Too many books? You can refine books on the query "Armed Conflict" (in brackets the number of books for this refinement is shown)
Switch display style:
Tragedy in the Shaesta Gorge
Is absent
The Afghan military campaign has just begun. Our soldiers and officers did not yet have the necessary combat experience. You could say our guys didn't know what it was like to be shot for real. Our officers did not yet know that a small mistake, inattention, and sometimes banal sloppiness ...
Is absent
A Tale of the First Months of World War II. A look at events through the eyes of a Red Army soldier. Becoming a soldier. In the beginning, both Germans and Russians were still people, but this quickly passes .... ...
Is absent
This book is an eyewitness account of all armed conflicts on the territory of the former USSR from the time of Gorbachev to the present. The author also included chapters on Afghanistan, China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, the wars in the former Yugoslavia, and his American impressions. All these chapters...
Is absent
In 2012, Ukraine hosted the European Football Championship, the brand new Donetsk airfield became a major transport hub, and the country banned smoking on the streets. Two years later, the airport burned to the ground, unexploded shells lie in the stadium, and former cigarette smugglers seized the border camps ...
Is absent
The book of the famous author Sergei Bogachev "Age of Trials" includes four works about the events taking place in the Donbass over the past hundred years. In the genre of political detective story, the author writes about the beginning of the post-Soviet period, gives a vivid and convincing idea of the characters and destinies as…
Is absent
Novels and short stories by Israeli writer Boris Krizhopolsky seem to tell about ordinary things – about life and death, love and friendship… But his heroes are young Israelis, soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces. And even when they don’t have a form burned out in the scorching sun and washed out by penetrating downpours…
Is absent
The author was born and raised in the Donbass, which is why the main part of the book is devoted to the history of this region, stories about people, their characters and actions. The final part of the book talks about some of the events of the beginning of the 2014 war in the Donbass, as it was seen directly in the places of events. Book…
The leader of the monkeys Caesar and his tribe are forced to enter into a deadly conflict with the army of people led by the merciless Colonel. After the apes suffer unimaginable losses, Caesar gets the better of his dark instincts and begins his own mythical quest for retribution. At the end of the road, n...
Is absent
“Soldiers of Fortune willy-nilly…” is a scandalous historical novel-study about the participation of Soviet troops, performing the so-called “international duty”, in the Congolese crisis of 1960-1965, which claimed the lives of more than 100 thousand people. Then the Soviet soldiers were abandoned in the distant jungle of Kon ...
Islamic extremists went on another monstrous provocation. In Turkish Antalya, they took hostage five Russian citizens, employees of a local cafe. A special "interview" is planned, during which the men will have to appear before the world community as special forces ...
“... Behind a few months of the largest European armed conflict since the Second World War. During the fighting, Donbass suffered enormous economic damage. More than five thousand houses, more than a hundred schools, dozens of hospitals and first-aid posts were destroyed. Destroyed trade infrastructure. By…
Is absent
A new strategic weapon in the arsenal of international terrorism. The civilized world got out, but paid with many lives of innocent people. The action takes place in the United States and other countries. …
Eastern Ukraine, 70 kilometers from Donetsk. Former police captain Andrei Okulenko, taking advantage of the announced truce, sends his wife and little daughter to Russia. The officer's family leaves the city and immediately dies under a sudden volley of Ukrainian self-propelled guns. Andrey is left alone, his ...
Jay-finch-quail, woodpecker-lark-bee… Enki-benki-sikli-sa, enki-benki-yes, who hesitated, left forever… The poignant debut of Tamta Melashvili, a young Georgian writer, is a protest against any war , anywhere: in Georgia, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine. Three days in the life of two girls...
Is absent
February 2015. The period of the most fierce fighting near Donetsk and Luhansk. The Ukrainian army launched a surprise attack on the headquarters of the united militia group, seized a checkpoint and broke through two dozen kilometers deep into the Donbass. Captain Nesterenko, commander of the assault company of the militia, ordered ...
Is absent
The basis of the book by the famous author Sergei Bogachev "Donetsk Tales" consists of two works united by one theme, which can be designated as "Ukraine and the events of recent years." “Gas Contract” is a detective story in which there are so many seemingly familiar figures who “breed” the Nazis ...
Trouble in Baghdad
Dangerous Weapons 3 is a continuation of the existing version of the game, which has new features and missions, but the plot and characters remain the same. The new version will be interesting for players who have already tried their hand at the previous parts.
The essence of the game
The goal of every Gun Mayhem 3 gamer is to survive the bullets in the long level maze. The enemy will make every effort, if only you did not move further. You have a lot of weapons in your arsenal, like the enemy, jumps, as well as a box with bonuses that are worth collecting. After all, each of them has weapons and other features, one of the bonuses of Gun Mayhem 3 can even be an extra life.
The game begins with the choice of a character, his abilities, weapons to be used in battle. Enemies come across a wide variety, each with its own characteristics, but you will be able to navigate after training. The new part has a large selection of weapons and jetpacks that allow you to fly. Here are 21 unique weapons with 2 shooting modes. Practice and you will be able to cope with all of them. A new maze of 10 brand new maps. In addition, Gun Mayhem allows you to try out Domination Mode.
Control
Such an opportunity is provided in the Challenges section of the game. If you plan to shoot right away, then you should choose the Campagn section. The game is designed for two, you can also fight with the computer in the Custom Game section. Dangerous Weapons 3 provides several game options:
- the one who remains alive does not win;
- when playing for survival, 5 lives are provided, you need to hold out as long as possible;
- kill first or be among the victims;
- take part in collective battles and win together with your friends;
- a selection from weak to strong weapons to destroy the enemy;
- and vice versa - a selection from strong weapons to weak ones.
Having decided on this option, it is worth picking up in Gun Mayhem 3 and the battlefield. Choose a character and design an outfit for him - a hat, clothes, a gun and more. Use Latin letters to write his name. The default is 10 lives. In the Weapon Library section, you can get acquainted with the existing guns, evaluate their power, rate of fire, weight and other parameters.
Management is provided for two players. The first can use the arrow keys, and the second keys: T - shoot, Y - throw a bomb. In this case, you can always increase the number of players - up to four. In addition, the entire action can be expanded to full screen.
Dangerous Weapons 3 is appreciated by many gamers due to new features, more exciting mode and simple controls. You can run it on any computer and even online, which can significantly save space on your PC, this is suitable for many. In addition, you can arrange a Weapon Mayhem in the company of friends, which is always more interesting. Once, by launching the game for two, you will not be able to refuse its advantages and will certainly get acquainted with other versions that have already been released on the network.
For the period from 1945 to the beginning of the XXI century. more than 500 local wars and armed conflicts have taken place in the world. They not only influenced the formation of relations between countries directly in conflict zones, but also reflected on the politics and economy of many states of the world. According to many political scientists, the likelihood of new local wars and armed conflicts not only remains, but also increases. In this regard, the study of the causes of their occurrence, the methods of unleashing them, the experience of preparing and conducting combat operations, and the peculiarities of military art in them is of particular relevance.
The term "local war" refers to a war involving two or more states within the boundaries of their territories, limited in purpose and scale from the point of view of the interests of the great powers. Local wars, as a rule, are waged with the direct or indirect support of major powers, which can use them to achieve their own political goals.
An armed conflict is an armed clash of a limited scale between states (international armed conflict) or opposing parties within the territory of one state (internal armed conflict). In armed conflicts, war is not declared and there is no transition to a wartime regime. An international armed conflict can escalate into a local war, an internal armed conflict into a civil war.
