The Soviet-Afghan War: How a Superpower Fought and Lost - Book Reviews

The Soviet-Afghan War: How a Superpower Fought and Lost. By the Russian General Staff, translated and edited by Lester W. Grau and Michael A. Gress. University Press of Kansas, 2002. 364 pages. $45.00 ($17.95 paper). Reviewed by Ali A. Jalali, former Afghan colonel, author of several books on Afghan military history, and currently Director of the Afghan Radio Network Project at the Voice of America, Washington, D.C.

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the ensuing decade-long unsuccessful military action to control the country became Moscow's longest foreign war of the 20th century. Its impact has been far-reaching. It not only contributed to major geopolitical shifts in the region and beyond but also put to the test the validity of certain military concepts underpinning the tenets of Soviet operational art and combined arms tactics. Yet few published works on the war look at the conflict from a critical military perspective.

The Soviet-Afghan War: How a Superpower Fought and Lost is a professional study of the drawn-out conflict. It reviews the Soviet military experience recounting the struggle of a modern army trying to cope with the harsh conditions of guerrilla warfare in a mountainous environment. Written by a group of 16 military analysts from the Russian General Staff, the volume draws on studies done by several Russian institutions compiled in a single work. Eyewitness accounts are laced with theoretical discussions similar to standard lectures given in Russian military schools. The book divides the war into four phases: the invasion (December 1979 to February 1980), military operations to pacify the country (March 1980 to April 1985), "Afghanization" of the war (April 1985 to January 1987), and the withdrawal (January 1987 to February 1989). The nature of the combat action, the structure of the forces, and the level of cooperation with Afghan government forces are outlined in each phase.

The book stands out for dealing with all aspects of military action--including the force structure, command and control, training, operational art, combined arms tactics, combat support issues, and logistics. It offers a comprehensive and yet succinct analysis of the war. The translators and editors have done a superb job, adding useful comments to put the passages in perspective. The editorial comments also help clarify the authors' confusing assertions and incomplete statements.

The most striking issue that recurs throughout the analysis is the lack of Soviet political and military preparedness for the Afghan war despite Moscow's close ties with the country for a quarter of a century. This drawback, coupled with risky miscalculations about the "correlation of forces and means," haunted the Soviet campaign all the way to the end. According to the authors, Soviet leaders had little comprehension of the "historic, religious, and national particularities of Afghanistan" when they sent their troops into the mountainous country. Nor was the Soviet military machine able to meet the requirements of fighting a counter-guerrilla war on rugged terrain. The troops had no practical skills in the conduct of counter-guerrilla warfare, nor specific guidelines and theoretical manuals for fighting such a war. The army, they say, lacked sufficient combat readiness to fight in mountainous terrain.

These statements invalidate the pre-war notion that the Soviet military methodology was characterized by a legendary resourcefulness. An army reputed to have developed creative methods for tactical and operational employment of armed forces under various conditions in different theaters of military action had hardly digested the lessons from the Basmachi war in Central Asia (1919-33) or the counterinsurgency war in Vietnam.

An army structured for large-scale, high-tempo engagements failed to deal effectively with decentralized guerrilla fighters who were too elusive to be destroyed or softened-up by the weight of massive air and artillery "preparation" or finished off by the swift and bold maneuvers of armored and mechanized columns. The Soviet command attempted to make adjustments as the conflict wore on. These modifications were slow and incremental, allowing the Mujahedin to adjust as well. Even so, the shifts dictated by the tactical environment mostly affected the front-line units and failed to bring significant conceptual or doctrinal changes. This is clearly visible in the arguments offered by the authors in describing the application of Soviet operational art to the Afghan guerrilla war setting, which was basically dominated by tactical actions.

The study admits that "the practice of massing a large number of regular forces against a small group of irregular forces to fight a guerrilla war on rugged terrain is bankrupt," and notes, "the war in Afghanistan posed many issues for the Soviet operational art which await resolution." However, the authors' analysis simply does not go far enough in suggesting new tactical and operational methods. Instead of looking for battle-imposed conceptual shifts, the authors tend to interpret the combat situation in a way that supports the validity of the "official" Soviet doctrine.

The study is thus useful but not complete. The chapters written by different authors at some points seem disjointed and inconsistent. The authors' distinction between the second and third phases of the war is vague and confusing. They claim that during the second phase the Soviet army mostly conducted independent operations, while in the third phase it often joined Afghan forces in joint actions. In fact, however, major military operations involving elements of several large units had always been combined ventures with massive participation of Afghan units. It was at the tactical level that the Soviets waged independent combat actions.

The chapter on the Afghan Mujahedin forces is the most disappointing part of the book. It is full of inaccuracies, factual mistakes, and unrealistic assessments based on sheer imagination and speculation. The authors' dash through Afghan history is also replete with factual errors and problematic interpretations. The identification of sources is another problem. Except for denoting some eyewitness accounts, the book rarely provides the reader with the source of its assertions. The authors claim casualty figures that are almost double the official figures without supporting them with facts or credible references. The maps are flawed and misleading in terms of distances, the location of towns and villages, and their geographic orientation. The editors failed to standardize the spelling of geographic names or accurately transliterate them from Russian into English. "Panjshir," for example, a well-known location, is spelled three different ways--Pandshir, Pandjshir, and Panjshir. Many misspellings in Russian are copied into English.

Finally, while the study does have its merits, it is lacking when compared with other published works. It certainly does not have the credence of official documentation and interpretation of the war, nor the appeal ofpersonal accounts of the conflict. It lacks the statistical richness ofAlexander Lekhovski's Afghan Tragedy and Valor and the fascination of General Boris Gromov's and Alexander Mayurov's dairies of the war.

Afghanistan, a remote Central Asian country with a long history of fighting foreign invasions, seems to find its moments on the world stage only when it becomes the scene of a new international campaign. Lessons from failed outside military actions in the past are then sought to help design effective strategies for future military actions. The US-led anti-terrorist military campaign in Afghanistan has spurred renewed interest in studying the military history of this turbulent land, particularly that of the Soviet military against the Afghan resistance in the 1980s.

However, it is very important to note that there is a stark contrast between the Soviet war in Afghanistan and the US-led coalition against al Qaeda and the Taliban. The two situations are distinct in terms of political aims and military objectives, the type of committed forces, the potential enemy, and the impact on the strategic situation in the region. Lessons learned from the past need to be evaluated in the context of current international and regional realities.

COPYRIGHT 2002 U.S. Army War College
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group