home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=91TT0663>
- <title>
- Apr. 01, 1991: How Moscow And Beijing Lost The War
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1991
- Apr. 01, 1991 Law And Disorder
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- WORLD, Page 40
- MILITARY STRATEGY
- How Moscow and Beijing Lost the War
- </hdr><body>
- <p>The allied victory is a sobering lesson for the world's two
- largest armies. It may be a prohibitively costly one.
- </p>
- <p>By BRUCE W. NELAN -- Reported by Jaime A. FlorCruz/Beijing and
- Bruce van Voorst/Washington
- </p>
- <p> The commanders of the world's two largest communist armies
- have seen the future, and to their horror, it works. Generals
- in Moscow and Beijing are organizing conferences and ordering
- up studies, but their conclusions are already clear: neither
- the Soviet nor the Chinese armed forces can match the
- high-technology weapons and tactics the U.S. displayed in its
- swift demolition of Iraq.
- </p>
- <p> It is not just that American M1A1 tanks made scrap metal out
- of Soviet T-72s, which they did, or that Iraqi pilots of
- top-of-the-line MiG-29s were unwilling even to engage U.S.
- planes, which they were. Worse, from the Soviet and Chinese
- points of view, is the fact that they have no counterparts to
- the Western weapons that won the war in its first few days --
- Stealth fighter-bombers, precision-guided munitions, electronic
- warfare. Hardest of all for the Soviet Union and China to
- accept is the near certainty that neither will be able to catch
- up with the U.S. anytime soon.
- </p>
- <p> In the decades after their successful revolutions, both
- communist giants built massive ground forces equipped with
- heavy tanks and artillery. Since the 1970s, their military
- leaders have also given lip service to the need for lighter,
- faster forces and high-tech weapons. Partly out of bureaucratic
- inertia and largely because their economies were not up to the
- task, neither country actually moved into the modern military
- age of microelectronics. "People talk as if the Soviets haven't
- done their best, and have to do better," says Stephen Meyer,
- a military expert at M.I.T. "The point is, their best wasn't
- good enough."
- </p>
- <p> Some of the conservative officers in Moscow are trying to
- pretend the Iraqi collapse never happened. Marshal Viktor
- Kulikov told a Soviet news agency that Iraqi soldiers had
- failed, not Soviet equipment. Marshal Sergei Akhromeyev, an
- adviser to President Mikhail Gorbachev, said any claim that the
- gulf war proved the superiority of American arms was "sheer
- propaganda."
- </p>
- <p> That kind of bluster is wearing off, and other generals are
- drawing pointed lessons. Defense Minister Dmitri Yazov told the
- Supreme Soviet in Moscow that Iraqi air defenses "failed in
- most cases." Furthermore, "we have weak spots in the
- antiaircraft system, and we need to examine them." The success
- of the American F-117A Stealth fighter, of course, throws into
- question the effectiveness of the whole $100 billion Soviet
- radar- and missile-defense network.
- </p>
- <p> The Soviets must also be shaken by the overwhelming speed,
- firepower and flexibility of the new American method of
- warfare, the doctrine called AirLand Battle, which combines
- air, ground and naval forces into one integrated onslaught.
- "They can't help being as impressed by the U.S. performance as
- they are depressed about what it means to their forces," says
- Raymond Garthoff of the Brookings Institution in Washington.
- </p>
- <p> A few reformers in the Soviet officer corps admit as much
- in public. Colonel Alexander Tsalko, former director of an air
- force training center and now a member of the Soviet
- parliament, says Iraq's defeat shows that Soviet military
- doctrine and the structure of its forces are obsolete. "Some
- military authorities in this country," he says, "still believe
- that the outcome of a war is determined by the clash of huge
- ground forces." That is "madness," he says, because the outcome
- in the gulf was determined by air power; Iraqi troops had no
- choice but to "keep their noses buried in the sand."
- </p>
- <p> Most of Moscow's brass, however, is not absorbing that
- lesson and is simply demanding more money. That is in part a
- knee-jerk reaction, conditioned by a series of shocks to the
- military system, like the humiliation in Afghanistan, the
- dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and two years of major cuts in
- the defense budget.
- </p>
- <p> Because Gorbachev is relying heavily on the armed forces to
- keep him in office and maintain order in the country, he may
- ease off on future spending cuts -- scheduled to reduce the
- defense budget 14.9% this year. But the Soviet economy is in
- such dire straits that it cannot provide the enormous amounts
- of money necessary to create the entire industries needed to
- duplicate U.S. battlefield technologies. "To be able to do as
- the allies did in the gulf," says Abraham Becker, director of
- the RAND-UCLA Center for Soviet studies, the Soviets "would
- have to revolutionize their economy." That is something
- Gorbachev has so far been unable to manage.
- </p>
- <p> China is even further behind in the high-tech stakes. A
- commentator in the military's Liberation Army Daily wrote of
- the gulf conflict, "We are seeing the warfare of the 21st
- century fought on the battlefield of today." The gulf battles
- were the antithesis of Mao Zedong's theories, which insisted
- that a "people's war" of massed armies would defeat any
- aggressor. Beijing began thinking about modernization recently,
- but with a defense budget of only $6.16 billion last year, it
- is hard pressed to deliver much more than basic equipment to
- its army of 3 million.
- </p>
- <p> Beijing is eager to buy new arms from the Soviet Union,
- though it must be having some doubts about the quality of the
- merchandise these days. China announced two weeks ago that it
- would provide the U.S.S.R. with food, tea, cigarettes and other
- consumer goods worth $730 million. In return it wants to buy
- combat aircraft, missiles and tanks.
- </p>
- <p> If America's smart weapons make Soviet hardware look bad,
- there is another lesson for Moscow and Beijing to learn -- one
- far less pleasing to the West. Saddam Hussein's mobile missile
- launchers proved very difficult to counter, and even his
- primitive Scuds, though little more than terror weapons,
- indicated the potential effectiveness of ballistic missiles.
- As a result, the Soviets and Chinese are now likely to base
- their defense even more heavily on missiles and nuclear
- weapons.
- </p>
-
- </body></article>
- </text>
-
-