COUNTERSTROKE AT SOLTSY - Strategy & Tactics Press
COUNTERSTROKE AT SOLTSY - Strategy & Tactics Press
COUNTERSTROKE AT SOLTSY - Strategy & Tactics Press
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Rescue at Entebbe<br />
Musashi Ronin<br />
Number 232<br />
U.S. $22. 99<br />
Wi t h Co m p l e t e<br />
historiCal Ga m e<br />
Featured Game:<br />
Catherine the Great (Solitaire)<br />
<strong>COUNTERSTROKE</strong><br />
<strong>AT</strong> <strong>SOLTSY</strong>:<br />
The Road to<br />
Leningrad 1941<br />
strategy & tactics 1
War on Terror<br />
This is the third game in the Lightning series. Fight the war on terror with America’s<br />
cutting edge weapon systems! You have been charged with hunting down terrorists<br />
aiding regions around the world and toppling their corrupt governments. To accomplish<br />
this, you have been given command of the latest weapons and best personnel<br />
America has to offer. You get to command elements of the Air Force, Army, Navy,<br />
Marines, Special Forces and Propaganda Warfare. War on Terror is an ultra-low<br />
complexity card game for all ages. The focus is on fast card play, strategy, and fun<br />
interactive game play for 2-4 players. Includes 110 full color playing cards and one<br />
sheet of rules.<br />
D-Day<br />
June 6, 1944, the day that decided the fate of World War II in Europe. Now you command the<br />
Allied and Axis armies as each struggles to control the five key beaches along the Normandy<br />
coastline. If the Allied troops seize the beaches, Germany is doomed. But if the assault fails,<br />
Germany will have the time it needs to build its ultimate weapons. You get to make vital command<br />
decisions that send troops into battle, assault enemy positions, and create heroic sacrifices<br />
so others can advance to victory!<br />
MiDWay<br />
From June 4th to June 6th of 1942, a massive battle raged<br />
around the tiny Pacific island of Midway that changed the<br />
course of World War II. The victorious Imperial Japanese<br />
Navy was poised to capture the airfield on the island of<br />
Midway and thus threaten Hawaii and the United States.<br />
The only obstacle in their path was an outnumbered US<br />
fleet itching for payback for Pearl Harbor. You get to command<br />
the US and Japanese fleets and their squadrons of fighter planes, torpedo<br />
bombers and dive bombers in this epic battle!<br />
TiTle<br />
QTY Price TOTAl<br />
Lightning War on Terror $19.99<br />
Lightning midway $19.99<br />
Lightning D-Day $19.99<br />
Shipping Charges<br />
Ziplocks count as 2<br />
for 1 for shipping.<br />
1st item Adt’l items Type of Service<br />
$8 $2 UPS Ground/US Mail Domestic Priority<br />
15(20) 4 UPS 2nd Day Air (Metro AK & HI)<br />
14(10) 2(7) Canada, Mexico (Express)<br />
17(25) 7(10) Europe (Express)<br />
2<br />
20(25)<br />
#232<br />
9(10) Asia, Africa, Australia (Express)<br />
LighTning<br />
SerieS<br />
a Fa s t & ea s y pl ay i n G Gr o u p o F Ca r d Ga m e s<br />
SUB To Ta l<br />
TaX (Ca. RES.)<br />
$<br />
S&H<br />
$<br />
ToTal oRDER<br />
$<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390-1598<br />
• (661) 587-9633 •fax 661/587-5031<br />
• www.decisiongames.com
Leningrad<br />
TiTle<br />
QTY Price TOTAl<br />
Shipping Charges<br />
Easy to Play Games<br />
This great introductory game covers Army Group North’s drive to Leningrad<br />
during the summer of 1941. It features hidden values for the Soviet<br />
units that only become known when they are involved in combat. Surprise<br />
attacks are essential to the success of either side, and the arrival of reinforcements<br />
can dramatically shift the course of battle. Leningrad features enough<br />
surprises to ensure that each game will be different and exciting.<br />
Components: 100 counters, 11” x 17” mapsheet, 8-page rule book. $14. 00<br />
Across Suez<br />
On 6 October 1973, troops of the Egyptian Third Army performed a<br />
masterful surprise crossing of the Suez Canal, overwhelmed the emplaced<br />
Israeli defenders along the Bar Lev line, and established themselves in force<br />
in the Sinai. The Battle of Chinese Farm is an operational level game that<br />
simulates the great battle between the Egyptian Second and Third Armies and the Israeli Defense Force as they<br />
battle for Suez canal. Included are special rules for commandos, Egyptian Marines and paratroopers.<br />
Components: 80 counters, 1 mapsheet, 8-page rule book. $10. 00<br />
Leningrad $14.00<br />
Across Suez $10.00<br />
Captivation $25.00<br />
1st item Adt’l items Type of Service<br />
$8 $2 UPS Ground/US Mail Domestic Priority<br />
15(20) 4 UPS 2nd Day Air (Metro AK & HI)<br />
14(10) 2(7) Canada, Mexico (Express)<br />
17(25) 7(10) Europe (Express)<br />
20(25) 9(10) Asia, Africa, Australia (Express)<br />
Captivation<br />
Be the first player to move all your cones around the board and<br />
into your home. Captivation plays like backgammon, only better.<br />
Unlike backgammon, everyone moves in the same direction. Two<br />
cones of the same color on one space are safe, however a single<br />
cone can be captured. When you land on a space with only one<br />
cone of another player on it, you stack your cone on top of it and<br />
capture it. Until you move that cone again, his or her cone can’t<br />
move! A captivating family game for two to four players that can<br />
be played in 30-60 minutes.<br />
Components: mounted board, rules sheet, dice and 40 cones. $25. 00<br />
SUB To Ta l<br />
TaX (Ca. RES.)<br />
$<br />
S&H<br />
$<br />
ToTal oRDER<br />
$<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390-1598<br />
• (661) 587-9633 •fax 661/587-5031<br />
• www.decisiongames.com<br />
strategy & tactics 3
Editor-in-Chief: Joseph Miranda<br />
FYI Editor: Ty Bomba<br />
Design • Graphics • Layout: Callie Cummins<br />
Copy Editors: Ty Bomba, Jason Burnett, and Jay<br />
Cookingham.<br />
Map Graphics: Meridian Mapping<br />
Publisher: Christopher Cummins<br />
Advertising: Rates and specifications available<br />
on request. Write P.O. Box 21598, Bakersfield CA<br />
93390.<br />
SUBSCRIPTION R<strong>AT</strong>ES are: Six issues per year—<br />
the United States is $99.97/1 year. Canada surface<br />
mail rates are $110/1 year and Overseas surface<br />
mail rates are $130/1 year. International rates are<br />
subject to change as postal rates change.<br />
Six issues per year-Newsstand (magazine only)the<br />
United States is $29.97/1 year. Canada surface<br />
mail rates are $36/1 year and Overseas surface<br />
mail rates are $42/1 year.<br />
All payments must be in U.S. funds drawn on a<br />
U.S. bank and made payable to <strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong><br />
(Please no Canadian checks). Checks and money<br />
orders or VISA/MasterCard accepted (with a<br />
minimum charge of $40). All orders should be sent<br />
to Decision Games, P.O. Box 21598, Bakersfield<br />
CA 93390 or call 661/587-9633 (best hours to<br />
call are 9am-12pm PDT, M-F) or use our 24-hour<br />
fax 661/587-5031 or e-mail us from our website<br />
www.decisiongames.com.<br />
NON U.S. SUBSCRIBERS PLEASE NOTE: Surface<br />
mail to foreign addres ses may take six to ten<br />
weeks for delivery. Inquiries should be sent to<br />
Decision Games after this time, to P.O. Box 21598,<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390.<br />
STR<strong>AT</strong>EGY & TACTICS ® is a registered trademark<br />
for Decision Games’ military history magazine.<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong> (©2005) reserves all rights<br />
on the contents of this publication. Nothing may<br />
be reproduced from it in whole or in part without<br />
prior permission from the publisher. All rights<br />
reserved. All correspondence should be sent<br />
to decision Games, P.O. Box 21598, Bakersfield<br />
CA 93390.<br />
STR<strong>AT</strong>EGY & TACTICS (ISSN 1040-886X) is published<br />
bi-monthly by Decision Games, 1649 Elzworth St. #1,<br />
Bakersfield CA 93312. Periodical Class postage paid<br />
at Bakersfield, CA and additional mailing offices.<br />
Address Corrections: Address change forms to<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong>, PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA<br />
93390.<br />
4 #232<br />
ConTEnTS<br />
F E A T U R E S<br />
6 Counterstroke at Soltsy:<br />
July 1941 the Road to Leningrad<br />
The Blitzkrieg receives an early check as the Red Army<br />
takes on the Wehrmacht.<br />
by Vance von Borries<br />
20 Catherine the Great:<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> in the Age of Enlightenment<br />
In an era of limited wars and enlightened monarchs,<br />
the Russians build an empire.<br />
by Joseph Miranda
F E A T U R E S<br />
RULES<br />
R1 C<strong>AT</strong>hERinE ThE GRE<strong>AT</strong><br />
by Joseph Miranda<br />
ConTEnTS<br />
42 Entebbe: Turning point of Terrorism<br />
The Israelis strike back and turn the tide in the<br />
war on terrorism.<br />
by Kelly Bell<br />
52 miyamoto musashi:<br />
Legendary Swordsman<br />
Japan’s greatest samurai creates a legacy of<br />
both war and philosophy.<br />
by Ltc a Pope<br />
dEpARTmEnTS<br />
31 for your information<br />
the maccabees:<br />
Hammer of the Hebrews<br />
by Kelly Bell<br />
Codename Blue Peacock<br />
by Mark Lardas<br />
naval mine Warfare During the Cold<br />
War<br />
by Carl Schuster<br />
Peace in Cambodia: untaC<br />
by Peter Schutze<br />
37 ThE LonG TRAdiTion<br />
58 mEGA FEEdbACk<br />
number 232<br />
jan/feB 2006<br />
strategy & tactics 5
<strong>COUNTERSTROKE</strong> <strong>AT</strong> <strong>SOLTSY</strong>:<br />
July 1941<br />
on the Road to Leningrad<br />
6 #232<br />
Axis units are in italics; Allied units are in plain text.<br />
By Vance von Borries<br />
The objective was Leningrad. From the shores of<br />
the Baltic in East Prussia to the marshes around Lake<br />
Ladoga, Germany’s Army Group North, commanded<br />
by Field Marshal von Leeb, struggled over an immense<br />
battlefield. Operation BARBAROSSA, the invasion of<br />
the Soviet Union, opened on 22 June 1941 and Leningrad<br />
was to be wiped from the earth. To the Nazis, the<br />
city was a symbol of the revolutionary origins of the<br />
Bolsheviks whose destruction would be an immense<br />
propaganda victory. For the Soviets, the defense of<br />
Leningrad was a test of will. The merciless struggle<br />
would be fought on the many roads to Leningrad. And<br />
one of those roads ran through the small city of Soltsy.<br />
It was there the timetable of conquest was upset and<br />
Army Group North lost its momentum.<br />
Plans<br />
Army Group North included two infantry armies<br />
(16 th and 18 th ) and one Panzer Group (4 th , the equivalent<br />
of an army, with Col. Gen. E. Hoepner commanding).<br />
In accordance with original BARBAROSSA<br />
instructions, debate began over the path of future operations.<br />
The plan was prepared under the guidelines<br />
of the Army General Staff (OberKommando der Heer,<br />
OKH) and were finalized in Army Group North’s order<br />
of 8 July. That order assumed that a Finnish offensive<br />
along the shores Lake Ladoga and an advance of 3 rd<br />
Panzer Group from Army Group Center northeast via<br />
Nevel toward Velizh would occur shortly after 10 July.<br />
Those operations were supposed to tie down Soviet<br />
forces facing Army Group North’s flanks. With Leningrad<br />
cut off, 4 th Panzer Group would take the city.<br />
Sixteenth Army would advance on Kholm and send<br />
a flanking force against Velikie Luki to protect the
strategy & tactics 7
8 #232<br />
army group’s southeastern flank. Eighteenth Army’s<br />
mission was to conquer Estonia and capture the Soviet<br />
naval bases at Tallinn and Paldiski. Units of 4 th Panzer<br />
Group were to move directly north to occupy the Narva<br />
crossings near Kingisepp, thereby preventing a withdrawal<br />
of enemy units from Estonia. The weakness to<br />
the plan was that until 16 th Army could move up, 4 th<br />
Panzer Group would have to defend alone against enemy<br />
counterattacks from east of Lake Ilmen.<br />
On 8 July OKH issued a directive significantly<br />
changing the plan of Army Group North. Army Chief<br />
of Staff Gen. Franz Halder was concerned about Army<br />
Group Center’s battle of encirclement in the Smolensk<br />
area. There were insufficient mobile forces to complete<br />
the envelopment, so 3 rd Panzer Group would not<br />
move north after all.<br />
More, Hitler wanted 4 th Panzer Group to cut off<br />
Leningrad to the east and southeast. Halder, who at<br />
the time assumed Army Group North enjoyed a clear<br />
numerical superiority, readily agreed to the plan.<br />
That shifted the main effort of the offensive to the<br />
Novgorod-Volkhov-Shlisselburg line and was also intended<br />
as support for the Finnish attack from the north.<br />
The Army General Staff also ordered infantry divisions<br />
to move toward Leningrad to make the mobile<br />
units available for other tasks as soon as possible. In<br />
sum, OKH stopped the preparations for a direct assault<br />
on Leningrad and demanded the shift of the main effort<br />
to the army group’s right. Leningrad would not be<br />
taken by direct assault. Instead, it would be by-passed<br />
from the southeast, encircled, and placed under siege.<br />
Army Group North accepted the order without<br />
much comment. That can only be explained by von<br />
Mastermind at work: FM von Leeb plans the attack.<br />
Leeb’s belief the Soviets would continue to withdraw<br />
if attacked, as had been the case up until then. More,<br />
the army group staff believed Soviet forces southeast<br />
of Leningrad were the last units in the area capable of<br />
offering serious resistance. And von Leeb welcomed<br />
the opportunity to rest his hard-driving formations and<br />
bring up fresh troops. He even doubted the Soviets<br />
were determined to hold the approaches to Leningrad.<br />
The View from Moscow<br />
Stalin and the Red Army Staff (STAVKA) divided<br />
the Eastern Front from the Baltic to the Black Sea into<br />
three “Glavkom,” or Directions, a Soviet military term<br />
with no western equivalent. Each Direction—Northwestern,<br />
Western and Southwestern—was roughly the<br />
equivalent of a German Army Group. Marshal K.Y.<br />
Voroshilov was in command of the Northwestern Direction.<br />
Stalin needed people he could trust to command<br />
each Glavkom, and Voroshilov was exactly that<br />
kind of man. He was a crony of Stalin’s from the days<br />
of the Russian Civil War and for some time he had<br />
been the People’s Commissar (Minister) of Defense.<br />
When Voroshilov arrived in Leningrad on 10 July,<br />
he had, on paper, at least 30 divisions available for<br />
the defense of the Northwestern Front; however, only<br />
five of them were at full strength, the rest averaging<br />
only about a third of their authorized men and equipment.<br />
Accordingly, the Soviet defense was to rely on<br />
fortifications. The Luga Line was the first of several<br />
fortified systems defending the approaches to Leningrad.<br />
About 30,000 civilians worked around the clock<br />
to build it. At the moment when Army Group North<br />
encountered the outer defenses of the Luga Line, the<br />
Luga Operational Group, with regular Red Army divisions<br />
backed by militia, had some 300 kilometers to<br />
hold. Reinforcements were committed out of the reserves<br />
held in Leningrad.<br />
Directly in the path of 4th Panzer Group’s advance<br />
was Gen. Lt. V.I. Morozov’s 11th Army. It had been in<br />
action since the beginning of the invasion, and its one<br />
tank and six rifle divisions were understrength. Soviet<br />
rifle divisions were normally expected to hold combat<br />
frontages of six to eight kilometers, but the rifle<br />
divisions on the front line were required to hold three<br />
times that. On 10 July, Army Group North outnumbered<br />
the Northwestern Front by 2.4 to 1 in infantry,<br />
4 to 1 in guns, 5.8 to 1 in mortars, 1.2 to 1 in tanks,<br />
and 10 to 1 in aircraft. When the Germans attacked,<br />
the Soviets retreated immediately. That was mainly<br />
due to the fact they were overextended and heavily<br />
outgunned, but also because they were out of range<br />
of army command. It seemed disaster had struck once<br />
again for the Red Army. Morozov was left with only<br />
blocking forces to stop the German drive to Leningrad<br />
and Novgorod.