The largest local wars of the 2nd half of the 20th century, which had a significant impact on the development of military affairs, include: the war in Korea (1950-1953), the war in Vietnam (1964-1975), the Indo-Pakistani war (1971), the Arab-Israeli wars, the war in Afghanistan (1979-1989), the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), the war in the Persian Gulf (1991), the wars in Yugoslavia and Iraq.
1. Brief overview of local wars and armed conflicts
War in Korea (1950-1953)
AT In August 1945, the Red Army liberated the northern part of Korea from the Japanese invaders. Part of the peninsula south of the 38th parallel was occupied by American troops. In the future, it was supposed to create a unified Korean state. The Soviet Union in 1948 withdrew its troops from the territory of North Korea. However, the United States continued the policy of splitting this country. In August 1948, a pro-American government headed by Syngman Rhee was formed in South Korea. In the north of the country, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) was proclaimed in the autumn of the same year. The governments of both the DPRK and South Korea believed that the creation of a state united under their rule was possible only by destroying the hostile regime in another part of Korea. Both countries began to actively create and build up their armed forces.
By the summer of 1950, the number of the South Korean army reached 100 thousand people. It was armed with 840 guns and mortars, 1.9 thousand bazooka anti-tank rifles and 27 armored vehicles. In addition, this army had 20 combat aircraft and 79 naval ships.
The Korean People's Army (KPA) consisted of 10 rifle divisions, a tank brigade, and a motorcycle regiment. She had 1.6 thousand guns and mortars, 258 tanks, 172 combat aircraft.
The American-South Korean war plan was to encircle and destroy the main forces of the KPA in the areas of Pyongyang and south of Wonsan, after which, developing the offensive to the north, to reach the border with China .
Their actions were ready to be supported by 3 American infantry and 1 armored divisions, an independent infantry regiment and a regimental battle group, which were part of the 8th US Army, which were based in Japan.
In early May 1950, the government of the DPRK received reliable information about the impending aggression. With the help of a group of Soviet military advisers, a plan of military operations was developed, which provided for repelling enemy attacks with a subsequent transition to a counteroffensive. The USSR provided material assistance to North Korea, including equipment and heavy weapons. The advance deployment of troops along the 38th parallel made it possible to achieve an advantageous balance of forces and means for the KPA. The transition of the KPA troops to the offensive on June 25, 1950 is considered by many historians as a forced measure in connection with the numerous military provocations by South Korea.
Military operations in the Korean War can be roughly divided into four periods.
1st period (June 25 - September 14, 1950). On June 4, 25, 1950, the KPA went on the offensive. Under US pressure and in the absence of a Soviet representative, the UN Security Council authorized the creation of UN troops to "repel aggression." On July 5, units of the 8th American Army under the UN flag entered the battle against the KPA. Enemy resistance increased. Despite this, the KPA troops continued their successful offensive and in 1.5 months advanced 250-350 km southward.
The air supremacy of American aviation forced the KPA command to increasingly switch to night operations, which had a negative effect on the pace of the offensive. By August 20, the KPA offensive was stopped at the turn of the river. Naktong. The enemy managed to hold the Pusan bridgehead in the south of the Korean Peninsula.
2nd period (September 15 - October 24, 1950). By mid-September, the enemy had transferred up to 6 American divisions and an English brigade to the Pusan bridgehead. The balance of power shifted in his favor. The 8th American Army alone had 14 infantry divisions, 2 brigades, up to 500 tanks, over 1,600 guns and mortars, and more than 1,000 aircraft. The plan of the American command was to encircle and destroy the main forces of the KPA by means of troop strikes from the Pusan bridgehead and an amphibious landing in the Inchon area.
The operation began on September 15 with an amphibious landing in the rear of the KPA. On September 16, troops from the Pusan bridgehead went on the offensive. They managed to break through the KPA defenses and develop an offensive to the north. On October 23, the enemy captured Pyongyang. On the west coast, American troops managed to reach the Korean-Chinese border by the end of October. Their further advance was delayed by the stubborn defense of the KPA units together with the partisans operating behind enemy lines.
3rd period (October 25, 1950 - July 9, 1951). From October 19, 1950, the Chinese People's Volunteers (CPV) took part in the hostilities on the side of the DPRK. On October 25, the forward units of the KPA and the CPV launched a counterattack on the enemy. Developing a successfully launched offensive, the KPA and CPV troops cleared the entire territory of North Korea from the enemy in 8 months of hostilities. Attempts by the American-South Korean troops to launch a new offensive in the first half of 1951 did not lead to success. In July 1951, the front stabilized along the 38th parallel, and the warring parties began peace negotiations.
4th period (July 10, 1951 - July 27, 1953). The American command repeatedly disrupted negotiations and re-started hostilities. Enemy aircraft inflicted massive strikes on the rear facilities and troops of the DPRK. However, as a result of the active resistance and steadfastness of the KPA and CPV troops in the defense, the enemy's next offensive attempts were not successful.
had. The firm position of the USSR, the heavy losses of UN troops and the growing demands of the world community to end the war led to the signing of a ceasefire agreement on July 27, 1953.
As a result, the war ended in the same place where it began - on the 38th parallel, along which the border between North and South Korea passed. One of the important military and political outcomes of the war was that the United States and its allies, despite their enormous potential, were unable to win the war against a much less technically equipped enemy, which was the North Korean army and Chinese volunteers.
Vietnam War (1964-1975)
The Vietnam War was one of the largest and longest armed clashes since World War II. Victory over the French colonialists in the war for independence in 1945-1954. created favorable conditions for the peaceful unification of the Vietnamese people. However, this did not happen. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) was established in the northern part of Vietnam. A pro-American government was formed in South Vietnam, which, using US military and economic assistance, hastily began to build its own army. By the end of 1958, there were 150,000 people in it, and more than 200,000 were in paramilitary formations. Using these forces, the South Vietnamese regime launched punitive operations against the national-patriotic forces of South Vietnam. In response to the repressive measures, the Vietnamese people launched an active guerrilla war. The fighting engulfed the entire territory of the country. The DRV provided the rebels with comprehensive assistance. By the middle of 1964, 2/3 of the country's territory was already under the control of the partisans.
To save its ally, the US government decided to switch to direct military intervention in South Vietnam. Taking advantage of the collision of American ships with DRV torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin as a pretext, on August 5, 1964, US aviation began systematic bombardments of the territory of the DRV. Large contingents of American troops were transferred to South Vietnam.
The course of the armed struggle in Vietnam can be conditionally divided into 3 periods: the first (August 5, 1964 - November 1, 1968) - the period of escalation of American military intervention; the second (November 1968 - January 27, 1973) - a period of gradual curtailment of the scale of the war; the third (January 28, 1973 - May 1, 1975) - the period of the final blows of the patriotic forces and the end of the war.
The plan of the American command provided for air strikes on the most important objects of the DRV and communications of the South Vietnamese partisans, to isolate them from
incoming aid, block and destroy. Parts of the American infantry, the latest equipment and weapons began to be transferred to South Vietnam. Subsequently, the number of American troops in South Vietnam constantly increased and amounted to: in 1965 - 155 thousand, in 1966 - 385.3 thousand, in 1967 - 485.8 thousand, in 1968 - 543 thousand people.
In 1965-1966 The American command launched a major offensive with the aim of capturing important points in Central Vietnam, pushing the partisans back into the mountainous, wooded and sparsely populated regions of the country. However, this plan was thwarted by the maneuvering and active actions of the Liberation Army. The air war against the DRV also ended in failure. Having strengthened the air defense system with anti-aircraft weapons (mainly Soviet anti-aircraft guided missiles), the anti-aircraft gunners of the DRV inflicted significant damage on enemy aircraft. Over 3,000 American combat aircraft were shot down over the territory of North Vietnam in 4 years.
