, howver, the government of Afghanistan showed itself to be quite extremist (in a “kill the suspected spies” sort of way), and unrest began growing. There was quite a serious military mutiny in Herat.
In addition to the facts cited above, more recent documentary evidence shows that some Soviet military officers believe that Afghanistan was going to go over to the Chinese side, the Soviets and the Chinese having had terrible relations for nearly two decades by that time. This was pure bunk, of course, but it played a supplementary role in convincing some in the Politburo that action had to be taken, otherwise the USSR would have a radical Islamic state that is a satellite of China on its southern border.
The Russians have been trying to occupy Afghanistan since the 18th century; it’s probably just force of habit by now. Afghanistan itself is worth very little in a strategic sense. But it is adjacent to Iran, Pakistan, and India; all of which would presumedly have been next on the schedule after Afghanistan was pacified and made into a base for future expansion.
A mistunderstanding
They thought there was a sale on rugs.
It certainly had been grasped, but since these reserves were situated in Soviet territory, this wasn’t an issue.
Afghanistan’s importance re gas is only as a transit point, and even then, only for countries not liking the concept of said gas going to Iran, Russia or China.
A combination of Russia having been invaded so many times over its history, and the conviction that the west really wanted to destroy the Soviet Union, produced an institutional paranoia in the Soviets. They wanted ‘buffer’ states on all boarders to protect themselves from hostile intent in every direction. The rise of Islamist and potentially Islamist governments certainly worried the Kremlin, and a ‘communist’ client state in Afganistan would have provided a partial buffer against Islamism.
But didn’t the West want to destroy the Soviet Union? First there was the outright invasion of western troops during and after the revolution, then the invasion by Hitler, then the Cold War with the world’s largest arsenal of nuclear weapons pointed at them. It’s only paranoia when “they” aren’t out to get you.
To a point.
After 1920, the West took a far more pragmatic approach. While the West generally would have been (and was) quite happy to see the Soviets fall, they were quite content in practice to live and let live. Even during the hieght of the Cold War, strategy was around containment, not conquest. The Soviets never really believed this, however. The Soviet take on things was that the west was actively seeking the destruction, and would invade as soon as they had a suitable advantage.
Well, once Dr. Manhattan left Earth, the Soviets felt emboldened.
There’s the appropriately-named “MAD” strategy, which is certainly an anhilialtion thing. It doesn’t help one bit when the president is joking about the bombing beginning in five minutes…
MAD wasn’t the goal, nor was it a “strategy” per se. Rather, it was the doctrine by which the West made sure that the Soviets (and vice versa) wouldn’t use nuclear weapons.
This always struck me as a bit of an odd way to look at the problem, considering that the US is/was the only nation to actually use nuclear weapons, and was usually years ahead of the USSR in their development and deployment.
Unfortunately, many planners on the US side of things certainly did look at MAD as a “strategy,” and I can assume the Soviets had their own dangerous wingnuts as well. Cites might include this or this (“MAD, of course, is an evolutionary defense strategy based on the concept that neither the United States nor its enemies will ever start a nuclear war because the other side will retaliate massively and unacceptably. MAD is a product of the 1950s’ US doctrine of massive retaliation, and despite attempts to redefine it in contemporary terms like flexible response and nuclear deterrence, it has remained the central theme of American defense planning for well over three decades.” - COL ALAN J. PARRINGTON, USAF ) or the fact that the Encyclopædia Britannica entry for MAD is under the heading “Strategy in the nuclear age.”
Soviets in the 80s, like Americans today, know that the only way to make a buck off of fuel reserves in Kazakhstan is to run a pipeline from there to the Arabian Sea. Said pipeline runs through some very inconveniently-held territory, including Afghanistan. Routing it around Afghanistan and Pakistan makes it cost-ineffective.
I wonder what reasons the Soviets gave to their own people for the war? Granted they didn’t tell them much, but it would be interesting to see what kind of spin they put on it.
“The Motherland is going to war. Anyone who questions this is cordially invited to mine salt in Siberia.”
Regardless of whether one thinks of MAD as a “strategy” or otherwise, it can only be seen as a part of a plan for containment, and not as an offenssive strategy.
They wanted the 7 bonus armies per turn for Asia.
And we still have the world’s largest nuclear arsenal pointed at the former Soviet Union why then…? To contain the USSR? To keep West Germany safe from East Germany? Why did we have nuclear weapons in Europe and Asian Turkey before the Soviets sent some to Cuba?
And why did we send troops into try to overthrow the revolution to start? As a defensive move?
Western powers have been destabilizing and threatening socialist and related governments for 8 decades or so. That’s not a defense of all of those governments… just stating fact.
As an American it’s getting to be more than a little exasperating that every foreign military misadventure we’ve ever been involved in has to be described in terms of an innocent defensive move reacting to threat.
And the answer is “we don’t”. American and Russian missiles are no longer targeted at the other country. (Granted, if relations between the two nations ever deteriorate again, the missiles could be retargeted in a few hours.)
We didn’t send troops in to overthrow the revolution. Several months after the revolution had occurred a civil war began. We favored one side in the war and sent troops and supplies in to support that side.