Opening Moves<br />
Fourth Panzer Group began its advance on 10 July<br />
with two motorized corps using divergent roads. Manstein’s<br />
56 th Motorized Corps (8 th Panzer and 3 rd Motorized<br />
Divisions) advanced on the right in the direction<br />
of Porkhov-Soltsy-Shimsk-Novgorod. On the left was<br />
Reinhardt’s 41st Motorized Corps with three mobile<br />
divisions (1 st Panzer, 6 th Panzer, 36 th Motorized) and<br />
one infantry division (269 th ). Reinhardt was moving<br />
up the Pskov-Luga-Leningrad axis. Fourth Panzer<br />
Group was determined to get to the starting positions<br />
for the Leningrad encirclement within four days. That<br />
represented an advance of about 300 kilometers (190<br />
miles), a preposterous distance for the time allowed.<br />
The Germans could succeed only if they encountered<br />
neither resistance nor difficult terrain.<br />
A further dilemma arose when Fourth Panzer<br />
Group found itself unable to protect its 200 kilometer<br />
long eastern flank and, as events would prove, not<br />
even its own rear. On the other hand, all five of the<br />
mobile divisions leading the advance were in excellent<br />
condition, perhaps the peak of their effectiveness<br />
for the war. The one exception was the SS Totenkopf<br />
Motorized Infantry Division. It had taken considerable<br />
casualties in heavy fighting on the Stalin Line fortifications<br />
at Sebezh. As a result, Totenkopf had to disband<br />
one of its three motorized infantry regiments and was<br />
not in position to advance with the rest of 56 th Motorized<br />
Corps. On 12 July, Army Group North ordered the<br />
SS division moved to Porchov for re-organization.<br />
Nonetheless, 56 th Motorized Corps advanced swiftly.<br />
On 11 July Porchov was taken by Gen. Maj. Curt<br />
Jahn’s 3rd Motorized Division. Following behind was<br />
Correlation of Forces, Morning, 15 July 1941<br />
Soviets Ratio Germans<br />
Personnel 50,500 1.6 – 1.0 30,700<br />
Tanks and assault guns 105 .5 – 1.0 192<br />
Artillery pieces 199 1.5 – 1.0 132<br />
Comparison of Soviet 70 th Rifle Division to<br />
German 8 th Panzer Div. at Soltsy<br />
Soviet<br />
70 th Rifle Div<br />
8 th Panzer. Div.<br />
Soviet Account<br />
likely # of<br />
Germans<br />
All Soviets at<br />
Soltsy, 15 July<br />
Soviet: German<br />
Ratio<br />
Personnel 15,333 16,120 14,900 30,000 2.0 – 1.0<br />
Tanks 16 201 186 56 .3 – 1.0<br />
Artillery 53 60 48 95 2.0 – 1.0<br />
Note 1: Estimated total then engaged<br />
Note 2: Germans likely had still fewer tanks due to mechanical breakdowns.<br />
Gen. Maj. Eric Brandenburger’s 8 th Panzer Division,<br />
which moved quickly toward Sitnya, some 20 kilometers<br />
west of Soltsy. But 56 th Motorized Corps achieved<br />
little breadth in its penetration. Each of these two divisions<br />
advanced with only one assault group to the front.<br />
Facing them were small blocking forces of Soviet armor<br />
and infantry from Gen. Maj. M.L. Chernyavsky’s<br />
1 Mechanized Corps. To the Soviet rear, the remains of<br />
Col. V.K. Gorbachev’s 202 Motorized Rifle Division,<br />
reinforced with NKVD Destroyer Detachments, organized<br />
the city of Sol’tsy for defense, mobilizing armed<br />
detachments of civilians.<br />
With considerable resistance developing along the<br />
Luga road, on 12 July Hoepner switched the three mobile<br />
divisions of Reinhardt’s corps to the northwest.<br />
He hoped for a breakthrough to Leningrad over the<br />
Ivanovskoye and the Koporye plateaus, where the terrain<br />
was open. That left only infantry on the road in<br />
front of Luga.<br />
Hoepner’s decision was clearly incompatible with<br />
the OKH orders of 8 July. Nonetheless, the episode<br />
provides a good example of the comparative independence<br />
panzer commanders had at that time in the<br />
war. Manstein later writes that the change of direction<br />
was: “…a particularly risky move when one<br />
considered that even though the enemy<br />
forces engaged by the corps to date had<br />
been outfought, they were far from annihilated…Be<br />
that as it may, we were still<br />
convinced that the corps would continue<br />
to find its safety in speed of movement.”<br />
strategy & tactics 9
10 #232<br />
Manstein Alone<br />
On 11 July, Manstein issued Corps Order #21. The<br />
8th Panzer Division would advance along the axis<br />
Porchov-Borovichi-Sukhlovo-Soltsy with the objective<br />
being the bridge over the Mshaga River. The 3 rd<br />
Motorized Division would advance along the axis<br />
Borovichi-Saklinye-Vsheli-Mal Utorgosh, with the<br />
objective being the bridge over the Mshaga River at<br />
Medved. SS Totenkopf would remain in corps reserve<br />
under Army Group control. Engineers would continue<br />
building and restoring bridges along the Usa and Shelon<br />
rivers.<br />
The advance toward Shimsk began briskly on 12<br />
July in sunny weather. At Borovichi, Soviet blocking<br />
forces were driven off by 1 st Lt. Fronhoefer’s battlegroup<br />
of 8 th Panzer Division (III /Panzer Regiment 10,<br />
Motorcycle Battalion 8, II/23 rd Flak Battalion), which had<br />
led the advance from Borovichi. It faced increasing<br />
opposition all the way to Sitnya, where it established a<br />
small bridgehead. That night Soviet infantry supported<br />
by tanks counterattacked but were thrown back.<br />
On 13 July, Manstein issued Corps Order #22, calling<br />
for a continued advance toward Novgorod. Fronhoefer<br />
again led. His battlegroup was immediately en-<br />
gaged by Soviet infantry and tanks. At about 3:00 pm<br />
Fronhoefer’s men broke through after destroying over<br />
40 tanks. They rolled forward and reached the railroad<br />
line just west of Soltsy. From there a motorized battalion<br />
reinforced with tanks drove swiftly east, then<br />
stopped for the night.<br />
Meanwhile, the rest of Fronhoefer’s group reached<br />
the western edge of Soltsy. There they drove back the<br />
Soviet 682 nd Motorized Rifle Regiment (of the 202 nd<br />
Motorized Division). The 645 th Rifle Regiment counterattacked<br />
and a Red Army bayonet charge threw the<br />
Germans back five kilometers. Later that evening the<br />
Germans attacked again and secured Soltsy along with<br />
a large quantity of supplies. Soviet supplies were, however,<br />
notoriously incompatible with German needs.<br />
On 14 July, 8 th Panzer Division continued along the<br />
north bank of the Shelon River. A German forward detachment<br />
got as far as the Mshaga River near Shimsk,<br />
but found the bridge there already blown. Manstein’s<br />
flanks were wide open, 40 kilometers to the left and 70<br />
kilometers to the right he had to detach units to screen<br />
them. 8 th Panzer Division was spread over 70 kilometers.<br />
The Battlefield<br />
The Soviet Union often presents a picture of open steppe and endless fields of grain, but northern Russia, including the Novgorod<br />
region (the area of this battle), is covered by vast woodlands and dense thickets, with numerous swamps interspersed. To the German<br />
soldiers it was a gloomy primeval forest. Around Lake Ilmen, the terrain blocked offensive operations except along the few cleared areas.<br />
Roads were poor to abysmal, were poorly mapped, and generally followed the river lines. They led through sand, bog, forest and swamp<br />
and favored the defense at every turn. Some soggy roads may never before have seen the passing of a motorized vehicle.<br />
Rivers could be the best-defined lines for advance since they were on the maps and were generally free of dense foliage. Because of<br />
the time and resources needed for engineers to build pontoons, the Germans tried their best to seize bridges by quick raids.<br />
Woodlands presented special tactical problems. Both sides had difficulty getting their heavy guns off the roads. Once deployed, the<br />
artillery found targets hard to pinpoint. Area fire could be effective, but it required many forward observers. Telephone landlines were<br />
impractical, and radios were in short supply in the Red Army. Once a target was identified, special fuses were required or most blast effects<br />
were lost in the mud. And the defenders found it difficult to entrench in the marshes.<br />
During 1941, German formations at all levels tended to bypass forests and swamps. Mechanized divisions occupied the roads and<br />
sought to fight in open terrain. Generally, that forced defending<br />
Soviet infantry to retreat into the depths of the forests. German<br />
infantry would pursue no farther than necessary to protect<br />
the Rollbahn (the main German supply routes), and that actually<br />
suited Soviet tactics. Soviet units sometimes took bear trails, following<br />
Suvorov’s principle: “Where [even] the deer does not go,<br />
there the Russian soldier will go.” That played into the Red Army<br />
strengths of concealment, ambush, preference for close-in fighting,<br />
and adaptability to the elements. Later in the war many of<br />
the by-passed formations would plague the Germans’ supply lines<br />
with guerilla warfare.<br />
It wasn’t as if the Germans lacked intelligence about the<br />
region. Many repatriated Volksdeutsch and Baltic refugees were<br />
available to give detailed information. Air reconnaissance was<br />
plentiful, and numerous German officers had served in the Baltic<br />
region during the First World War and in the Freikorps campaigns<br />
following. Even clandestine intelligence agents provided information.<br />
Yet German military intelligence casually disregarded much<br />
of it and processed little of the remainder. So the Wehrmacht was<br />
fighting in an ever-increasing fog of war.<br />
Into the east: Motorized columns clog the roads.