In 1968-1972. patriotic forces carried out three large-scale offensives, during which areas with a population of over 2.5 million people were liberated. Saigon and American troops suffered heavy casualties and were forced onto the defensive.
In 1970-1971. the flames of war spread to the states adjacent to Vietnam - Cambodia and Laos. The purpose of the invasion of the American-Saigon troops into them was to cut the Indochinese Peninsula in two, isolate the South Vietnamese patriots from the DRV, and strangle the national liberation movement in this region. However, the aggression failed. Having met strong resistance and suffered heavy losses, the interventionists withdrew their troops from the territories of these two states. At the same time, the American command began a gradual withdrawal of its troops from South Vietnam, shifting the main burden of the struggle onto the troops of the Saigon regime.
The successful actions of the air defense of the DRV and the South Vietnamese partisans, as well as the demands of the world community, forced the United States to sign on January 27, 1973, the Agreement on the termination of the participation of their armed forces in the Vietnam War. In total, up to 2.6 million American soldiers and officers participated in this war. The American troops were armed with over 5 thousand combat aircraft and helicopters, 2.5 thousand guns, hundreds of tanks. According to American data, the United States lost in Vietnam about 60,000 people killed, over 300,000 wounded, over 8,600 planes and helicopters, and a large amount of other military equipment.
In 1975, the troops of the DRV and partisans completed the defeat of the Saigon army and on May 1 captured the city of Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam. The puppet regime fell. The heroic 30-year struggle of the Vietnamese people for independence ended in complete victory. In 1976, the DRV and the Republic of South Vietnam formed a single state - the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The main military-political results of the war were that the impotence of the most modern military power against the people fighting for their national liberation was again revealed. After the defeat in Vietnam, the US largely lost its influence in Southeast Asia.
Indo-Pakistani War (1971)
The Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 was the result of the colonial past of the two countries that were part of British India until 1947, and the result of the incorrect division of the territory of the colony by the British after granting it independence.
The main reasons for the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 were:
unresolved disputed territorial issues, among which the problem of Jammu and Kashmir occupied a key position;
political and economic contradictions within Pakistan, between its western and eastern parts;
the problem of refugees from East Bengal (9.5 million people by the beginning of the war).
By the beginning of 1971, the strength of the Indian Armed Forces was about 950 thousand people. More than 1.1 thousand tanks, 5.6 thousand guns and mortars, over 900 aircraft and helicopters (about 600 combat), more than 80 warships, boats and auxiliary vessels were in service.
The armed forces of Pakistan numbered about 370 thousand people, over 900 tanks, about 3.3 thousand guns and mortars, 450 aircraft (350 combat), 30 warships and auxiliary vessels.
The Indian Armed Forces outnumbered the Pakistani in terms of the number of personnel by 2.6 times; tanks - in 1.3; field artillery guns and mortars - 1.7; combat aircraft - in 1.7; warships and boats - 2.3 times.
The Indian Armed Forces used mainly modern Soviet-made military equipment, including T-54, T-55, PT-76 tanks, 100-mm and 130-mm artillery mounts, MiG-21 fighters, Su-7b fighter-bombers, destroyers (large anti-submarine ships), submarines and missile boats.
The armed forces of Pakistan were built with the help of the United States (1954-1965), and later China, France, Italy and Germany. The instability of the foreign policy orientation in matters of military construction was reflected in the composition and quality of weapons. Comparable in terms of combat capabilities with Indian tanks were only Chinese-made T-59 tanks. The remaining types of weapons were mostly inferior to Indian models.
The Indo-Pakistani conflict can be divided into 2 periods: the threatened period (April-November 1971), the fighting of the parties (December 1971).
In December 1970, the People's League party won the elections in East Pakistan (East Bengal). However, the government of Pakistan refused to hand over power to her and give East Pakistan internal autonomy. By order of President Yahya Khan on March 26, 1971, political activity in the country was banned, the "People's League" was outlawed, and troops were brought into East Pakistan, who began punitive operations against the population. On April 14, 1971, the leadership of the "People's League" announced the creation of an interim government of Bangladesh and began preparations for the armed struggle of the "mukti bahini" rebel detachments. However, the Pakistani troops broke the resistance of the armed groups of East Bengal nationalists by the end of May and regained control over major cities. Repressions against the population led to a mass exodus of Bengalis to neighboring India, where by mid-November 1971 the number of refugees amounted to 9.5 million people.
India supported the Bengali rebels by providing them with weapons and bases on its territory. After preparation, the detachments were transferred to the territory of East Bengal, where by the beginning of the war their number amounted to 100 thousand people. At the end of October, the Mukti Bahini, often with the direct support of Indian troops, took control of certain areas along the border and deep into the territory of East Pakistan, and on November 21, regular Indian troops crossed the border and, together with the rebels, began fighting against Pakistani troops.
Pakistan, faced with the threat of East Bengal separatism, at the beginning of 1971 transferred an additional 2 divisions to East Pakistan, began the formation of new civil defense units and detachments in this province. Partial mobilization was announced and 40,000 reservists were called up. The troops advanced to the borders, forming 2 groups - on the western border with India 13 divisions, on the east - 5 divisions. In mid-November 1971, the Armed Forces were put on full alert, and on November 23, a state of emergency was declared in the country.
India responded by understaffing formations and units to wartime states by calling up reservists. By the end of October, 2 groupings of troops were deployed, consisting of: the western - 13 divisions and the eastern - 7. At the same time, India increased assistance, including military, to the detachments of the East Bengal liberation movement.
On December 3, 1971, the government of Pakistan, seeing a real threat of losing the eastern part of the country, declared war on India. At 5:45 p.m. local time, Pakistani aircraft attacked Indian air bases. The strikes did not give the expected results: the Indian Air Force dispersed the aircraft fleet and camouflaged it in advance. Following this, Pakistani troops attempted to launch an offensive on the western front.
A state of emergency was declared in India, and the troops were ordered to begin active hostilities on the western and eastern fronts, as well as at sea. On the morning of December 4, the offensive of Indian troops in East Bengal began. The offensive was organized in the direction of Dhaka from the west, northwest and northeast (the territory of India covers East Bengal from three sides). Here India had a twofold superiority in ground forces and significant air superiority. For 8 days of fighting, Indian troops, in cooperation with the Mukti Bahini detachments, broke the stubborn resistance of the Pakistanis and advanced 65-90 km, creating a threat of encirclement for Pakistani troops in the Dhaka area.
On the western front, the fighting took on a positional character. Here the parties had approximately equal forces. The offensive of the Pakistani troops, launched on December 3, did not lead to success and was stopped.
On December 11, the Indian command offered the Pakistani troops on the eastern front to surrender. Having been refused, the Indian troops continued their offensive and by December 14 finally closed the encirclement around Dhaka. Indian units on December 16 entered the city. On the same day, an act of surrender was signed for a group of Pakistani troops in East Bengal. In the west, a grouping of Pakistani troops ceased hostilities by agreement of the parties.
An important role in achieving victory in the war was played by the Indian Navy, which was tasked with conducting active offensive operations, disrupting Pakistan's maritime communications, destroying enemy ships at sea and in bases, and striking coastal targets. To solve these problems, two temporary formations were formed: "Western" (a cruiser, patrol ships and 6 missile boats) for operations in the Arabian Sea and "East" (an aircraft carrier with escort ships) for operations in the Bay of Bengal. Submarines (submarines) were tasked with blocking the Pakistani coast in the Arabian Sea (2 submarines) and the Bay of Bengal (2 submarines).
With the outbreak of war, the Indian Navy blockaded the naval bases and ports of West and East Pakistan. On December 4, an official announcement was made about the naval blockade of the Pakistani coast. Deployed in the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal, Indian Navy ships have begun screening all ships en route to and from Pakistani ports.
On the night of December 5, Indian ships attacked Pakistan's main naval base, Karachi. The strike was carried out by 3 Soviet-made missile boats in support of 2 patrol ships. When approaching the base, the lead boat attacked and destroyed the Pakistani destroyer Khyber with two missiles. The minesweeper was hit by the first missile from another boat
"Mukhafiz", the second missile - the destroyer "Badr" (the entire command staff was killed). The transport standing on the roadstead was also damaged. Approaching the base, the boats fired two more missiles at port facilities, and patrol ships opened artillery fire, damaging a Pakistani minesweeper.
This success of the Indian Navy was of great importance for the subsequent struggle at sea. In the Arabian Sea, the Pakistani command returned all its ships to their bases, giving the enemy freedom of action.
Other Soviet-made ships showed themselves excellently during the fighting at sea. So, on December 3, the Indian destroyer "Rajput" in the Bay of Bengal with the help of depth charges destroyed the Pakistani submarine "Ghazi".
The Indian Armed Forces, as a result of two weeks of hostilities, defeated the troops of Pakistan, occupied the territory of East Bengal and forced the capitulation of the Pakistani group that opposed them. In the west, Indian troops occupied several sections of Pakistani territory with a total area of 14.5 thousand km2. Dominance at sea was won and Pakistani shipping was completely blocked.
Losses of Pakistan: over 4 thousand killed, about 10 thousand wounded, 93 thousand prisoners; more than 180 tanks, about 1 thousand guns and mortars, about 100 aircraft. The Khyber destroyer, the Ghazi submarine, the Mukhafiz minesweeper, 3 patrol boats and several ships were sunk. A number of Pakistan Navy ships are damaged.
Indian losses: about 2.4 thousand killed, over 6.2 thousand wounded; 73 tanks, 220 guns and mortars, 45 aircraft. The Indian Navy lost the Kukri patrol ship, 4 patrol boats and an anti-submarine aircraft. A patrol ship and a missile boat were damaged.
Pakistan emerged from the war politically, economically and militarily weakened. The eastern province of the country was lost, on the territory of which a state friendly to India, the People's Republic of Bangladesh, was formed. India has significantly strengthened its position in South Asia. At the same time, as a result of the war, the Kashmir problem and a number of other contradictions between the countries were not resolved, which predetermined the continuation of the confrontation, the arms race and nuclear rivalry.
Local wars in the Middle East
After World War II, the Middle East became one of the hottest regions in the world. The reasons for this state lie in the mutual territorial claims of the Arab states and Israel. In 1948-1949. and 1956 (Anglo-French-Israeli aggression against Egypt), these contradictions resulted in open armed clashes. Arab-Israeli War 1948-1949 was fought between a coalition of Arab states (Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq) and Israel. On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly decided to create two independent states on the territory of Palestine - Jewish and Arab. Israel was formed on May 14, 1948; the Arab state of Palestine was not created. The leaders of the Arab states did not agree with the UN decision on the division of Palestine. To conduct military operations, the Arab states created a grouping - a total of 30 thousand people, 50 aircraft, 50 tanks, 147 guns and mortars.
Israeli troops numbered about 40 thousand people, 11 aircraft, several tanks and armored vehicles, about 200 guns and mortars.
The offensive of the Arab troops began on May 15 in the general direction of Jerusalem with the aim of dissecting the grouping of Israeli troops and destroying it piece by piece. As a result of the spring-summer offensive of 1948, Arab troops reached the approaches to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Retreating, the Israelis exhausted the Arabs, conducting focal and mobile defenses and acting on communications. On June 11, on the recommendation of the UN Security Council, a truce was concluded between the Arabs and Israel, but it turned out to be fragile. At dawn on July 9, Israeli troops launched an offensive and in 10 days inflicted heavy losses on the Arabs, pushing them out of their positions and significantly strengthening their position. On July 18, the UN ceasefire came into effect. The UN plan for a peaceful settlement of the conflict was rejected by both warring parties.
Israel by mid-October increased its army to 120 thousand people, 98 combat aircraft and formed a tank brigade. The Arab army at that time numbered 40 thousand people, and the number of aircraft and tanks decreased due to losses in battles.
Israel, having a three-fold superiority over the Arab troops in manpower and absolute in aviation and tanks, violated the truce, and on October 15, 1948, its troops resumed hostilities. Israeli aircraft attacked airfields and destroyed Arab aircraft. Within two months, in the course of a series of successive offensive operations, Israeli troops surrounded and defeated a significant part of the Arab forces and transferred the fighting to the territory of Egypt and Lebanon.
Under British pressure, the Israeli government was forced to agree to a truce. On January 7, 1949, hostilities ceased. In February-July 1949, through the mediation of the UN, agreements were concluded that fixed only the temporary boundaries of a ceasefire.
A complex knot of Arab-Israeli contradictions formed, which were the cause of all subsequent Arab-Israeli wars.
In October 1956, the General Staffs of Great Britain, France and Israel developed a plan of joint action against Egypt. According to the plan, the Israeli troops, having begun hostilities in the Sinai Peninsula, were to defeat the Egyptian army and go to the Suez Canal (Operation Kadesh); Great Britain and France - to bomb the cities and troops of Egypt, with the help of naval and airborne assaults, capture Port Said and Port Fuad, then land the main forces and occupy the Suez Canal zone and Cairo (Operation Musketeer). The number of the Anglo-French expeditionary force exceeded 100 thousand people. The Israeli army consisted of 150 thousand people, 400 tanks and SAO, about 500 armored personnel carriers, 600 guns and mortars, 150 combat aircraft and 30 ships of various classes. In total, 229 thousand people, 650 aircraft and over 130 warships, including 6 aircraft carriers, were concentrated directly against Egypt.
The Egyptian army numbered about 90 thousand people, 600 tanks and SAO, 200 armored personnel carriers, more than 600 guns and mortars, 128 aircraft, 11 warships and several auxiliary vessels.
In the Sinai Peninsula, the Israelis outnumbered the Egyptian army in manpower by 1.5 times, and in some areas - more than 3 times; the expeditionary force had more than five times the superiority over the Egyptian troops in the Port Said area. Hostilities began on the evening of October 29 with an Israeli airborne assault.
At the same time, Israeli troops launched an offensive in the Suez and Ismaili directions, and on October 31 - in the seaside. The Anglo-French fleet established a naval blockade of Egypt.
On the Suez direction, Israeli troops reached the approaches to the canal on November 1. In the Ismaili direction, the Egyptian troops left the city of Abu-Aveigil. In the coastal direction, the fighting continued until November 5.
On October 30, the British and French governments issued an ultimatum to the Egyptians. After the Egyptian government refused to accept the ultimatum, military and civilian installations were heavily bombed. Marines were landed. There was a threat of capturing the capital of Egypt.
The emergency session of the UN General Assembly, which opened on November 1, resolutely demanded a ceasefire from the warring parties. England, France and Israel refused to comply with this demand. On November 5, the Soviet Union warned of its determination
use military force to restore peace in the Middle East. On November 7, hostilities ceased. By December 22, 1956, Great Britain and France, and by March 8, 1957, Israel withdrew their troops from the occupied territories. The Suez Canal, closed to navigation since the outbreak of hostilities, began to function at the end of April 1957.