The German plan called for 3rd Motorized Division<br />
to cover the corps’ northern flank, but that unit was<br />
experiencing its own difficulties. The road system was<br />
composed largely of narrow dirt paths cutting through<br />
swamps with few bridges. A detachment under 1st Lt.<br />
Feldkeller managed to push its way forward, but ran<br />
into an aggressive Soviet defense. The time was ripe<br />
for a counterattack.<br />
Counterstroke<br />
Soviet reconnaissance had established that the road<br />
along the Shelon River was choked with columns of<br />
German tanks and other vehicles. In the Soviet view<br />
the arrogance of the “Hitlerites” was such that they<br />
neglected the security of their flanks and rear. Eleventh<br />
Army staff quickly came to the conclusion the<br />
situation was favorable for launching a counterblow,<br />
where a gap of 100 kilometers had formed between<br />
the 41st and 56th Motorized Corps. The catalyst, how-<br />
ever, was a message sent on 10 July from G.K. Zhukov<br />
of the Supreme High Command in Moscow. Zhukov<br />
severely criticized 11 th Army for failure to launch a<br />
major counterattack and hinted of the consequences of<br />
continued inaction.<br />
With that inducement, the Soviet Northwestern<br />
Front commander, Gen. Maj. P.P. Sobennikov, decided<br />
to exploit the developing gap between the enemy<br />
corps. [The Northwestern Front was a subordinate<br />
formation of the Northwestern Direction. ed.] He had<br />
two primary objectives: disrupting the German offensive<br />
toward Novgorod and smashing the 56 Motorized<br />
Corps. Voroshilov formalized the arrangement by<br />
directing 11 th Army to make strikes from converging<br />
directions to encircle and destroy the enemy. Units of<br />
11 th Army regrouped into northern and southern operational<br />
groups.<br />
continued on page 14<br />
strategy & tactics 11
12 #232<br />
The Armies<br />
The Red Army<br />
The June 22 nd 1941 German invasion of the USSR caught<br />
the Soviet Union’s “Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army” at<br />
the worst possible time. It was still recovering from Stalin’s<br />
purges, in which thousands of officers at all levels of command<br />
were executed or exiled, effectively decapitating<br />
much of the Red Army. Soviet armies resembled their Western<br />
counterparts on paper, with corps controlling divisions<br />
and a plethora of support units the purge, however, as well<br />
as casualties, made it impossible to maintain that structure,<br />
so by the end of the year the Soviets eliminated the corps<br />
headquarters and made the divisions directly responsible to<br />
the army commander. In the field, units were often combined<br />
as “operational groups” for specific missions. That was an<br />
expedient, and it more or less worked until the Red Army<br />
could recover. At higher echelons, the armies were grouped<br />
into “fronts” (army groups) and those into “directions.”<br />
Then there was the reorganization of Soviet armor. During<br />
the 1930s, the Red Army had pioneered mobile warfare,<br />
creating mechanized corps of two tank and one motorized<br />
infantry division each. Those units had much potential, but<br />
the experience of the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) caused<br />
the Soviet command to believe large-scale mechanized warfare<br />
would not work. So they broke up the tank divisions<br />
into independent brigades that were supposed to be used as<br />
infantry support units. Then, prior to the German invasion,<br />
the Red Army reformed the mechanized divisions and corps.<br />
All of which led to confusion. Units lacked combined arms<br />
training, logistics were poor, and staffs ranged from inexperienced<br />
to non-existent; however, the Soviets had many<br />
excellent tanks coming off the assembly lines, such as the<br />
T-34.<br />
The Soviet air force was intended to be a direct support<br />
force. Air divisions were assigned directly to fronts and<br />
armies. Despite large numbers of aircraft, the Red air force<br />
performed poorly in the first year of the war. That was due to<br />
a lack of trained pilots, poor logistics, bad command control,<br />
and a general dispersion of effort.
The Germans<br />
German panzer groups were independent<br />
mobile units. Unlike the numbered<br />
armies, the panzer groups were not<br />
supposed to be used to hold sectors of the<br />
front, but instead were employed as operational<br />
forces to gain the decision. In<br />
the 1941 campaign, they were frequently<br />
switched across the Eastern Front to exploit<br />
opportunities. As a result, the Germans<br />
made some incredible advances, but<br />
at the cost of wear and tear on the vehicles<br />
and men. Among other things, German tank replacement was minimal<br />
in 1941, as Hitler wanted to use new production to build up<br />
reserves rather than committing tanks piecemeal at the front.<br />
The panzer groups were initially composed of motorized corps<br />
(later redesignated panzer corps), each with several panzer (armored)<br />
and motorized divisions. As the war progressed, the panzer<br />
groups were redesignated panzer armies and ended up holding sectors<br />
of the front. They also received considerable infusions of nonmotorized<br />
formations, with a corresponding decline in mobility. A<br />
major German dilemma, which was never resolved during the war,<br />
was their lack of strategic reserves. Crises had to be met by switching<br />
divisions across the theater of operations or pulling units from<br />
other fronts.<br />
The Luftwaffe in 1941 was still at the highpoint of its effectiveness.<br />
Its operational air doctrine and high state of training allowed<br />
it to concentrate anywhere on the front. The Luftwaffe was<br />
an integral part of the blitzkrieg, striking deep into the enemy rear<br />
and covering deep-ranging panzer columns. But its strength was<br />
frequently dissipated when used as a “fire brigade,” bailing out<br />
ground forces with close support and air supply.<br />
strategy & tactics 13
14 #232<br />
Reinforcements were already moving into the Luga<br />
Line and some were transferred to 11 th Army: Col. L.V.<br />
Bunin’s 21 st Tank Division, Gen. Maj. A.Y. Fedyunin’s<br />
70 th “Order of Lenin” Rifle Division, and Col. V.Y.<br />
Tishinsky’s 237 th Rifle Division were all allocated to<br />
the Northern Operational Group. Those divisions were<br />
facing the Germans for the first time, though the 70 th<br />
at least had the experience of fighting the Finns in the<br />
1939-40 Winter War. The Soviets were gambling, as<br />
the overall correlation of forces was only marginally<br />
favorable. They had insufficient armor and Red Army<br />
tactics left something to be desired at that time in the<br />
war, but they would enjoy a high degree of surprise in<br />
a favorable battlefield position.<br />
The counterstroke at Soltsy began on 14 July with<br />
subsidiary moves to set the trap. The Northern Operational<br />
Group, built around the headquarters of the<br />
newly arrived 16 Rifle Corps, attacked from the line<br />
Gorodishche-Utorgosh with two divisions toward Sitnya<br />
and with one toward Soltsy. The Southern Group<br />
was built around Gen. Maj. A.S. Ksenofontov’s 22 nd<br />
Rifle Corps (formed in Estonia of 180 th and 182 nd<br />
Rifle Divisions), and included the remnants of 202 nd<br />
Motorized Division plus the recently reformed 183 rd<br />
Rifle Division. It deployed facing the exposed German<br />
southern flank for a push north to Sitnya. The plan was<br />
Waiting for the Soviets: German antitank gun crew.<br />
for the groups to launch converging thrusts to encircle<br />
and destroy enemy forces. In the skies above, Soviet<br />
aircraft would provide direct support.<br />
At 3:00 am on the 15 th , the following radio message<br />
arrived at 4 th Panzer Group headquarters: “Rear area<br />
services of 8 th Panzer Division, three kilometers east<br />
of Borovichi, are defending against enemy attack with<br />
machineguns and mortars.”<br />
Throughout the 15 th , similar reports were received<br />
at German command posts. The Soviets had launched<br />
a powerful attack from the north into the flank of 8 th<br />
Panzer Division, and simultaneously from the south<br />
over the Shelon. That meant the bulk of 8 th Panzer’s<br />
combat units, being located between Soltsy and the<br />
Mshaga, were cut off from the division’s rear echelons.<br />
Further, the Red Army had pushed up forces from the<br />
south to close the German supply route. At the same<br />
time, advance elements of the 3 rd Motorized Division<br />
came under renewed attack by the 237 th Rifle Division<br />
at Maloye Utorgosh. In hard fighting, the 3 rd ’s troops<br />
repulsed seven Soviet attacks, some in hand-to-hand<br />
fighting.<br />
Forming the hammer of the Soviet drive was 70 th<br />
Rifle Division, which enjoyed a favorable local ratio<br />
of force. By 6:00 am on 15 July all of the 70 th ’s
Comparative Unit Strengths, 1941<br />
Manpower AFV MG Mortars AA DF Guns Artillery MT<br />
German<br />
Panzer ‘41 division 15,600 165 1,067 30 74 75 70 2900<br />
Motorized division 16,400 821 712 93 28 71 38 2800<br />
Infantry division<br />
Soviet<br />
17,200 3 643 142 11 79 70 942<br />
Tank division 10,940 475 ? 852 (2) (2) (2) ?<br />
Motorized division 11,600 326 ? 1582 (2) (2) (2) ?<br />
Infantry division, May ‘41 14,400 293 491 150 4 69 32 685<br />
Infantry division, July ‘41 10,700 - 279 78 6 34 8 249<br />
Manpower = full strength<br />
AFV = total armored fighting vehicles, tanks, assault guns; includes armored cars and half tracks in certain units<br />
MG = machineguns; includes anti-aircraft machineguns and vehicle-mounted weapons<br />
Mortars = total mortars<br />
AA = anti-aircraft guns, 20mm and larger; multi-barreled weapons count each barrel<br />
DF Guns = all artillery direct fire weapons and antitank guns larger than 20mm; includes some self-propelled pieces<br />
Artillery = all howitzers and multiple rocket launchers; includes some self-propelled pieces<br />
MT = motor transport vehicles<br />
Notes<br />
1) This number is cited in several sources, but seems to assume the attachment of a tank or assault gun battalion to the division.<br />
The number of organic AFVs was probably 20-30.<br />
2) Total all “guns,” weapons 45mm and greater (except 50mm mortars).<br />
3) In some divisions, 16 light tanks and 13 armored cars.<br />
Note: the diagram of the German 56 th Motorized Corps includes the 290 th Infantry Division, which was detached prior to the<br />
operations described in this article.<br />
units were in position. A last minute reconnaissance<br />
led to the 68th Rifle Regiment going around Soltsy to<br />
put it into position to cut off 8th Panzer Division. Detecting<br />
that movement, a German battlegroup of two<br />
battalions of motorized infantry supported by tanks,<br />
immediately attacked and penetrated into the 68th ’s defensive<br />
zone. But suddenly the German column found<br />
its own rear and flanks under attack. According to the<br />
Soviet account, the Germans panicked, leaving behind<br />
15 destroyed tanks and 200 dead and wounded.<br />
With the preliminaries out of the way, the Soviet attack<br />
developed in its full fury, with 8th Panzer Division<br />
standing alone against 3rd and 21st Tank Divisions, 22nd ,<br />
52nd , and 80th Rifle Divisions, and 22nd Rifle Corps,<br />
consisting of 180th , 182nd and 183rd Rifle Divisions,<br />
and the 202nd Motorized Division. The battle raged<br />
west to Borovichi as the Soviets crossed the Shelon<br />
River and thrust from the north with the 70th and 237th Rifle Divisions and parts of 21st Tank Division.<br />
By late in the day, 8th Panzer Division had divided<br />
into three battlegroups:<br />
• the Shelon sector under Oberst Scheller ( Infantry<br />
Regiment 8, I and III/Panzer Regiment 10, II/Artillery<br />
Regiment 61, Recon Battalion 59, II/Nebelwerfer Regi-<br />
ment 52, 8<br />
strategy & tactics 15<br />
th Panzer Regiment);<br />
• the railroad bridge sector under Maj. Schmid ( Antitank<br />
Battalion 43, Pioneer Battalion 59, Flak Battalion<br />
92, minor units, 8th Panzer Regiment);<br />
• and well forward along the Shelon River a battlegroup<br />
under 1st Lt. Crisolli (II/ Panzer Regiment 10,<br />
Infantry Regiment 28, II and III/Artillery Regiment 80,<br />
II/Flak 23, minor units of the 8th Panzer Regiment).<br />
Scheller found himself under heavy attack with reports<br />
of the Soviets at the edge of Soltsy. From above,<br />
Soviet aircraft attacked road-bound columns. By midday<br />
panic had set in with some German units. That<br />
evening, Red Army infantry was entering Soltsy but,<br />
since it was starting to rain, at least the Soviet aircraft<br />
were grounded. For the night, the battlegroups of 8th Panzer Division organized an all-round defense.<br />
The next day, 16 July, 8th Panzer Division fought<br />
while fully surrounded. Early that morning it withdrew<br />
from most of Soltsy and established its main defense<br />
line along the road west of the north-south railroad.<br />
A battle still raged over Soltsy airfield where German<br />
tanks came under direct fire from enemy anti-tank and<br />
artillery batteries. German motorized units attacked<br />
twice but were thrown back. Red Army pressure on
16 #232<br />
the German flanks threw the defense into confusion as<br />
room to reorganize simply was not there. The Soviet<br />
Northern Group, in particular 70 th Rifle Division, attacked<br />
again and at times fighting was hand-to-hand.<br />
After 16 hours of hard fighting, 8 th Panzer Division<br />
was on the verge of defeat, cut off from its path of<br />
retreat. The Soviets also succeeded in penetrating between<br />
the 56 th Corps’ divisions. Late in the day the<br />
Germans evacuated their last footholds in Soltsy.<br />
Meanwhile, 3 rd Motorized Division reported it was still<br />
under heavy attack.<br />
The Luftwaffe made a showing on the 16 th despite<br />
difficult flying weather. German bombers struck Soviet<br />
railheads and engaged Red Army columns. Destroyer<br />
Group 26 also made an impact with its Bf-110<br />
fighter-bombers, whose pilots were trained in close air<br />
support of ground forces.<br />
But the Soviet air force was also busy, attacking<br />
day and night with four aviation divisions and the 1 st<br />
Long Range Bomber Corps, in all about 235 aircraft.<br />
A particularly successful raid occurred on the night of<br />
15-16 July when the 4 th Composite Aviation Division<br />
of Col. I.K. Samokhin attacked a concentration of German<br />
tanks. In five days of action (14-18 July), the Soviets<br />
conducted about 1,500 sorties in the Soltsy area,<br />
compared to about 960 German, the latter spread out<br />
over the entire Luga front. Soviet bombers included<br />