In June 1967, Israel unleashed a new war against the Arab states. The plan of the Israeli military command provided for a lightning successive defeat of the neighboring Arab states with the main attack on Egypt. On the morning of June 5, Israeli aircraft launched surprise attacks on the airfields of Egypt, Syria and Jordan. As a result, 65% of the aircraft of the Air Forces of these countries were destroyed and air supremacy was won.
The offensive of the Israeli Armed Forces on the Egyptian front was carried out in three main directions. By June 6, having broken the resistance of the Egyptians and disrupted the counterattacks undertaken by the Egyptian command, the Israeli troops began to pursue. The bulk of the Egyptian formations located in the Sinai Peninsula was cut off. By 12:00 on June 8, the Israeli advance units reached the Suez Canal. By the end of the day, active hostilities in the Sinai Peninsula had ceased.
On the Jordanian front, the Israeli offensive began on June 6. In the very first hours, the Israeli brigades broke through the Jordanian defenses and developed success in depth. On June 7, they surrounded and defeated the main grouping of Jordanian troops, and by the end of June 8, they reached the river on the entire front. Jordan.
On June 9, Israel attacked Syria with all its might. The main blow was delivered north of Lake Tiberias in the years. El Quneitra and Damascus. The Syrian troops put up stubborn resistance, but at the end of the day they could not withstand the onslaught and, despite superiority in forces and means, began to retreat. By the end of the day on June 10, the Israelis captured the Golan Heights, wedged into Syrian territory to a depth of 26 km. Only thanks to the decisive position and energetic measures taken by the Soviet Union, the Arab countries avoided complete defeat.
In subsequent years, Israel's refusal to liberate the occupied Arab territories made it necessary for Egypt and Syria to achieve this by force of arms. The fighting began simultaneously on both fronts in the middle of the day on October 6, 1973. During fierce battles, the Syrian troops drove the enemy out of their positions and advanced 12-18 km. By the end of the day on October 7, due to significant losses, the offensive was suspended. On the morning of October 8, the Israeli command, pulling up reserves from the depths, carried out a counterattack. Under pressure from the enemy, by October 16, the Syrians were forced to withdraw to their second line of defense, where the front had stabilized.
In turn, the Egyptian troops successfully crossed the Suez Canal, captured the enemy's 1st defense line and created bridgeheads up to 15-25 km deep. However, due to the passivity of the Egyptian command, the success of the offensive was not developed. On October 15, the Israelis launched a counterattack, crossed the Suez Canal and captured a bridgehead on its western bank. In the following days, developing the offensive in a fan, they blockaded Suez, Ismailia and created a threat of encirclement of the 3rd Egyptian army. In this situation, Egypt turned to the USSR with a request for help. Thanks to the tough position taken by the Soviet Union in the UN, on October 25, 1973, hostilities were stopped.
Although Egypt and Syria failed to achieve their goals, the outcome of the war for them was positive. First of all, a kind of psychological barrier that arose as a result of the defeat in the 1967 war was overcome in the minds of the Arabs. The Arab armies dispelled the myth of Israel's invincibility by showing that they were quite capable of fighting Israeli troops.
The 1973 war was the largest local war in the Middle East. On both sides, up to 1 million 700 thousand people, 6 thousand tanks, 1.8 thousand combat aircraft participated in it. The losses of the Arab countries amounted to over 19 thousand people, up to 2 thousand tanks and about 350 aircraft. Israel lost in this war over 15 thousand people, 700 tanks and up to 250 aircraft. A distinctive feature of this war was that it was conducted by regular armed forces equipped with all types of modern military equipment and weapons.
In June 1982, the Middle East was once again engulfed in the flames of war. This time, the scene of hostilities was Lebanon, on whose territory Palestinian refugee camps were located. The Palestinians carried out raids on Israeli territory, thus trying to force the Israeli government to negotiate the return of the territories seized in 1967. Large Israeli troops were introduced into Lebanese territory and entered Beirut. Heavy fighting continued for more than three months. Despite the withdrawal of Palestinian detachments from West Beirut and the partial solution of the assigned tasks, Israeli troops remained in Lebanese territory for the next eight years.
In 2000, Israeli troops were withdrawn from the southern regions of Lebanon. However, this move did not bring the long-awaited peace. The demands of the Arab public to create their own state on the lands occupied by Israel did not find understanding in Tel Aviv. In turn, the numerous terrorist acts committed by Arab suicide bombers against the Jews only tightened the knot of contradictions more and forced the Israeli army to respond with harsh forceful measures. At present, the unsettledness of the Arab-Israeli contradictions can at any moment blow up the fragile peace of this troubled region. Therefore, Russia, the United States, the UN and the European Union (the "Middle East Quartet") are doing everything possible to implement the Middle East settlement plan they developed in 2003 under the name "Road Map".
War in Afghanistan (1979-1989)
AT At the end of December 1979, the Afghan government once again turned to the USSR with a request to provide military assistance in repelling external aggression. The Soviet leadership, true to its treaty obligations and in order to protect the country's southern borders, decided to send a Limited Contingent of Soviet Troops (OKSV) to the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA). The calculation was made on the fact that with the introduction of Soviet Army formations into the DRA, the situation there would stabilize. The participation of troops in hostilities was not envisaged.
The presence of the OKSV in Afghanistan can be conditionally divided into 4 periods according to the nature of the actions: 1st period (December 1979 - February 1980) - the introduction of troops, their deployment in garrisons, the organization of the protection of deployment points and the most important objects; 2nd period (March 1980 - April 1985) - conducting active hostilities against opposition groups, work to strengthen the Afghan Armed Forces; 3rd period (April 1985 - January 1987) - the transition from active hostilities mainly to supporting government troops, the fight against rebel caravans on the border; 4th period (January 1987 - February 1989) - continued support for the combat activities of government troops, preparation and withdrawal of the OKSV from Afghanistan.
The calculation of the political leadership of the USSR and the DRA that the situation would stabilize with the introduction of troops did not materialize. The opposition, using the slogan of "jihad" (sacred struggle against infidels), stepped up armed activity. Responding to provocations and defending ourselves, our units and subunits were increasingly drawn into the civil war. The fighting unfolded throughout Afghanistan.
The initial attempts of the Soviet command to carry out offensive operations according to the rules of classical war did not bring success. Raid operations as part of reinforced battalions also proved to be of little effect. The Soviet troops suffered heavy losses, and the Mujahideen, who knew the area well, in small groups came out from under the blow and broke away from the pursuit.
Opposition formations usually fought in small groups of 20 to 50 people. To solve more complex tasks, groups were united in detachments of 150-200 people or more. Sometimes the so-called "Islamic regiments" were formed, numbering 500-900 people or more. The forms and methods of guerrilla warfare lay at the heart of the conduct of armed struggle.
Starting in 1981, the command of the OKSV switched to conducting operations with large forces, which turned out to be much more effective (Operation Ring in Parvan, an offensive operation and raids in Panjshir). The enemy suffered significant losses, however, it was not possible to completely defeat the Mujahideen detachments.
The largest number of OKSV (1985) was 108.8 thousand people (military personnel - 106 thousand), including 73.6 thousand people in combat units of the Ground Forces and Air Force. The total number of the armed Afghan opposition in different years ranged from 47 thousand to 173 thousand people.
In the course of carrying out operations in the areas occupied by the troops, state authorities were created. However, they did not have real power. After the Soviet or government Afghan troops left the occupied area, the surviving rebels again took their place. They destroyed party activists and restored their influence in the area. For example, in the valley of the Panjshir River, 12 military operations were carried out over 9 years, but government power in this area has not been consolidated.