bridges in their target list, forcing the Germans to deploy<br />
anti-aircraft units at each—and the 88mm highvelocity,<br />
dual-purpose guns were needed to counter<br />
Soviet armor.<br />
Soviet bombing accuracy was poor and the Germans<br />
generally held the initiative in the air. The Soviets<br />
usually came off the worse in air-to-air action<br />
because their aircraft were nearly all obsolescent and<br />
their pilots poorly trained. Yet air losses were not great<br />
for either side. The Luftwaffe was overstretched, try-<br />
Red eagles: Soviet aircraft in a makeshift field.<br />
ing to meet too many requirements across an expanding<br />
front.<br />
Southern Thrust<br />
The Soviet Southern Operations Group enjoyed<br />
success on the 16th , at least at first. On the far left<br />
Col. I.I. Kuryshev’s 182 Rifle Division had attacked<br />
Porchov on the 15th , taking the eastern part of the city<br />
and beginning to encircle the rest. Like the rest of the<br />
Southern Group, that division was too weak, and by<br />
the evening of the 17th it had been driven well back<br />
along the road to Dno with German mechanized units<br />
pursuing. During the 18th the division fell apart and its<br />
command was taken over by Col. M.S. Nazarov.<br />
Col. S.I. Karapetyan’s 183rd Rifle Division covered<br />
the center-left flank of 22nd Corps operations. Over<br />
a three-day period the division continually attacked<br />
German columns retreating to the west toward Borovichi.<br />
Early morning 16 July, units of the 183rd Rifle<br />
Division forced the Shelon River with a surprise attack<br />
and crossed the Novgorod road. The attack succeeded<br />
in demolishing a German column.<br />
During that engagement, an important role was<br />
played by artillerymen of the 624th Howitzer Artillery<br />
Regiment, led by Capt. Y. Leninis. According to the<br />
Soviet account, he gathered all the guns on hand in the<br />
division into one group, which with accurate fire inflicted<br />
heavy losses on the Germans. The Germans retreated<br />
in disorder and the road along the Shelon filled<br />
with burning German equipment.<br />
Prominent on the German side in this fighting was<br />
the 1st Munitions Column bringing forward ammunition<br />
in spite of enemy artillery fire. The Germans reported<br />
a total of 60 vehicles lost. The 183rd Rifle Division<br />
was unable to follow up on its success, and a<br />
request for reinforcements brought only a commission<br />
to count captured equipment. The Germans responded<br />
to that attack by sending up a battalion of the SS Totenkopf,<br />
a motorized infantry battalion from 3rd Motorized<br />
Division, the 48th Pioneer Battalion, and a company of<br />
tanks. Those units managed to stop the Soviets at the<br />
river line from Borovichi to Ilemno.<br />
The 3rd Tank Division’s 5th Tank Regiment fought<br />
actively in the area of Dolzhitsy, Gorushka and Sukhlovo<br />
under the command of Maj. G.I. Segeda on the 17th .<br />
The tankers claimed they encircled and destroyed an<br />
enemy force composed of up to 240 motor vehicles<br />
loaded with ammunition and fuel. That was likely the<br />
German group that had pulled out of Soltsy the prior<br />
evening.<br />
Seven vehicles were captured, one of which contained<br />
chemical shells. Also captured were secret<br />
documents of the German General Staff concerning<br />
preparations for the utilization of poison gas in the war<br />
against the Soviet Union (which, were never carried<br />
out). That was a politically difficult loss for the Germans.<br />
As soon as OKH found out, they requested a full
German vs. Soviet Armored Fighting Vehicles, 1941<br />
German Type Gun MGs Weight Armor Speed HP/Wt Crew<br />
PzKw Ib tank - 2 6.6 tons 13mm 40k/h 15 2<br />
PzKw IIf tank 20/55 1 9.5 tons 35mm 40k/h 12.8 3<br />
PzKw IIIe tank 50/42 2 19.5 tons 50mm 40k/h 12.8 5<br />
PzKw IVe tank 75/24 2 23 tons 45mm 42k/h 13.0 5<br />
PzKw 38(t) tank 37/40 2 9.7 tons 25mm 42k/h 12.9 4<br />
StuG IIIb AG 75/24 - 22 tons 50mm 40k/h 14.9 4<br />
Sd Kfz 231 AC 20/55 1 8.2 tons 14.5mm 85k/h 18.3 4<br />
Sd Kfz 251/1 APC - 1 8.5 tons 12mm 50k/h 13.0 12 1<br />
Soviet Type Gun MGs Weight Armor Speed HP/Wt Crew<br />
BT-7 tank 45/46 2 13.8 tons 20mm 58k/h 32.6 3<br />
KV-1A tank 76.2/30 3 47.5 tons 100mm 35k/h 11.9 5<br />
T-26b tank 45/46 2 9.5 tons 20mm 30k/h 9.5 3<br />
T-28c tank 76.2/26 3 32 tons 55mm ? 15.6 6<br />
T-34/76a tank 76.2/30 1 28.2 tons 60mm 50k/h 9.1 4<br />
T-35 tank 76.2/30 2 5 45 tons 30mm 29k/h 11.1 10<br />
T-60a tank 20/50 1 6.4 tons 50mm 49k/h 13.3 2<br />
SMK tank 76.2/30 3 3 58 tons 60mm 24k/h 8.6 7<br />
BA-10 AC 45mm 1 5.2 tons 15mm 56k/h 16.3 4<br />
Notes<br />
Gun = main gun bore width in millimeters/length<br />
of gun in terms of number of calibers (that is, multiple<br />
of the bore width)<br />
MGs = number of machineguns<br />
Weight = weight when combat loaded<br />
Armor = maximum in millimeters (usually frontal)<br />
Speed = maximum road speed in kilometers per hour<br />
HP/Wt = horsepower/weight (tons) ratio, a measure<br />
of the vehicles maneuverability<br />
Crew = normal operating crew<br />
Type AC = armored car; AG = Assault gun; APC =<br />
Armored personnel carrier<br />
1) Includes transported infantry<br />
2) The T-35 also had 2 x 45mm guns mounted in<br />
separate turrets.<br />
3) The SMK also had 1 x 45mm gun mounted in a<br />
separate turret.<br />
Red armor rolls.<br />
strategy & tactics 17
18 #232<br />
report from Manstein about the loss of those top-secret<br />
documents.<br />
At the center of Soviet 22 Corps Col. I.I. Missan’s<br />
180th Rifle Division began the offensive a bit later.<br />
Moving in a northerly direction from Dno, it advanced<br />
25 kilometers to reach the Shelon River. There it joined<br />
the attack in progress and took its share of prisoners<br />
and equipment.<br />
The Germans fought desperately to break out of the<br />
encirclement. From 15 to 16 July, the 202nd Motorized<br />
Division claimed it destroyed more than 100 enemy<br />
trucks, around 50 tanks, and a great number of personnel.<br />
Turning Point<br />
On 17 July the Germans undertook urgent efforts<br />
to rescue their troops. SS Totenkopf was released from<br />
army group reserves and entered the Sitnya battle. One<br />
battalion helped 3rd Motorized Division smash a series<br />
of Soviet armored and infantry attacks at the village of<br />
Baranovo. All told, 3rd Motorized Division repelled 17<br />
attacks that day, a good measure of how Soviet battle<br />
coordination was breaking down. With the approach<br />
of Totenkopf, 8th Panzer Division concluded its breakout<br />
to the west. It completed its move out of the front<br />
line on the 18th and went into reserve.<br />
By 18 July the crisis was over. The 56th Motorized<br />
Corps was firmly established east of Sitnya on a line<br />
Dubrovo-Baranovo, generally facing east by northeast,<br />
and still pressed by attacks from 70th Rifle Division.<br />
The earlier danger to the southern flank was<br />
removed as 1st Corps (11th and 21st Infantry Divisions)<br />
moved up in support. With the 182nd Rifle Division<br />
breaking, and the 183rd Rifle Division almost caught<br />
in an encirclement, the Red Army was running out<br />
of steam. But the Soviets were not yet finished. They<br />
German infantry walks.<br />
sent in additional forces, among which were elements<br />
of 1st Mechanized Corps. They proved insufficient in<br />
the face of German regimental groups reinforced with<br />
armor. The 5th Motorcycle Regiment found itself surrounded<br />
at one point, but the arriving 202nd Division<br />
restored the situation. On the morning of the 19th , German<br />
troops entered Dno and Soviet troops were in full<br />
retreat. On 20 July the strategic initiative shifted north<br />
of the Shelon, and the Red Army was also retreating<br />
there. The struggle for Soltsy was over.<br />
Endgame<br />
Soltsy was one of the most outstanding Soviet<br />
counterblows in the first months of BARBAROSSA. It<br />
played an important role in slowing the pace of Army<br />
Group North’s drive toward Leningrad and Novgorod.<br />
The Red Army had won valuable time for the organization<br />
of the defense of Leningrad and the arrival<br />
of reserves, and for the improvement of combat skills<br />
and morale.<br />
Still, the Red Army derived no operational lessons<br />
from the battle. There was little in the way of coordination<br />
between the converging columns. Overall command<br />
and control was poor. Essentially, the operation<br />
devolved into a series of attacks in which each division<br />
attacked on making contact with the Germans.<br />
There was also little coordination between neighboring<br />
units. Casualties in the assault waves could be up<br />
to 50%, and most divisions burned out quickly. No<br />
Soviet casualty figures are available for the Battle of<br />
Soltsy but the casualties could not have been any less<br />
than that typical elsewhere. As an example, 70th Rifle<br />
Division entered the battle over-strength with 15,333<br />
men; a month later it recorded only a few hundred<br />
troops still on the roster.<br />
The Soviets credited themselves with inflicting a<br />
defeat on a picked enemy force, throwing the Germans<br />
back 40 kilometers and routing 8th Panzer Division.<br />
Eighth Panzer Division was indeed cut up and out of<br />
action for about a month. Parts of 3rd Motorized Division<br />
and the rear services of the 56th Motorized Corps<br />
also suffered. Overall, Army Group North stopped for<br />
three weeks before renewing its offensive. It was those<br />
weeks that provided enough time to save Leningrad.<br />
German losses were serious but not disastrous.<br />
Some 50 tanks were destroyed or seriously damaged,<br />
and operational armor was reduced to about 100 as<br />
of 20 July. Yet many of the damaged vehicles were<br />
repaired. Troop losses amounted to about 550 killed,<br />
wounded, and missing in 8th Panzer Division, 220 in<br />
the SS Totenkopf Division, and proportionately the<br />
same in 3rd Motorized Division. That was a loss rate<br />
of 110 men per division per day for the period 14 -18<br />
July, which was typical of heavy engagements. Divisional<br />
replacement pools were exhausted and Manstein<br />
considered his divisions to be exhausted. Gen. Paulus,<br />
chief quartermaster of OKH, informed Manstein
on the 26 th that replacements were indeed available—but<br />
they were far back on the road to Germany. Much more<br />
troublesome were the equipment losses in 8 th Panzer Division.<br />
They were high and difficult to replace. Germany<br />
was too short on mobile divisions to have a panzer division<br />
knocked out of action for a month.<br />
Then came the delegation of blame. In his postwar<br />
memoirs, Manstein was critical of Hoepner’s decision to<br />
withdraw the SS Totenkopf Division from the right flank of<br />
his corps after its earlier battles to the south. Manstein had<br />
indeed requested on 14 July a return of SS Totenkopf and<br />
that was refused by Hoepner. It is likely the army group<br />
commander felt he needed at least some reserve for the<br />
attack on Leningrad. Manstein later urged the insertion of<br />
his corps behind that of Reinhardt’s on the lower Luga, but<br />
that was forbidden by Hitler. The Führer even followed up<br />
with a visit to von Leeb’s Headquarters on 21 July, where<br />
he demanded Leningrad be “finished off speedily.”<br />
With the defeat of 56 th Motorized Corps and stalemate<br />
elsewhere along the Luga Line, German forces paused to<br />
gather strength for their next general offensive. Hitler directed<br />
that any farther advance toward Leningrad would<br />
have to wait until the infantry of 16 th Army had secured<br />
the eastern flank of the army group. Later he authorized<br />
units of 3 rd Panzer Group and the whole of 8 th Air Corps to<br />
move north from Army Group Center to assist Leeb in his<br />
renewed offensive, scheduled to begin 8 August. Notably,<br />
plans still included the encirclement of Leningrad from the<br />
southeast, and in the end, that was accomplished if only<br />
by a narrow margin. But Leningrad was never taken.<br />
The objective: Leningrad, with Soviet militia mobilizing.<br />
References<br />
Carell, Paul, Hitler Moves East, New York: Ballantine, 1963.<br />
Dieckhoff, G., 3.Infanterie-Division, Cuxhaven: Erich Borries D.und V.,<br />
1960.<br />
Erickson, John, The Road to Stalingrad, New York: Harper & Row, 1975;<br />
p.182.<br />
Glantz, Col. David M., Forgotten Battles of the German-Soviet War (1941-<br />
1945), Vol.I., self-published, 1999.<br />
Haupt, Werner, Army Group North, the Wehrmacht in Russia 1941 - 1945,<br />
Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing, 1997.<br />
Haupt, Werner, Die 8.Panzer-Division im Zweitenweltkrieg, Freidberg: Podzun-<br />
Pallas- Verlag, 1987Yu.S. Krinov, Horst Boog, et al, Germany and<br />
the Second World War, Vol. IV, Oxford: Clarendon <strong>Press</strong>, 1998; pgs 541-<br />
542.<br />
Kislinsky, V.S., Net nechego dorozhe: Dokumentalnyy ocherk, Leningrad:<br />
Lenizdat, 1983.<br />
Kvaley, S.F., “202-ya strelkovaya diviya I ee komandir S.G. Shtykov,” Ha severo-zapadnomfronte,<br />
1941-1943, Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Navka,” 1969<br />
Levi, S. (ed), Borba latyshskovo naroda v gody velikoy otechestvennoy<br />
voyny (1941-1945), Riga: Izdatelstvo “Zinatne,” 1970.<br />
Lubey, L. (ed), Borba za sovetskuyu pribaltiky v velikoy otechestvennoy<br />
voyne 1941-45, Book One, Riga: Izdatelstvo “Liyesma,” 1966.<br />
v.Manstein, Eric, Lost Victories, Chicago: Regnery, 1958<br />
Salisbury, Harrison E., The 900 Days, New York, 1969.<br />
Sydnor, Charles W., Soldiers of Destruction, Princeton: Princeton University<br />
<strong>Press</strong>, 1977.<br />
Istoriya ordena Lenina Leningradskogo voyennogo okruga, Moscow: Voyenizdat,<br />
1974.<br />
Luzhskiy rubezh god 1941-y, Leningrad: Lenizdat, 1983.<br />
“Combat in Russian Forests and Swamps,” Dept. of the Army Pamphlet No.20-<br />
231, dated July 1951; and “Terrain Factors in the Russian Campaign,” Dept.<br />
of the Army Pamphlet No.20-290, dated July 1951.<br />
strategy & tactics 19
20 #232<br />
C<strong>AT</strong>HERINE THE GRE<strong>AT</strong>:<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> in the Age of Enlightenment<br />
by Joseph Miranda<br />
The Age of Enlightenment, roughly the period from the<br />
Treaty of Westphalia (1648) to the outbreak of the wars of<br />
the French Revolution (1791), was characterized by strategic<br />
parameters that led to a formalistic style of warfare. Military<br />
objectives were limited by the necessity to maintain the balance<br />
of power. Yet despite the formalism, a power operating outside<br />
the mainstream of Europe was able to build a continent<br />
spanning empire—that was Russia.
War and Society<br />
The Treaty of Westphalia brought to an end the<br />
Thirty Years War (1618-48). That war had originally<br />
started as another round in what was becoming a seemingly<br />
endless series of religious conflicts in Europe,<br />
triggered by the rise of Protestantism in the early 16 th<br />
century. The issues Protestantism raised went beyond<br />
religion and included fundamental political disputes.<br />
Since the rise of the Carolingian Empire in the 8 th century<br />
AD, the European ideal was to form a united state<br />
ruling over the entire continent. The Holy Roman Empire<br />
was an attempt to bring about this universal state.<br />
The Holy Roman Empire, as wits frequently described<br />
it, was neither “holy,” nor “Roman,” nor much of an<br />
“empire.” Not since the Dark Ages had even the city<br />
of Rome been included within the empire’s boundaries<br />
and, in fact, the papacy frequently fought against various<br />
emperors, the latter coming from various German<br />
houses.<br />
By the 17 th century, the Holy Roman Empire was<br />
little more than a collection of states in central Europe,<br />
loosely organized around a fragmented Germany with<br />
the capital in Vienna and the throne in the hands of<br />
the Habsburg family. Challenging the empire, not<br />
merely militarily but ideologically, were the rising<br />
national states of Europe The protestant churches of<br />
Sweden and England, since they did not acknowledge<br />
the supremacy of the papacy in Rome, provided an<br />
ideological counterbalance to the centralizing and universal<br />
appeal of “empire.” And even Catholic France<br />
frequently put its national aspirations higher than any<br />
pan-Catholic or even Christian interests, frequently allying<br />
itself with the Moslem Ottoman Empire.<br />
All that came to a head with the Thirty Years War,<br />
which initially pitted Catholic Austria and Spain (representing<br />
the empire) against Protestant German states<br />
and then Denmark and Sweden. But the nature of<br />
the conflict changed with the intervention of France<br />
against the empire. French national interests demanded<br />
Europe not be consolidated under a single great<br />
empire. The war came to an end with the aforementioned<br />
Treaty of Westphalia. While the treaty did not<br />
end warfare in Europe, it did fundamentally change its<br />
nature.<br />
The Thirty Years War was fought with unprecedented<br />
disregard for the civilian populace, with pillaging<br />
and devastation a normal part of operations.<br />
Aside from the moral issues, the destruction of crops<br />
and cities undermined the civilian economies. That, in<br />
turn, undermined the power of the governments to collect<br />
taxes and maintain order. The European governments<br />
decided it was time to restrain their armies and<br />
minimize the destruction. It wasn’t simply a matter of<br />
altruism, but also of self-preservation. Out of control<br />
armies were as much a threat to the kings and princes<br />
as they were to the citizenry. For example, Albrecht<br />
Wallenstein, the imperial warlord of the Thirty Years<br />
War, had amassed more power than the Hapsburgs and<br />
might have set himself up as emperor were it not for<br />
his assassination in 1634<br />
There was also the growing professionalization of<br />
the armies. Up until the mid-17 th century, recruiting<br />
was a haphazard affair. Soldiers were drawn from mercenaries,<br />
quasi-professional regulars, and remnants of<br />
feudal levies. Countries such as Sweden showed that<br />
a regular military with a professional officer corps<br />
was the way of the future. A regular army had the advantages<br />
of superior discipline and training. Recruits<br />
needed to be exercised in the drills required to employ<br />
the complex tactics of the day. Officers were drawn<br />
from the nobility, and that had the added benefit of<br />
putting them to some good use.<br />
Politically, the states of Europe were becoming<br />
more centralized. Feudal relationships were disintegrating<br />
and being replaced by central government administrations<br />
with taxation and nation-wide laws. That<br />
meant governments could mobilize far more strength<br />
than they could in the past, and did not waste time and<br />
resources in civil war. All that was backed by new ideologies<br />
that justified centralized rule: the divine rights<br />
of kings as well as Hobbes’s Leviathan.<br />
With well disciplined armies and centralized states,<br />
the European governments had instruments with<br />
which they could conduct warfare as if it were a game<br />
of chess. And, not incidentally the army could be used<br />
to maintain the monarch’s power by suppressing any<br />
rebels.<br />
In a sense, what the Treaty of Westphalia recognized<br />
was that among European monarchs there was<br />
no issue worth mutual self-destruction. By limiting<br />
conflict to disputes over the balance of power all states<br />
could be assured of their continual existence. Yet the<br />
Age of Enlightenment was also an age of war—even<br />
if limited. But the wars were fought not to conquer<br />
entire countries or to establish a European-wide polity.<br />
For the most part, they were “civilized” affairs that<br />
resulted in the acquisition or loss of a border province<br />
or two.<br />
Balance of Power<br />
The central feature of both war and international<br />
politics in this era was the balance of power. Simply<br />
put, the balance ensured no one European state became<br />
strong enough to dominate the entire continent. Effectively,<br />
that meant the old ideal of empire was dead.<br />
Each state would keep its integrity and, while borders<br />
might fluctuate, only minor gains and losses of territory<br />
would be allowed. Even a monarch as powerful as<br />
Louis XIV of France (1643-1715) proved incapable of<br />
defeating the balance. In the War of the Spanish Succession<br />
(1701-14), his attempts to set a relative on the<br />
throne of Spain led to a European coalition marching<br />
against him. Ironically, what saved him in the end was<br />
strategy & tactics 21
22 #232<br />
the same balance. The other European states saw Britain<br />
as becoming too powerful, and so withdrew from<br />
the anti-French coalition.<br />
Consequently, military operations tended to be<br />
conducted with an eye toward the postwar settlement.<br />
What was gained on the battlefield could be traded for<br />
advantages at the peace talks, and even the loser might<br />
come home with something. For example, during the<br />
Seven Years War, a French objective was conquering<br />
the kingdom of Hanover in Germany. The reason was<br />
the British monarchy had strong links to Hanover, and<br />
Paris could hope to trade any of Hanover’s territory<br />
that French armies seized for, perhaps, the return of<br />
French colonial possession in America or India that<br />
had been conquered by the British. Similarly, the Russians’<br />
gains in their 1787-92 war against the Ottomans<br />
were largely given back to the Turks owing to the pressures<br />
other European capitals put on St. Petersburg.<br />
While there may have been little love for the Ottoman<br />
Empire in Europe, there was even less desire to see a<br />
powerful Russia dominating the east.<br />
All that underscored a more fundamental dilemma:<br />
how did one actually conquer a country in the 18 th century?<br />
Charles XII of Sweden tried. In the Great Northern<br />
War (1700-21), he led a Swedish army deep into<br />
Russia. While he won some initial victories, they led<br />
nowhere strategically because his foe, Russian Emperor<br />
Peter I (the Great) refused to capitulate. And Peter<br />
had plenty of room into which he could retreat, given<br />
the expanse of his empire. So the Swedes plunged<br />
deeper into Russia, finally marching into the Ukraine<br />
to link up with Cossacks who were in rebellion against<br />
St. Petersburg. Charles finally attacked Peter at the<br />
epic Battle of Poltava (28 June 1709), and went down<br />
to defeat. The Swedish army was largely annihilated,<br />
and only after much difficulty did Charles make it<br />
home. Poltava is one of the decisive battles of European<br />
history insofar as it ended Swedish supremacy in<br />
northern Europe and also brought the emerging Russian<br />
Empire to the forefront as a great power.<br />
The Swedes had been out of their depth from the<br />
start of the Great Northern War. Swedish power was<br />
based on the Baltic, with the Swedish Empire including<br />
not only the homeland but also Finland, Pomerania<br />
in northern Germany, and the Baltic states. Swedish<br />
naval domination of the Baltic gave them interior lines<br />
of communication. Effectively, they could reinforce<br />
any part of their empire by sea. Economically, Baltic<br />
trade gave them the wealth to maintain the empire and<br />
also consolidate political relationships with the littoral.<br />
By moving deep inland in Russia, Charles was cutting<br />
himself off from his economic and military base. Even<br />
if he had somehow managed to defeat Peter at Poltava,<br />
he would have still have faced the overarching<br />
dilemma of actually ruling Russia. The Swedes lacked<br />
both the infrastructure to administer the country and<br />
the army to maintain order internally.
The Rise of Russia<br />
Modern Russia really began with the rise of the<br />
Muscovite state that, until the end of the European<br />
middle ages, was little more than a vassal of the Mongol<br />
Khanate of the Golden Horde. But a powerful vassal<br />
it was and, by the early 16 th century, Moscovy had<br />
largely destroyed the remnants of Mongolian power<br />
west of the Urals. The Russians then continued to expand,<br />
absorbing the ancient states of Novgorod and<br />
Kiev, as well as sweeping deep into Siberia and Central<br />
Asia.<br />
Of course, when dealing with assorted Mongols<br />
and Asian peoples, the Russians had little concern<br />
for balance of power issues. Consequently, conquest<br />
tended to be complete, including extensive colonization<br />
of subjected peoples. In a sense, it was a clash of<br />
civilizations. The Russians were better organized, and<br />
they also had a military advantage. Traditionally, the<br />
peoples of the Asian steppes relied on horse-mobile<br />
armies that were capable of outmaneuvering enemies<br />
both strategically and tactically. But the rise of modern,<br />
disciplined Western armies equipped with gunpowder<br />
weapons returned the tactical ascendancy to the Europeans.<br />
They could easily smash a nomadic army on the<br />
battlefield. Strategically, the Russians used a combination<br />
of forts, military colonies and secured trade routes<br />
to limit the mobility of steppe armies as well as extend<br />
their own rule. Then there were the personality issues:<br />
the rise of Russia took place in the era of such great<br />
leaders as Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great, while<br />
the steppe peoples failed to produce another Genghis<br />
Khan or Tamerlane.<br />
The constant eastern warfare gave the Russian military<br />
something of an edge when it came to the practical<br />
aspects of war. Commanders had to be good, or they<br />
would be annihilated. In the 18 th century, the Russian<br />
military proved adept at organizing mobile, combined<br />
arms columns to track down nomad foes. And Russian<br />
commanders such as Alexander Suvarov also became<br />
good at fighting and winning decisive campaigns.<br />
All that underscores the Russian divergence from<br />
contemporary European warfare. The Russians had<br />
a frontier into which to expand. The other European<br />
powers did not, at least not on the continent—hence<br />
their competition for colonies in the Americas and India.<br />
At home, the Europeans were forced into a limited<br />
form of warfare in which diplomacy and mutual preservation<br />
were overriding considerations. The Russians<br />
had more room to maneuver.<br />
Enter Catherine the Great<br />
Catherine, later known as the “Great” (see the sidebar<br />
on biographies), came to power at a unique time in<br />
European history. The year 1762 saw the beginning of<br />
the end of the Seven Years War, which pitted the great<br />
powers against each other both on the continent and<br />
around the world. Britain and Prussia emerged from<br />
the war as the leading powers of Europe, while France<br />
and Austria had their stars eclipsed by battlefield defeat<br />
and financial exhaustion. It was especially bad for<br />
France, which lost its colonies in the New World. [For<br />
more on the Seven Years War, see S&T nr. 231. ed.]<br />
Russia was in a position to assume the mantle of the<br />
primary continental power. And that Catherine did, by<br />
the usual method: war. During her reign (1762-96),<br />
continued on page 26<br />
strategy & tactics 23
24 #232<br />
The Players<br />
Abdulhamid I (1725-1789). Abdulhamid reigned as Sultan of<br />
the Ottoman Empire from 1774 to 1789, an era which saw<br />
Turkish fortunes on the decline. He lost wars to both Austria<br />
and Russia, the former power gaining Bukovina, and the latter<br />
the Crimea (an Ottoman vassal state) as well as a chunk<br />
of the Ukraine. His empire was saved from destruction only<br />
by the intervention of the other European powers, notably<br />
England, Sweden and Prussia, who did not want the Austro-<br />
Russian alliance becoming too powerful.<br />
Abdulhamid saw much of the problem with his empire<br />
was it had long since fallen behind the Europeans in various<br />
ways. He made some attempts to modernize the armed<br />
forces and to restrain the independent warlords, but it was a<br />
matter of too little too late.<br />
Frederick II (1712-86). Frederick, King of Prussia (1740-86) is<br />
generally known by his title, “the Great.” He is also known<br />
for personally commanding the Prussian Army in the War<br />
of the Austrian Secession (1740-44) and the Seven Years<br />
War (1756-63). Those wars resulted in Prussia gaining and<br />
holding the rich province of Silesia. More importantly for<br />
the history of Europe, Frederick established Prussia as the<br />
most important state in Germany and as a major power of<br />
the day.<br />
Frederick built up the Prussian army as a decisive instrument<br />
of warfare, emphasizing the military education of<br />
officers, severe training for the regiments, and the use of<br />
precision tactics on the battlefield. He proved adept at using<br />
the strategy of the central position to fight off his French,<br />
Austrian and Russian foes.<br />
Domestically Frederick considered himself an enlightened<br />
monarch, liberalizing various laws, developing the<br />
economy and supporting culture. He also corresponded<br />
with the great French philosopher, Voltaire. His final campaign,<br />
the War of the Bavarian Succession (1777-79), was<br />
a largely bloodless affair and became known as the “Potato<br />
War” due to the diet of the troops.<br />
Catherine II (1729-96). Catherine, in Russian Yekaterina, was<br />
born Sophie Frederike Auguste, the daughter of the German<br />
prince, Christian August von Anhalt-Zerbst. As was typical<br />
with much of the European nobility,<br />
she became involved in a political<br />
marriage to Peter, the grandson of<br />
Peter the Great (reigned 1682-1725),<br />
and heir to the throne of Russia. She<br />
arrived in Russia in 1744, which at<br />
the time was ruled by the Empress<br />