As a result, by the end of 1986, a balance had developed: government troops, even supported by the OKSV, could not inflict a decisive defeat on the enemy and force him to stop the armed struggle, and the opposition, in turn, was not capable of overthrowing the existing regime in the country by force. It became obvious that the only way to solve the Afghan problem was through negotiations.
In 1987, the DRA leadership proposed a policy of national reconciliation to the opposition. At first, she was successful. Thousands of rebels stopped fighting. The main efforts of our troops during this period were transferred to the protection and delivery of materiel coming from the Soviet Union. But the opposition, sensing a serious danger for itself in the policy of national reconciliation, intensified subversive activities. Fierce fighting began again. This was largely facilitated by the supply of the latest weapons from abroad, including the American Stinger portable anti-aircraft missile systems.
At the same time, the proclaimed policy opened up prospects for negotiations on the settlement of the Afghan issue. On April 14, 1988, agreements were signed in Geneva to end foreign interference in the affairs of Afghanistan.
The Geneva agreements were fully implemented by the Soviet side: by August 15, 1988, the number of OKSV was reduced by 50%, and on February 15, 1989, the last Soviet unit left Afghan territory.
The withdrawal of Soviet troops was carried out on a planned basis. In the western direction, the troops were withdrawn along the route Kandahar, Farahrud, Shindand, Turagundi, Kushka, and in the eastern direction - along five routes originating in the garrisons of Jalalabad, Ghazni, Faizabad, Kunduz and Kabul, then through Puli-Khumri to Hairaton and Termez. Part of the personnel from the airfields of Jalalabad, Gardez, Faizabad, Kunduz, Kandahar and Shindand was transported by aircraft.
Three days before the start of the movement of the columns, all routes were blocked, outposts were strengthened, artillery was brought to firing positions and prepared for firing. fire-
the first impact on the enemy began 2-3 days before the start of the advance. In close cooperation with artillery, aviation operated, which, from a position of duty in the air, ensured the withdrawal of troops. Important tasks during the withdrawal of Soviet troops were solved by engineering units and subunits, which was due to the difficult mine situation on the routes of movement.
The formations and units of the OKSV in Afghanistan were the decisive force that ensured the retention of power in the hands of state bodies and the leaders of the DRA. They are in 1981 - 1988. almost continuously fought active hostilities.
For courage and courage shown on the soil of Afghanistan, 86 people were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. Over 200 thousand soldiers and officers were awarded orders and medals. Most of them are 18-20 year old boys.
The total irretrievable human losses of the Soviet Armed Forces amounted to 14,453 people. At the same time, the authorities, formations and parts of the OKSV lost 13,833 people. In Afghanistan, 417 servicemen were missing and captured, of which 119 were released.
Sanitary losses amounted to 469,685 people, including: wounded, shell-shocked and injured 53,753 people (11.44%); fell ill - 415,932 people (88.56%).
Losses of equipment and weapons amounted to: aircraft - 118; helicopters - 333; tanks - 147; BMP, BMD and BTR - 1314; guns and mortars - 433; radio stations and KShM - 1138; engineering vehicles - 510; flatbed vehicles and tank trucks - 11,369.
The following should be noted as the main conclusions from the experience of the combat activities of the OKSV in Afghanistan:
1. Introduced in late 1979 - early 1980 into the territory of Afghanistan, the grouping of Soviet troops found itself in very specific conditions. This required major changes in the standard organizational and staffing structures and equipment of formations and units, in the training of personnel, in the daily and combat activities of the OKSV.
2. The specifics of the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan necessitated the development and mastering of forms, methods and techniques of combat operations that are atypical for domestic military theory and practice. Throughout the entire period of being in Afghanistan, the issues of coordinating the actions of the Soviet and government Afghan troops remained problematic. Afghanistan has accumulated rich experience in the use of various branches of the Ground Forces and the Air Force in difficult physical-geographical and natural-climatic conditions.
3. During the period of the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan, a unique experience was gained in organizing communication systems, electronic warfare, collecting, processing and timely implementation of intelligence information, conducting camouflage measures, as well as engineering, logistic, technical and medical support for the combat activities of the OKSV. In addition, the Afghan experience gives
4. there are many examples of effective information and psychological impact on the enemy both inside the country and abroad.
5. After the withdrawal of the OKSV, hostilities between government troops and detachments of the Mujahideen continued until 1992, when opposition parties came to power in Afghanistan. However, peace never came to this war-torn land. An armed struggle for power and spheres of influence has now flared up between parties and opposition leaders, as a result of which the Taliban came to power. After the terrorist act in the USA on September 11, 2001 and the subsequent international anti-terrorist operation on the territory of Afghanistan, the Taliban were removed from power, but peace did not come on the Afghan territory.
Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)
This is the most bloody and destructive war of the last quarter of the 20th century. had a direct impact not only on neighboring countries and peoples, but also on the international situation as a whole.
The main reasons for the conflict were the intransigence of the positions of the parties on territorial issues, the desire for leadership in the Persian Gulf zone, religious contradictions, and personal antagonism between them. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini, provocative statements in the Western media about the collapse of the Iranian military machine after the Islamic Revolution (1979), as well as the inflammatory policy of the United States and Israel, which sought to use the deepening Iranian-Iraqi confrontation in their strategic interests in the Middle and the Middle East.
By the beginning of the war, the grouping of ground forces of the parties in the border zone consisted of: Iraq - 140 thousand people, 1.3 thousand tanks, 1.7 thousand field artillery pieces and mortars; Iran - 70 thousand people, 620 tanks, 710 guns and mortars.
The superiority of Iraq in terms of ground forces and tanks was 2 times greater, in guns and mortars - 2.4 times.
On the eve of the war, Iran and Iraq had approximately the same number of combat aircraft (316 and 322, respectively). At the same time, the parties were armed, with rare exceptions, either only American (Iran) or Soviet aviation equipment, which, starting from the 1950s. became one of the characteristic features of most local wars and armed conflicts.
However, the Iraqi Air Force significantly outnumbered the Iranians both in terms of the number of combat-ready aircraft manned by flight personnel, and in terms of the level of logistics of aviation equipment and the ability to replenish ammunition and spare parts. The main role in this was played by the continued cooperation of Iraq with the USSR and the Arab countries, whose air forces used the same types of Soviet-made aircraft.
The blow to the combat readiness of the Iranian Air Force was caused, firstly, by the severance of traditional military ties with the United States after the Islamic Revolution, and secondly, by the repressions of the new authorities against the top and middle-level command staff of the Air Force. All this led to Iraq's air superiority during the war.
The navies of both countries had an equal number of warships and boats - 52 each. However, the Iranian Navy significantly outnumbered the Iraqi ones in terms of the number of warships of the main classes, armament and level of combat readiness. The Iraqi Navy did not have naval aviation, marines, and the strike forces included only a formation of missile boats.
Thus, by the beginning of the war, Iraq had an overwhelming superiority in ground forces and aviation, Iran managed to maintain an advantage over Iraq only in the field of naval weapons.
The beginning of the war was preceded by a period of aggravation of relations between the two states. On April 7, 1980, the Iranian Foreign Ministry announced the withdrawal of the staff of its embassy and consulate from Baghdad and invited Iraq to do the same. From September 4 to September 10, Iraqi troops occupied the disputed border areas of Iranian territory, and on September 18, the Iraqi National Council decided to denounce the Iran-Iraq agreement of June 13, 1975. Iran strongly condemned this decision, saying that it would comply with the provisions of the agreement.
The fighting during the Iran-Iraq war can be divided into 3 periods: 1st period (September 1980-June 1982) - the successful offensive of Iraqi troops, the counteroffensive of Iranian formations and the withdrawal of Iraqi troops to their original positions; 2nd period (July 1982 - February 1984) - offensive operations of Iranian troops and mobile defense of Iraqi formations; 3rd period (March 1984 - August 1988) - a combination of combined arms operations and battles of ground forces with military operations at sea and missile and air strikes against objects in the rear of the parties.
1st period. On September 22, 1980, Iraqi troops crossed the border and launched offensive operations against Iran on a front of 650 km from Kasre-Shirin in the north to Khorramshahr in the south. In a month of fierce fighting, they managed to advance to a depth of 20 to 80 km, capture a number of cities and seize over 20,000 km2 of Iranian territory.
The Iraqi leadership pursued several goals: the capture of the oil-bearing province of Khuzestan, where the Arab population predominated; revision of bilateral agreements on territorial issues in their favor; removing Ayatollah Khomeini from power and replacing him with another, liberal secular figure.
In the initial period of the war, hostilities proceeded favorably for Iraq. The created superiority in ground forces and aviation, as well as the surprise of the attack, had an effect, since the Iranian intelligence services were seriously affected by the post-revolutionary purges and could not organize the collection of information about the timing of the attack, the number and deployment of Iraqi troops.
The most intense fighting broke out in Khuzestan. In November, after several weeks of bloody fighting, the Iranian port of Khorramshahr was captured. As a result of air strikes and artillery shelling, many oil refineries and oil fields in Iran were completely disabled or damaged.
The further advance of the Iraqi troops at the end of 1980 was stopped by Iranian formations advanced from the depths of the country, which equalized the forces of the opposing sides and gave the fighting a positional character. This allowed Iran in the spring and summer of 1981 to reorganize its troops and increase their numbers, and in the fall to move on to organizing offensive operations in separate sectors of the front. From september
From 1981 to February 1982, a number of operations were carried out to release and liberate the cities captured by the Iraqis. spring
In 1982, large-scale offensive operations were carried out in southern Iran, during which the tactics of "human waves" were used, which led to huge losses among the attackers.
The leadership of Iraq, having lost the strategic initiative, having failed to solve the assigned tasks, decided to withdraw troops to the line of the state border, leaving behind only disputed territories. At the end of June 1982, the withdrawal of Iraqi troops was basically completed. Baghdad made an attempt to persuade Tehran to peace talks, the proposal to start which, however, was rejected by the Iranian leadership.
2nd period. The Iranian command launched large-scale offensive operations on the southern sector of the front, where four operations were carried out. Auxiliary strikes during this period were carried out in the central and northern sectors of the front.
As a rule, operations began at night, were characterized by huge losses in manpower, and ended either with minor tactical successes or with the withdrawal of troops to their original positions. The Iraqi troops also suffered heavy losses, which conducted an active mobile defense, used the planned withdrawal of troops, counterattacks and counterattacks of armored formations and units with air support. As a result, the war reached a positional stalemate and increasingly took on the character of a "war of attrition".
The 3rd period was characterized by a combination of combined arms operations and battles of the ground forces with military operations at sea, which received the name "tanker war" in foreign and domestic historiography, as well as missile and air strikes on cities and important economic objects of the deep rear ("war cities").
The initiative in the conduct of hostilities, excluding the deployment of a "tanker war", remained in the hands of the Iranian command. From the autumn of 1984 to September 1986, they carried out four large-scale offensive operations. They did not give significant results, but, as before, they were extremely bloody.
In an effort to end the war victoriously, the Iranian leadership announced a general mobilization, thanks to which it was possible to compensate for losses and strengthen the troops operating at the front. From the end of December 1986 to May 1987, the command of the Iranian Armed Forces sequentially conducted 10 offensive operations. Most of them took place on the southern sector of the front, the results were insignificant, and the losses were huge.
The protracted nature of the Iran-Iraq war made it possible to speak of it as a "forgotten" war, but only as long as the armed struggle was conducted mainly on the land front. The spread of the war at sea in the spring of 1984 from the region of the northern part of the Persian Gulf to the entire Gulf, the increase in its intensity and its direction against international shipping and the interests of third countries, as well as the threat posed to strategic communications passing through the Strait of Hormuz, not only brought it out of the framework "forgotten war", but also led to the internationalization of the conflict, the deployment and use of naval groups of non-coastal states in the Persian Gulf.
The beginning of the "tanker war" is considered to be April 25, 1984, when the Saudi Arabian supertanker Safina al-Arab with a displacement of 357 thousand tons was hit by an Iraqi Exocet AM-39 missile. A fire broke out on the ship, up to 10,000 tons of oil was spilled into the sea, and the damage amounted to $20 million.
The scale and significance of the "tanker war" is characterized by the fact that during the 8 years of the Iran-Iraq war, 546 large ships of the merchant fleet were attacked, and the total displacement of the damaged ships exceeded 30 million tons. The priority targets for strikes were tankers - 76% of the attacked ships, hence the name "tanker war". At the same time, warships used mainly rocket weapons, as well as artillery; aviation used anti-ship missiles and aerial bombs. According to the Lloyd's Insurance Company, 420 civilian sailors died as a result of military operations at sea, including 94 in 1988.
Military confrontation in the Persian Gulf in 1987-1988. in addition to the Iran-Iraq conflict, it developed mainly along the line of aggravation of US-Iranian relations. A manifestation of this confrontation was the struggle on sea lanes (“tanker war”), in which the forces of the United States and Iran acted with directly opposite goals - respectively, protection and disruption of maritime traffic. In these years, they took part in the protection of navigation in the Persian Gulf
also the navies of five European NATO member countries - Great Britain, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium.
Shelling and searches of ships flying the Soviet flag became the reason for the dispatch to the Persian Gulf of a detachment of warships (4 ships) from the deployed in the early 1970s. in the Indian Ocean of the 8th operational squadron of the USSR Navy, subordinate to the command of the Pacific Fleet.
From September 1986, the ships of the squadron began to escort Soviet and some chartered ships in the bay.
From 1987 to 1988, the ships of the squadron in the Persian and Oman Gulfs in 178 convoys carried 374 merchant ships without loss or damage.
By the summer of 1988, the participants in the war finally reached a political, economic and military impasse and were forced to sit down at the negotiating table. On August 20, 1988, hostilities ceased. The war did not reveal a winner. The parties lost more than 1.5 million people. Material losses amounted to hundreds of billions of dollars.
Gulf War (1991)
On the night of August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait. The main reasons were long-standing territorial claims, accusations of illegal oil production and lower prices for it on the world market. In one day, the aggressor troops defeated the small Kuwaiti army and occupied the country. The demands of the UN Security Council for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Kuwait were rejected by Iraq.
On August 6, 1990, the US government decided to strategically deploy a contingent of its armed forces in the Persian Gulf. At the same time, the United States began to form an anti-Iraqi coalition and the creation of the Multinational Force (MNF).
The plan developed by the American command provided for the conduct of two operations: "Desert Shield" - an early inter-theatre transfer of troops and the creation of a strike force in the crisis area, and "Desert Storm" - conducting direct combat operations to defeat the Iraqi Armed Forces.
In the course of Operation Desert Shield, hundreds of thousands of people and gigantic amounts of materiel were deployed to the Persian Gulf region by air and sea in 5.5 months. By mid-January 1991, the concentration of the MNF group was over. It included: 16 corps (up to 800 thousand people), about 5.5 thousand tanks, 4.2 thousand guns and mortars, about 2.5 thousand combat aircraft, about 1.7 thousand helicopters, 175 warships. Up to 80% of these forces and assets were American troops.