Elizabeth. Catherine found court life<br />
boring, but used it as an opportunity<br />
to educate herself for her assumption<br />
of power, becoming something of an<br />
advocate of popular ideas (among<br />
the aristocracy) about the Enlightenment.<br />
She also proved to be effective<br />
in charming assorted nobles and, in<br />
so doing, creating relationships that<br />
would enable her to later seized the<br />
throne.<br />
Elizabeth died on 5 January 1762. Peter became emperor<br />
and promptly ended Russia’s participation in the Seven<br />
Years War. Among other things, that saved Frederick the<br />
Great’s Prussia from being overrun by the coalition armies.<br />
Peter (raised in Germany) quickly alienated the aristocracy<br />
with his open contempt for all things Russian. He was also<br />
preparing to get rid of Catherine, but she struck first. On<br />
9 July 1762, she led the regiments that deposed Peter and<br />
then proclaimed her self empress, being formally crowned<br />
in Moscow in September of that year. Peter, meanwhile<br />
was spirited away and then assassinated.<br />
Catherine continued Peter the Great’s policies of modernization.<br />
Among other things, she secularized the properties<br />
of the Orthodox Church in order to balance the budget.<br />
She also convened a commission to look into establishing<br />
a constitution. Catherine had planned to emancipate<br />
the serfs, but the realities of Russia soon took precedence.<br />
Freeing the serfs would have meant losing the support of<br />
the nobility and the landowners, and possibly her throne.<br />
More, Pugachev’s rebellion shook her faith in tolerant policies.<br />
So instead, she tightened up on the serfs and increased<br />
the power of the state.<br />
Catherine fought a series of wars that resulted in the<br />
aggrandizement of her empire and, especially in Europe,<br />
would give Russia the shape it was to retain until 1918.<br />
She intervened in the ongoing Polish Civil War, placing a<br />
client ruler on the throne, then, in three partitions (1772,<br />
1793 and 1795), divided the country with Prussia and Austria,<br />
taking the eastern part for Russia. She fought two wars<br />
against the Turks (1768-74, 1787-92), annexed the Crimea<br />
(1783), and fought the Swedes to a standstill (1788-90).<br />
She probably would have had her armies march all the<br />
way to Constantinople had not the other European powers<br />
stopped her. Still, she did much to consolidate the hold she<br />
had on her domain, investing state funds in building towns<br />
and military colonies. She also had the services of some<br />
capable ministers and generals, such as Potemkin and Suvarov.<br />
The outbreak of the French Revolution shook Catherine,<br />
who, while dabbling in Enlightenment politics, was not<br />
about to surrender any of her own power and privilege.<br />
She died before she saw the world she had created challenged<br />
by that Revolution, but even so, in 1812 her Russia<br />
was able to absorb the full strength of Napoleon’s Grande<br />
Armee.<br />
Gustavus III (reigned 1771-92). Gustavus came to power in<br />
what amounted to a military coup. He made some attempts<br />
to restore Sweden to its status as a great power (lost owing<br />
to its defeat in the Great Northern<br />
War in the early part of the<br />
century), but had to deal with<br />
the growing power of Russia in<br />
the east. Fearing future Russian<br />
aggression, Gustavus declared<br />
war against Russia in 1788,<br />
and then launched an invasion<br />
while St. Petersburg was preoccupied<br />
with its ongoing Turkish<br />
war. While initially victorious,<br />
the Swedes were defeated on<br />
both land and sea, though they<br />
managed to pull off a final naval<br />
victory that gave them some<br />
bargaining power in the ensuing<br />
negotiations. The war ended in<br />
1780 with the restoration of the
status quo, but in the long term it was the Russians who were<br />
the winners.<br />
Maria Teresa (1717-1780). Maria Teresa started off life as a pawn<br />
in the great power struggle, but she became one of the greatest<br />
monarchs of the century as archduchess of Austria, Queen<br />
of Hungary and Bohemia, and Holy Roman Empress. When<br />
she was but a lass, Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI had gotten<br />
most of the powers of Europe to consent to the Pragmatic<br />
Sanction, in which they agreed to recognize a woman as heir to<br />
the Habsburg Empire—he was thinking of his daughter, Maria<br />
Teresa. In October 1740, Charles died, leaving Maria Teresa as<br />
the new empress. Fredrick II of Prussia refused to recognize<br />
her, his motive undoubtedly to seize the rich Austrian province<br />
of Silesia. The following four years of warfare saw Maria Teresa<br />
consolidate her rule as she raised troops and modernized<br />
the army.<br />
While the War of the Austrian Succession saw the loss of<br />
Silesia to Prussia, Maria Teresa embarked on a program of reforms,<br />
alleviating some of the oppression of the peasantry and<br />
restricting the power of the nobility. She was in part responsible<br />
for provoking the Seven Years War in 1756, in an attempt<br />
to regain Silesia. Among other things, she reversed traditional<br />
Habsburg policy by creating an alliance with France. And she<br />
was also, in part, responsible for bringing Russian interest and<br />
the Russian army into central Europe.<br />
Gregory Aleksandrovich Potemkin (1739-91). Potemkin rose<br />
to become the most powerful man—though not person—in<br />
the Russian Empire. His not-so-humble beginnings were with<br />
Moscow University and the Imperial Guard, and he was part of<br />
the coterie who made Catherine empress of all the Russias. As<br />
one of Catherine’s lovers, he maintained a high profile in the<br />
empire. More importantly, he was able to get things done. He<br />
performed well in the First Turkish War (1768-74), and later<br />
drew up the plan that would lead to Russian annexation of the<br />
Crimea. One of his other plans was the Greek project. The idea<br />
behind it was the Russians would dismemberer the Ottoman<br />
Empire and then set up a revived Byzantine Empire. The Russians<br />
went so far as to support Greek rebels and send a fleet to<br />
the Aegean in a remarkable voyage that brought the Russian<br />
navy from the Baltic to the Mediterranean in 1788. But the<br />
other European powers, while not enamored of the Ottomans,<br />
had no desire to see a Russian-dominated eastern Mediterranean,<br />
so the project was scotched.<br />
Catherine made Potemkin governor-general of the southern<br />
Ukraine. While he did much to develop the region there was<br />
a lot left undone. Supposedly, when Catherine toured there in<br />
1787, he erected facades of buildings along the way to give the<br />
appearance of a growing economy, hence the term: “Potemkin<br />
Village.” The Russian Navy later named a battleship after him,<br />
and in 1905 it became the scene of an abortive mutiny against<br />
the last of the Russian emperors.<br />
Yemelyan Ivanovich Pugachev (or Pugachov) (1742-1775).<br />
Pugachev, of course, was the man behind the Pugachev Rebellion.<br />
That rebellion did much to shake Catherine’s empire to its<br />
core. Yet Pugachev himself came from humble beginnings as<br />
a Don Cossack, and he fought as a soldier in the Seven Years<br />
War. Following service against the Prussians and Turks, he was<br />
discharged from the army as an invalid. Wandering throughout<br />
Russia, he became familiar with the various oppressions and<br />
cruelties of the government, and also with various dissident<br />
groups. Arrested in 1773 for desertion, he escaped and then<br />
raised the flag of revolution.<br />
Pugachev claimed he was really Emperor Peter III,<br />
Catherine’s deposed and executed ex-husband. Gathering<br />
a growing following of downtrodden peasants, displaced<br />
workers, dissident clergy and disgruntled cossacks, he soon<br />
swept over much of southern Russia, storming several cities<br />
and wreaking havoc on the nobility. By declaring the abolition<br />
of serfdom, he threatened the foundation of the Russian<br />
state and, with his armies approaching Moscow, Catherine<br />
had to do something. And something she did, dispatching<br />
an army under Gen. Suvarov that promptly smashed the<br />
rebels in 1774. Pugachev was betrayed by some Cossacks<br />
and turned over to government forces. He was executed in<br />
Moscow, defiant to the end. The interesting thing is Catherine<br />
recognized the problems that had led to the rebellion,<br />
mainly the deprivation of rights from the serfs, but could do<br />
little to change them insofar as serious reform would have<br />
threatened her own rule.<br />
Alexander Vasilyevich Suvarov (1729-1800). Suvarov was<br />
one of the major military innovators of the 18 th century. He<br />
was renowned for training his troops to fight according to<br />
the conditions of the battlefield, and he ran rapid campaigns<br />
in which he sought a decision. All that was at a time when<br />
parade-ground precision and formalistic campaigning were<br />
the order of the day. Suvarov began his military career in<br />
a Guards regiment, commissioned in 1754 as a lieutenant.<br />
He fought in the Seven Years War (1756-63), and wrote a<br />
training manual in which he advocated realistic field training.<br />
His later military treatise, called “Science of Victory,”<br />
emphasized speed and mobility, as well as attacks brought<br />
home at the point of the bayonet.<br />
In campaigns against the Poles (1768-72), the Turks<br />
(1773-74), and in the Caucasus (1782), he showed superior<br />
qualities as a tactician. He rose slowly in rank, though, not<br />
being especially favored in St. Petersburg because of his<br />
lack of manners. Nonetheless, he was promoted to general<br />
in 1787. There followed his victories over the Turks (1787-<br />
91), and his suppression of the Polish Rebellion (1794). At<br />
long last, in 1794, he was made field marshal and appointed<br />
commander of the Southern Army, but it was a short-lived<br />
triumph. The new Emperor Paul I (1796-1801), disliked Suvorov’s<br />
emphasizes on realistic training, preferring to mold<br />
the Russian army with 18 th century Prussian-style parade<br />
ground drill (Paul even brought back classic 18 th century<br />
uniforms.) Suvarov was unfairly accused of treason but exonerated.<br />
In 1799, with the French Revolution in full swing, Suvarov<br />
was recalled to the active list and given command<br />
of a new Russian army. He proceeded to clear the French<br />
from northern Italy and prepared to invade France itself, but<br />
was forced to withdraw when his Austrian allies met defeat.<br />
Returning to St. Petersburg, he found court intrigue had deprived<br />
him of official honors. While he died in 1800, he<br />
later became a Russian military hero and was undoubtedly<br />
one of the most successful commanders of his era.<br />
strategy & tactics 25
26 #232
The Turks<br />
The Ottoman Turks were once the mightiest military power in Europe, but by the 18 th century<br />
they had begun their long slide into eventual dissolution as an empire. The last real threat<br />
the Turks posed to Europe was in their 1683 invasion that reached the gates of Vienna before<br />
being driven back.<br />
One reason for the Ottoman decline was the devolution of power from the central government<br />
in Constantinople toward local feudal lords, the latter having their own interests that<br />
were not necessarily those of the sultans. The Ottomans could no longer mobilize the kinds of<br />
armies they once did for massive invasions. All that was happening at a time when the European<br />
powers were becoming more centralized and their armies more professionalized.<br />
The Ottoman military had traditionally been a combination of professionals, feudal levies<br />
and auxiliaries. The professionals included the Janissaries, who were elite infantry, and<br />
Sipahis (or Spahis), who provided regular cavalry. Ottoman nobles were required to provide<br />
levies of troops, and some of those were good. Finally, there were numerous auxiliaries, such<br />
as the infamous Bashi-bazouks, who came along for the loot. In the 18 th century, warlords<br />
raised many of the empire’s armies, and while theycould often be effective in the field, they<br />
did much to undermine the power of the government in Constantinople, since the local armies<br />
were often used to maintain the nobles’ power.<br />
On the battlefield, Ottoman tactics relied on mobility, perhaps too much so. Skirmishers<br />
would snipe at the enemy while cavalry would maneuver to envelop a flank. The Ottomans<br />
brought along large numbers of artillery to provide a base of fire. What the Ottoman system<br />
lacked was well disciplined infantry capable of firing in ranks. Instead, skirmishing was the<br />
order of the day. Even the Janissaries tended to fight in loose formations emphasizing individual<br />
action. By tradition, each Janissary could choose his own weapon from the Ottoman<br />
arsenals before going on campaign. Indeed, there is a certain irony there, for while European<br />
armies of the 18 th century are sometimes criticized for being too rigid and neglecting their own<br />
light troops, in the Ottoman military the situation was the opposite.<br />
There were men in the Ottoman Empire who tried to organize European-style army units, with well disciplined volley fire<br />
by the troops. But the innovators were resisted by traditionalists who saw nothing wrong with the system, or, believed if there<br />
was something wrong it was that traditional methods were no longer being fully applied. Too much change would undermine the<br />
traditional power bases of the empire, especially those like the Janissaries who had a vested interest in keeping affairs, especially<br />
military affairs, the way they were. In the end, the Ottomans would pay for that lack of foresight with defeat in a long and dreary<br />
series of wars with Austria and Russia.<br />
Catherine expanded Russia’s borders to absorb eastern<br />
Poland, the Crimea and Black Sea littoral, and the<br />
western Ukraine.<br />
Catherine also decided to reverse the Turkish conquests<br />
of the last several centuries by invading the Ottoman<br />
Empire. To that end, she supported Greek rebels<br />
and even sent a fleet to the eastern Mediterranean. That<br />
was an impressive feat for the day, given the general<br />
Russian inexperience in naval matters. The Russian<br />
fleet defeated the Turks in June 1788 in the Aegean.<br />
That victory, in conjunction with Russian and Austrian<br />
land advances in the Balkans, could have brought<br />
the Ottomans to their knees, but the Turks were saved<br />
when the other European powers intervened in order<br />
to maintain the balance of power. Still, Russian naval<br />
operations were an impressive display of military<br />
power.<br />
One of Catherine’s great triumphs was the partition<br />
of Poland. It was actually a series of land grabs by<br />
Russia, Austria and Prussia, working together in 1772,<br />
1793 and 1795. The result was the Polish state, once<br />
one of the most powerful in Europe, disappeared from<br />
the map and did not re-emerge until the chaos following<br />
World War I in 1918. While that seemed to be a<br />
violation of the balance of power, it was a special case<br />
in which the three great powers of eastern Europe were<br />
united in their objectives. More, Poland was located in<br />