The military-political leadership of Iraq, in turn, carried out a number of measures to increase the combat capabilities of its troops. Their essence was to create in the south of the country and in Kuwait
powerful defensive grouping, for which large masses of troops were deployed from the western and central regions of Iraq. In addition, a lot of work was carried out on the engineering equipment of the area for the upcoming hostilities, the camouflage of objects, the construction of defense lines and the creation of false areas for the deployment of troops. As of January 16, 1991, the southern grouping of the Iraqi armed forces included: more than 40 divisions (over 500 thousand people), about 4.2 thousand tanks, 5.3 thousand guns, multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and mortars. Its actions were supposed to support over 760 combat aircraft, up to 150 helicopters and the entire inventory of the Iraqi Navy (13 ships and 45 boats).
Operation "Desert Storm" as the second part of the general plan lasted from January 17 to February 28, 1991. It included 2 stages: the first - an air offensive operation (January 17 - February 23); the second is the offensive operation of the ground grouping of forces of the MNF (February 24-28).
The hostilities began on January 17 with strikes by Tomahawk cruise missiles at the objects of the control system of the Iraqi Armed Forces, airfields and positions of air defense systems. Subsequent air raids by the MNF aircraft disabled the enemy's military-economic potential facilities and the country's most important communication centers, and destroyed missile attack weapons. Attacks were also made on the positions of the first echelon and the nearest reserves of the Iraqi army. As a result of many days of bombing, the combat capabilities and morale of the Iraqi troops were drastically reduced.
At the same time, preparations were underway for an offensive operation of the ground forces, which had the code name "Desert Sword". Its plan was to strike the main blow in the center with the forces of the 7th Army Corps and the 18th Airborne Corps (USA), encircle and cut off the southern grouping of Iraqi troops in Kuwait. Auxiliary strikes were carried out in the coastal direction and on the left wing of the front with the aim of capturing the capital of Kuwait in order to cover the main forces from a blow to the flank.
The offensive of the ground grouping of the MNF began on February 24. The actions of the coalition forces were successful along the entire front. In the seaside direction, the formations of the US Marine Corps, in cooperation with Arab troops, penetrated the enemy defenses to a depth of 40-50 km and created a threat of encirclement of the Iraqi group defending in the southeastern part of Kuwait. In the central direction, formations of the 7th Army Corps (USA), without encountering serious resistance, advanced 30-40 km. On the left flank, the 6th armored division (France) captured the Es-Salman airfield with a swift blow, capturing up to 2.5 thousand enemy soldiers and officers.
The scattered defensive actions of the Iraqi troops were of a focal nature. Attempts by the Iraqi command to carry out counterattacks and a counterattack were thwarted by MNF aircraft. Having suffered significant losses, the Iraqi formations began to withdraw.
In the following days, the MNF continued their offensive in order to complete the encirclement and defeat of the enemy troops. On the night of February 28, the main forces of the southern grouping of the Iraqi Armed Forces were completely isolated and dissected. On the morning of February 28, hostilities in the Persian Gulf ceased on terms that were an ultimatum for Iraq. Kuwait was liberated.
During the fighting, the Iraqi Armed Forces lost up to 60 thousand people, 358 aircraft, about 3 thousand tanks, 5 warships, a large number of other equipment and weapons, killed, wounded and captured. In addition, heavy damage was inflicted on the military and economic potential of the country.
The MNF suffered the following losses: personnel - about 1 thousand people, combat aircraft - 69, helicopters - 28, tanks - 15.
The war in the Persian Gulf zone has no analogues in modern history and does not fit the well-known standards of local wars. It was of a coalition character and, in terms of the number of participating countries, went far beyond regional borders. The main result was the complete defeat of the enemy and the achievement of the goals of the war in a short time and with minimal losses.
A navigational template for an armed conflict (war or series of wars).
blank
((Armed conflict | conflict = | part = | image = | signature = | date = | place = | reason = | status = | result = | changes = | adversary1 = | adversary2 = | adversary3 = | adversary4 = | commander1 = | commander2 = | commander3 = | commander4 = | force1 = | force2 = | force3 = | force4 = | casualties1 = | casualties2 = | casualties3 = | casualties4 = | total casualties = | wikimedia Commons = | note = ))Examples
| First Defense of Tsaritsyn | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Main Conflict: Russian Civil War | |||
| the date | July-September 1918 | ||
| Place | Tsaritsyn Uyezd, Saratov Governorate | ||
| Cause | Establishing control over the strategically important city of Tsaritsyn | ||
| Outcome | White troops were thrown back over the Don | ||
| Opponents | |||
|
|
|||
| Commanders | |||
|
|||
| Side forces | |||
| Losses | |||
| Audio, photo, video at Wikimedia Commons | |||
Options
- Before the names of the commanders, it is customary to use the appropriate flags, emblems or coats of arms. So, for US military leaders, the seals of the relevant departments can be used (see Campaign in the Solomon Islands). It should be noted that the symbols of the corresponding historical period are used in the card.
- Before the names of the parties, it is customary to use the appropriate flags. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that state flags are used for states, regardless of the types and types of troops that took part in the armed conflict. In addition, it is worth considering that the card uses the national flag of the corresponding historical period (for example, to designate the US armed forces in World War II, a 48-star flag should be used). Example:((flag of the RSFSR 1918| 22px))
Card template for articles about armed conflicts.
| Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict | conflict | Name of the armed conflict | String (short) | optional |
| Part | partof | The name of the wider armed conflict of which the described is a part | unknown | optional |
| Image | image image | Image to display in the card | File name | optional |
| Signature | caption title | Image caption | String (short) | optional |
| the date | date date | Time frame for the conduct of armed conflict | unknown | optional |
| Place | place | Place of armed conflict | unknown | optional |
| Cause | reason casus | Cause(s) of the armed conflict. Not to be confused with the reason for the start of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Status | status | Conflict status (for ongoing conflicts). Mutually exclusive parameter with respect to the "total" parameter | unknown | optional |
| Outcome | result | Non-material result (intangible results) of the military conflict | unknown | optional |
| Changes | territory changes | Territorial changes resulting from the military conflict | unknown | optional |
| Opponent1 | combatant1 | Name of the 1st opposing side. All forces (states) acting on the same side in the conflict should be indicated | unknown | optional |
| Opponent2 | combatant2 | Name of the 2nd opposing side | unknown | optional |
| Opponent3 | combatant3 | Name of the 3rd opposing side | unknown | optional |
| Opponent4 | combatant4 | Name of the 4th opposing side | unknown | optional |
| Commander1 | commander1 commander1 | Name of the commander (names of commanders) of the armed forces of the 1st side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Commander2 | commander2 commander2 | Name of the commander (names of commanders) of the armed forces of the 2nd side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Commander3 | commander3 commander3 | Name of the commander (names of commanders) of the armed forces of the 3rd party to the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Commander4 | commander4 commander4 | Name of the commander (names of commanders) of the armed forces of the 4th side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Forces1 | strength1 strength1 | General forces of the 1st side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Forces2 | strength2 strength2 | General forces of the 2nd side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Forces3 | strength3 strength3 | General forces of the 3rd side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Forces4 | strength4 strength4 | General forces of the 4th side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Losses1 | casualties1 casualties1 | Losses of the 1st side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Losses2 | casualties2 casualties2 | Losses of the 2nd side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Losses3 | losses3 casualties3 | Losses of the 3rd side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Losses4 | losses4 casualties4 | Losses of the 4th side of the conflict | unknown | optional |
| Total losses | overall losses overall_casualties | no description | unknown | optional |
| Wikimedia Commons | Wikimedia Commons | String (short) | optional | |
| Note | notes | no description | unknown | optional |
see also
- ((Conflict))