the center of the three and on the front of their geopolitical<br />
lines of expansion. Another reason the great powers<br />
could partition the country was the Poles were fighting<br />
among themselves and were unable to offer a united resistance.<br />
Domestically, Catherine was in the same predicament<br />
as other Enlightenment monarchs. While advocating reform,<br />
too much reform would undermine her own power<br />
and that of the aristocracy who supported her. Inevitably,<br />
her reforms strengthened the power of the state by increasing<br />
revenues and reinforcing the military.<br />
The extent of Catherine’s accomplishments can be<br />
seen by looking at the map. The territory she gained for<br />
Russia exceeded in extent that of the entire Prussian kingdom.<br />
The effectiveness of the system she left to her descendants<br />
on the throne could be seen in the following<br />
decades, when Russia provided the wherewithal to defeat<br />
the forces of the French Revolution and Napoleon.<br />
strategy & tactics 27
28 #232<br />
The Armies<br />
18 th century armies had three basic arms: cavalry, infantry<br />
and artillery.<br />
Cavalry consisted of three general types: heavies, mediums<br />
and lights. Heavy cavalry, sometimes called cuirassiers,<br />
wore body armor (usually a breast- and back-plate)<br />
and were mounted on large horses. They were intended for<br />
shock action. An interesting touch was some armies gave<br />
their heavies a breast-plate but no back-plate. The idea was<br />
that was both a “compliment and a reminder,” that is, recognizing<br />
they never turned their back to the enemy, and if they<br />
did, they would be more vulnerable.<br />
Medium cavalry were usually called dragoons. Originally<br />
dragoons had been mounted infantry who could also<br />
act as general purpose troops, providing advanced guards,<br />
scouts and pickets, but by the mid-18 th century they served<br />
largely as combat cavalry.<br />
Light cavalry, often termed hussars, performed such<br />
functions as scouting and skirmishing but, again, could be<br />
involved in shock action. Some armies had auxiliary light<br />
cavalry. The Austrians had their pandours, while the Russians<br />
had the Cossacks. Often those axillaries were good at<br />
independent action but less effective in set-piece battles.<br />
Most infantry of this era were armed and equipped in the<br />
same way: with a flintlock musket, socket bayonet and short<br />
sword. The smoothbore muskets were effective in massed<br />
volley fire up to 100 meters. The limited range and rate of<br />
fire necessitated rigid “linear” tactics in which troops were<br />
placed in geometrically correct lines to maximize the number<br />
of muskets pointed at the enemy. Fire was either by ranks<br />
or platoons. Under the latter, an infantry line would be divided<br />
into sections or platoons, and each platoon would fire<br />
as a single unit. The advantage of platoon fire was it allowed<br />
for concentrated fire at a single point.<br />
The bayonet allowed the pikes, which once formed up to<br />
half of each regiment, to be dispensed with. The sword was<br />
maintained long after it had any battlefield use largely as a matter<br />
of décor. There is some debate about which weapon caused<br />
the most casualties. Probably, artillery was the chief killer on<br />
the battlefield, bladed weapons probably the least, with muskets<br />
somewhere in between. The main effect of swords and bayonets<br />
seems to have been psychological: a line of troops advancing<br />
with cold steel might break the morale of a defending line and<br />
cause it to flee.<br />
Most armies had units of grenadiers. Originally, they were<br />
soldiers armed with hand grenades, used by storming parties<br />
against entrenched enemy troops. By the 18 th century, the hand<br />
grenade had fallen out of fashion on the battlefield, but the<br />
grenadier units were maintained. They consisted of the tallest<br />
and bravest men, who were given the most difficult tasks such<br />
as leading assaults, or maintained in reserve for critical actions.<br />
They were armed much the same manner as line infantry,<br />
though often with more elaborate uniforms.<br />
There was some light infantry, though it seems to have<br />
fallen out of use with most European armies. That was odd, as<br />
up until the mid-17 th century it was standard practice for infantry<br />
units to detach parties of musketeers as skirmishers. They<br />
would move to the front or flanks to engage in fire fights with<br />
the enemy, or to seize objectives into which the more ponderous<br />
infantry formations could not easily move. The Austrians<br />
did have light troops, but they were auxiliaries. The French did<br />
some skirmishing in their North American colonies, while designated<br />
light infantry companies did not appear in the British<br />
Army until the late 1750s.<br />
Enlisted personnel were usually recruited from the lower<br />
classes of society; valuable citizens were not to be wasted as<br />
cannon fodder. The kings also feared arming the growing middle<br />
class, who might then use the military to deprive them of<br />
their divinely granted rights. It was not uncommon in the Russian<br />
military for lesser nobility to begin a military career as an<br />
enlisted ranker, but then move up rapidly.<br />
The highest regular echelon of command in that era was<br />
the regiment. Depending on the country, a regiment consisted<br />
of from one to four battalions. Higher units, such as brigades,<br />
“columns” and armies were generally ad hoc affairs; however,<br />
there was some experimentation with “legions,” consisting of<br />
infantry, cavalry and artillery.<br />
Armies also maintained special formations called Guards.<br />
Originally, they were the bodyguards of the sovereign, but by<br />
the mid-18 th century they were corps of elite troops. In Russia,<br />
the Guards were recruited from the nobles. That made them extra<br />
insurance for the emperor or empress, since they were presumably<br />
more reliable. On the other hand, the Russian Guards<br />
were frequently involved in factional infighting and palace<br />
coups.<br />
The Russians also maintained a special relationship with<br />
the Cossacks. The Cossacks were the descendants of peoples<br />
who had fled from the surrounding regions and settled along the<br />
Black Sea littoral and the Caucuses. The Cossacks maintained<br />
a rough democratic egalitarianism, and their leader, or hetman,<br />
was elected. They served as Russian auxiliaries in return for<br />
certain privileges and generally made fine, if undisciplined,<br />
light cavalry.<br />
One special Russian unit was the Gatchina Corps. It was<br />
set up by Catherine for her son Paul, so he would have an army<br />
with which to “play.”
<strong>Tactics</strong><br />
Battlefield tactics used combined arms. Artillery provided<br />
the firepower to break an enemy line and run up the casualties.<br />
Infantry would advance to finish off a shaken enemy<br />
or maintain a defensive wall of fire. Cavalry maneuvered<br />
and closed in for shock action.<br />
Several of the more effective commanders of the era<br />
emphasized infantry attacks with bayonets leveled: these<br />
included Charles XII, Frederick the Great and Suvarov.<br />
Charles’s use of the bayonet at Poltava in the face of entrenched<br />
Russian artillery led to disaster, but it worked on<br />
more than one occasion for the Prussians and Russians.<br />
When that tactic worked, it was inevitably because it was<br />
part of a much larger battle plan in which artillery was used<br />
to provide fire support.<br />
Frederick employed the attack in echelon to concentrate<br />
his sometimes numerically smaller army against larger foes.<br />
He concentrated one wing of his army against a vulnerable<br />
enemy flank, and that gave him great victories at Rossbach<br />
(5 November 1757) and Leuthen (6 December 1757). His<br />
use of the echelon tactic also led to stereotypical attacks and,<br />
as a result, his enemies were able to counter with such techniques<br />
as holding back reserves to deal with the threat.<br />
Toward the end of the 18 th century, there was much experimentation<br />
with skirmish and column formations. Columns<br />
were not a reversion to phalanx-style mass attacks<br />
with cold steel; rather, columns were essentially deep infantry<br />
formations used to maneuver units about the battlefield.<br />
Meanwhile clouds of skirmishers would snipe at the enemy<br />
in order to keep him pinned down and disrupt his formations.<br />
When the enemy’s line was sufficiently dislocated,<br />
or a vulnerability found, the commander would launch his<br />
infantry to take advantage of the situation. The artillery, of<br />
course, was doing the majority of the killing, and what the<br />
column-skirmish tactics were supposed to do was keep the<br />
main line of infantry out of contact with the enemy until the<br />
decisive movement. Those tactics did not reach full fruition,<br />
however, until the Napoleonic era.<br />
strategy & tactics 29
To purchase the game that covers the battles featured in<br />
this issue send your name and address along with:<br />
$23 US Customers<br />
$25 Canadian Customers<br />
$28 Overseas Customers All prices include postage for first class or airmail shipping.<br />
CA residents add ($1.09) sales tax. Send to:<br />
Decision Games<br />
<strong>AT</strong>TN: S&T Game Offer<br />
PO Box 21598<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390<br />
30 #232<br />
Now you can experience this epic period with<br />
Catherine the Great<br />
C<strong>AT</strong>HERINE THE GRE<strong>AT</strong> is a purposed-designed solitaire wargame of the expansion of the Russian Empire under Empress<br />
Catherine II (1762-96). The player conducts the affairs of the Russian Empire and its allies, while the game system does the same<br />
for the anti-Russian coalition made up of a shifting alliance of powers.<br />
Central to play of the game are its ‘policy cards.’ They trigger various strategies, powers at war, and other events that shape the<br />
general course of play. Policy cards are activated in one of two ways: the Empire player can choose which policies he will activate,<br />
while coalition policies are activated by the draw of markers. The Empire player may move his forces freely. The game system<br />
moves coalition forces according to a schedule of precedence.<br />
The objective of the game is for the Russian Empire to have gained an advantageous position at the end of play, measured in<br />
terms of geographic objectives. The player must, however, also look toward maintaining the “balance of power,” or he may face<br />
disintegration of the entire European state system. Depending on how well the player attains his objectives, will be the thing that<br />
determines the nature of victory.<br />
While Catherine the Great has been designed to be a solitaire game, more than one can play at the same time as part of a Russian<br />
Empire command team. Player’s can divvy up responsibilities as they please for different parts of the Russian Empire, with<br />
the most veteran gamer taking the role of Czar and deciding who gets what resources.<br />
Each region represents a distinct geographic area or province within a power. Each unit represents an entire army or fleet. Each<br />
turn represents five years. Designed by Joseph Miranda.
Did you Know<br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
The “America First Committee”<br />
was an isolationist lobbying<br />
group organized in the US shortly<br />
after war broke out in Europe<br />
in 1939. At its peak, just prior to<br />
Pearl Harbor, the committee had<br />
850,000 members, all dedicated<br />
to keeping America out of World<br />
War II. Among some of the more<br />
prominent were: future presidents<br />
Gerald Ford and John F.<br />
Kennedy; ex-president Herbert<br />
Hoover; authors Sinclair Lewis,<br />
Henry Miller and Gore Vidal;<br />
architect Frank Lloyd Wright;<br />
historian Charles Beard; poet<br />
e.e. cummings; aviator Charles<br />
Lindbergh; and media pundit<br />
H.L. Mencken.<br />
The US Army presently deploys<br />
over 10,000 computers at brigade-level<br />
and below.<br />
During the June 2005 reenactment<br />
of the naval Battle of<br />
Trafalgar, held to mark its 200th anniversary, some 150 sailing<br />
ships from over 35 countries<br />
converged in the waters of the<br />
English Channel. In order not to<br />
offend any participants from nations<br />
whose forebears had been<br />
on the losing side of that great<br />
Nelsonian victory (namely the<br />
French and Spanish), the British<br />
sponsors of the event referred<br />
to the two sides only as the “red<br />
team” and the “blue team.”<br />
From May 1917 through November<br />
1918, when the Allies’<br />
trans-Atlantic convoy system<br />
between the US and Europe was<br />
in force, there were 1,134 such<br />
groupings containing a total of<br />
16,693 merchant vessels. Despite<br />
the threat of German U-boats,<br />
fully 99 percent of those ships<br />
made it across unscathed.<br />
An emerging school of thought<br />
among today’s military strategists<br />
holds that by 2025 the main<br />
causes for war will be natural<br />
resource acquisition and control.<br />
Between now and then, world<br />
•<br />
•<br />
population is expected to increase<br />
from 6.3 to 8 billion, and<br />
fully 80 percent of that growth<br />
will take place in countries least<br />
capable of supporting it. Water<br />
and energy are expected to become<br />
the two most fought over<br />
resources.<br />
Judging by the basic assumptions<br />
used to govern Pentagon<br />
wargames these days, two new<br />
factors have been added into US<br />
planning for future campaigns in<br />
the War on Terror. First, this war<br />
is now expected to take up to<br />
eight years to be fully resolved.<br />
Second, neither Republican nor<br />
Democratic administrations are<br />
seen as being willing to mobilize,<br />
or even inconvenience, the<br />
nation’s citizenry and economy<br />
for war. That means all plans<br />
must take into account that<br />
large-scale reinforcements will<br />
likely not be available should<br />
something go wrong, while<br />
at the same time allowing for<br />
campaigning across time spans<br />
too long to make for easy control<br />
of outside variables.<br />
An emerging hot spot in the<br />
War on Terror is the sparsely<br />
settled tri-border area shared by<br />
the South American nations of<br />
Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay.<br />
In the past few years the Mid-<br />
East terrorist groups Hezbollah,<br />
Hamas and Jemaah Islamiyah<br />
have all set up cells there. Their<br />
main activities are arms and<br />
drug trafficking, counterfeiting,<br />
money laundering, software<br />
piracy and selling forged travel<br />
documents.<br />
We need writers for this FYI column.<br />
If you can write tight, pithy articles of<br />
no more than 2,000 words on interesting,<br />
obscure, or otherwise little known<br />
aspects of military history, contact the<br />
FYI editor, Ty Bomba by emailing him<br />
at: <br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
FYI<br />
For Your information<br />
The US Army presently has<br />
51,000 personnel assigned at<br />
brigade-level and below whose<br />
main task is collecting and<br />
analyzing intelligence data. By<br />
2011 that number is planned to<br />
increase to 66,000.<br />
During the next 12 years the US<br />
Army will spend an estimated<br />
$18 to $20 billion on new trucks.<br />
According to the main planning<br />
document for that spending,<br />
titled “Tactical Wheeled Vehicles<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong>,” all future truck purchases<br />
must be at least “armor<br />
ready.” That is, even if they<br />
come off the assembly line unarmored,<br />
they must be so designed<br />
as to readily accept “protective<br />
kit upgrades” in the field, should<br />
that become necessary.<br />
As of September 2004, the<br />
defense of the greater Washington,<br />
DC, area has been entrusted<br />
to the Joint Forces Headquarters<br />
- National Capital Region<br />
(JFHQ-NCR). Headquartered at<br />
Fort Lesley J. McNair, within the<br />
city, the new command organization<br />
has approximately 4,000<br />
personnel immediately available<br />
to defend the capital and the<br />
surrounding counties, organized<br />
as follows:<br />
strategy & tactics 31
32 #232<br />
the maccabees:<br />
Hammer of the<br />
Hebrews<br />
from the Dustbin of History<br />
In 167 BC a war for freedom<br />
erupted in Judea, at that time a province<br />
within the Seleucid Empire. The<br />
Seleucids were one of the dynasties<br />
descended from the Macedonian<br />
generals who’d succeeded Alexander<br />
the Great following the breakup of his<br />
empire. In 198 the Seleucids, based<br />
in Syria, seized the Jewish homeland,<br />
which had recently been under the<br />
suzerainty of the Ptolemies of Egypt,<br />
the latter yet another Macedonian<br />
dynasty.<br />
At first the change in occupying<br />
forces had little effect on the Jewish<br />
people, who remained free to practice<br />
nominal self-government and, most<br />
importantly, their religion. Generations<br />
of Judeans were accustomed to<br />
benign overlords, and Antiochus III,<br />
the Seleucid ruler, was no different in<br />
that regard. Upon his death and the<br />
installation of his son Antiochus IV<br />
Epiphanes in 175, however, intolerance<br />
and tension became the order of<br />
the day.<br />
Hoping to simplify the job of<br />
ruling, Antiochus IV ordered a new<br />
policy in 168, imposing a common<br />
Greek language, culture and religion<br />
(Hellenism) throughout his empire.<br />
Of course, attempting to force the<br />
Jews to worship the pantheon of<br />
Greek deities was an unsustainable<br />
error. Rioting broke out in Jerusalem.<br />
Antiochus dispatched one of his<br />
most competent generals, Appolonius,<br />
to quell the insurrection. Seleucid<br />
troops soon thereafter massacred most<br />
of Jerusalem’s population and burned<br />
all documents they found containing<br />
Mosaic law. They also looted the<br />
Temple of Solomon and desecrated<br />
its sanctuary by converting it into a<br />
“Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier.”<br />
shrine to Zeus. Word of the atrocities<br />
spread swiftly and general rebellion<br />
erupted across Judea.<br />
When a Seleucid officer named<br />
Apelles took his small command to<br />
occupy the Judean village of Modiin,<br />
its inhabitants, led by their priest<br />
Mattathias, rose up and wiped out the<br />
intruders. It was the first in a long line<br />
of military reverses for Syria in what<br />
came to be called the “Maccabean<br />
Revolt.”<br />
It took a year for the Seleucids to<br />
even learn the fate of their missing<br />
troops. By then Mattathias had died<br />
and one of his five sons, Judah the<br />
Maccabee, had succeeded him as<br />
Jewish commander. The rebels spent<br />
the hiatus recruiting, training and<br />
gathering information.<br />
With a keen military mind, Judah<br />
realized he would have to start slowly,<br />
building up his army to the point<br />
where it could confront the Seleucid<br />
military machine. He recruited soldiers<br />
and created confidence as well<br />
as combat experience by conducting<br />
raids and ambushes. His men<br />
annihilated Seleucid patrols, leaving<br />
no enemy troops alive to report the<br />
action. The Jews used their tactical<br />
successes to assemble an arsenal of<br />
weapons captured in those fights.<br />
Judah also labored to train his men in<br />
unconventional tactics against which<br />
their dogma-bound opponents would<br />
be unprepared.<br />
The Seleucids’ main battle tactic<br />
centered on the phalanx. Heavily<br />
armed and armored infantry were<br />
packed together in a tight formation,<br />
each line shoulder to shoulder. Their<br />
smallest phalanxes contained 2,000<br />
men deployed in areas 120 yards<br />
wide and 15 yards deep. Soldiers<br />
in the first five lines held their long<br />
spears horizontally, while the men<br />
in the 11 following lines held theirs<br />
vertically, in reserve for those times<br />
—US Gen. Colin Powell, July 1995<br />
when they were needed. The mass<br />
of a well handled phalanx could<br />
run over any foe on a conventional<br />
battlefield. While powerful, though,<br />
phalanxes were unwieldy, and their<br />
mere deployment instantly gave up all<br />
element of surprise.<br />
Sometime in 166, Apollonius led<br />
2,000 Macedonians toward Jerusalem.<br />
They passed through terrain marked<br />
by defiles and canyons, perfect for<br />
ambush. Dividing his own 600 men<br />
into four sub-units, Judah deployed<br />
at a place called Nahal el-Haramiah.<br />
There the invaders marched blithely<br />
into a narrow passage harboring the<br />
well trained, hidden, prepared and<br />
motivated Jewish warriors. It was late<br />
afternoon when the Maccabeans fell<br />
on the column’s vanguard, causing<br />
havoc as the troops farther back in the<br />
column continued to press forward,<br />
with the Macedonians ranks, and<br />
pikes entangled among each other.<br />
Then an arrow struck and killed<br />
Apollonius, while the Maccabeans<br />
smashed into the Syrian flanks from<br />
north, south and east. The Judeans<br />
wiped out the Seleucids, capturing all<br />
their weapons and equipment.<br />
A year later the rebels wiped out<br />
an even larger force sent by Antiochus.<br />
Waylaying the Seleucids in the<br />
pass of Beth-horon, Judah, wielding<br />
the sword he had taken from<br />
Apollonius’s corpse, led the final<br />
assault himself, whereupon his 1,000<br />
men slaughtered 4,000 foes.<br />
Flush with victory, the Maccabean<br />
army swelled with recruits as<br />
news spread of the latest triumph.<br />
Meanwhile, Antiochus was bedeviled<br />
by an unrelated civil war that had<br />
broken out in the eastern part of his<br />
domain. That new conflict benefited<br />
the Judeans by siphoning off forces<br />
that otherwise would have been sent<br />
against them.
Preoccupied with his civil war,<br />
Antiochus sent one of his relatives,<br />
a general named Lysias, against the<br />
Judeans. Lysias’s level of military experience<br />
and acumen remain unclear,<br />
but it didn’t take an Alexander to<br />
comprehend his instructions: “Uproot<br />
and destroy the strength of Israel and<br />
the remnant of Judea. Blot out all<br />
memory of them in the place. Settle<br />
strangers in the territory and allot the<br />
land to the settlers.” (I Maccabees,<br />
chapter three, verses 36-37.)<br />
Already numbering approximately<br />
20,000 men, the Seleucids were<br />
further reinforced by an unrecorded<br />
number of Idumean troops at their<br />
sprawling encampment just to the<br />
south of Judea. That bivouac also<br />
hosted large numbers of slave traders,<br />
all anticipating a bonanza upon the<br />
defeat of the insurgents. Those merchants<br />
brought not only chains, but<br />
also hefty amounts of gold and silver<br />
in anticipation of setting up a lucrative<br />
market. The camp itself therefore<br />
become a rich prize.<br />
Learning from his spies the<br />
Seleucids planned to attack at night,<br />
Judah abandoned his own camp after<br />
lighting a number of bonfires to make<br />
it appear still fully occupied. While<br />
6,000 Seleucids groped in darkness,<br />
searching for the elusive rebels, the<br />
Jews circled behind them to assault<br />
their camp at dawn. And attack the<br />
Judeans did. Amid the pandemonium<br />
of stampeding horses and elephants,<br />
the invaders were cut to pieces while<br />
panicked survivors fled in disorder<br />
toward the coast.<br />
The victors helped themselves to<br />
the treasures of the captured enemy<br />
camp, which included yet another<br />
massive cache of weapons. News of<br />
the plunder swelled Judah’s army to<br />
around 10,000, all spoiling for further<br />
action.<br />
Lysias escaped the debacle, made<br />
it back to Syria, and frantically raised<br />
yet another expeditionary force, hoping<br />
to surprise the Judeans by returning<br />
more quickly than they expected,<br />
as well as salvaging his own reputation<br />
with his master Antiochus. The<br />
Maccabees, however, remained ready,<br />
and easily routed the new force near<br />
the city of Beth-zur in southernmost<br />
Judea.<br />
After Judah upended yet another<br />
large Syrian invasion in the spring of<br />
161, the Seleucids broke off action for<br />
a year, lulling the Judeans into believ-<br />
ing they had won. The Maccabean<br />
army began to disperse, and in 160BC<br />
the Judeans were unable to survive a<br />
new, massive and unexpected attack.<br />
Judah himself was killed in the final<br />
battle.<br />
The Maccabean Revolt died along<br />
with the leader who had made it<br />
possible, but it was not a real victory<br />
for the Seleucids. Their empire had<br />
bled too much during the eight year<br />
uprising. Its armies were depleted and<br />
its coffers drained. Before long, the<br />
ascendant Roman Republic moved<br />
in and conducted what was one of<br />
their easiest conquests enroute to their<br />
mastery of the Mediterranean littoral.<br />
— Kelly Bell<br />
Codename Blue<br />
Peacock<br />
During the early days of the<br />
Cold War, western Europe was hard<br />
pressed. The British, then responsible<br />
for halting any potential Warsaw Pact<br />
sweep across the Northern German<br />
Plain, lacked the financial and manpower<br />
resources of the United States.<br />
So the British government came to<br />
believe stopping the “Red hordes”<br />
might call for desperate measures.<br />
One solution explored was an<br />
atomic land mine, for which a War<br />
Office “specification” was issued in<br />
1954. The document called for a 10<br />
kiloton device that could be triggered<br />
remotely from up to three miles away,<br />
or by a clockwork timer that could<br />
be set for up to an eight-day delay. A<br />
study followed in 1955. Its conclusion<br />
was that atomic mines buried<br />
in northern Germany could indeed<br />
thwart a Soviet advance across the flat<br />
expanses of the British sector.<br />
In 1955, Britain’s nuclear arsenal<br />
was limited to one design, the “Blue<br />
Danube” bomb, first tested in 1952<br />
and then in service with the Royal Air<br />
Force. The Blue Danube, a plutonium<br />
bomb, had been created as a free-fall<br />
aerial device, carried to its target in a<br />
bomber. In 1955 it was the only nuclear<br />
weapon immediately available<br />
to the British. The design became the<br />
basis for the army’s new atomic land<br />
mine, codenamed “Blue Peacock.”<br />
Converting the Blue Danube to<br />
an army munition offered challenges.<br />
The weapon was big: Blue Danube<br />
weighed 10,000 pounds, was over 24<br />
feet long and five feet, two inches in<br />
diameter. It was intended to be stored<br />
under climate-controlled conditions,<br />
and it was expected to be under the<br />
control of the British military until<br />
it had been delivered. Blue Peacock<br />
would – by its very nature as a supermine<br />
– be left alone for up to a week<br />
in primitive field conditions.<br />
Blue Peacock ended up using the<br />
Blue Danube detonation system in<br />
a larger casing that was also made<br />
waterproof and airtight. It could<br />
therefore be buried, dumped into a<br />
lake or river, or simply left on the<br />
ground. A surface burst would create<br />
a 375 foot crater. Buried 35 feet deep,<br />
Blue Peacock would dig a hole 640<br />
feet across.<br />
Since the bomb would be untended,<br />
anti-tamper devices were<br />
also added. The casing was pressurized,<br />
and pressure switches and tilt<br />
switches were added. Once armed,<br />
Blue Peacock would detonate 10 seconds<br />
after being moved, if the casing<br />
lost pressure (for example, if gunfire<br />
punctured it), or if it was filled with<br />
water.<br />
Field tests indicated a European<br />
winter might chill the bomb below<br />
the detonator’s operating temperature.<br />
Therefore the bomb was insulated<br />
with fiberglass batting, and a unique<br />
heating system added – live chickens.<br />
The birds were to be sealed inside<br />
the casing with a week’s worth of<br />
birdseed and water. The fowls’ body<br />
heat would keep the detonator warm<br />
enough to fire, at which time Blue<br />
Peacock would flash-fry the birds<br />
along with everything else within<br />
its range. [Talk about a “chicken<br />
outfit”…ed.]<br />
The Army Council ordered 10<br />
Blue Peacock mines in July 1957, and<br />
Britain’s atomic weapons establishment<br />
built two inert prototypes later<br />
that year. One of them was used to<br />
test the design in a gravel pit near<br />
Seven Oaks. Only then did wiser<br />
heads decide the project was too<br />
desperate.<br />
Blue Peacock had meanwhile<br />
grown to 16,000 pounds (weight, not<br />
cost in Sterling). Operational deployment<br />
of the weapon would therefore<br />
have required an item the size a<br />
large locomotive boiler to have been<br />
secretly trucked around Germany.<br />
Various devices were to be used to<br />
disguise the mine’s purpose. One<br />
cover story called for Blue Peacock to<br />
be described as “an atomic power unit<br />
for troops in the field” – an accurate,<br />
strategy & tactics 33
34 #232<br />
if incomplete, description.<br />
The best reason for second<br />
thoughts actually came from the 1955<br />
policy paper. In it, the army’s chief<br />
engineer stated: “A skillfully sited<br />
atomic mine would not only destroy<br />
facilities and installations over a large<br />
area, but would deny occupation of<br />
the area to an enemy for an appreciable<br />
time due to contamination.”<br />
In 1954, Britain still considered<br />
Germany to be an occupied nation;<br />
however, by 1958 it had become an<br />
ally. Sanguine destruction of facilities<br />
and installations and widespread<br />
atomic contamination was therefore<br />
no longer acceptable.<br />
The Ministry of Defense canceled<br />
Blue Peacock in February 1958.<br />
Newer, smaller atomic weapons<br />
replaced the Blue Danube. One of<br />
the Blue Peacock casings was tested<br />
to destruction, and the other idled<br />
quietly at an RAF base before being<br />
consigned to a historical collection<br />
at the end of the Cold War. Blue<br />
Peacock became just another curious<br />
footnote in history.<br />
Blue Peacock again gained attention<br />
in the spring of 2004, when<br />
documents relating to its development<br />
were included in an exhibition<br />
at the British National Archives.<br />
While other information about it had<br />
been released in 2002, the exhibit<br />
contained the first public mention of<br />
the avian heating system. The press<br />
release including that information<br />
was issued on April 1 st – April Fool’s<br />
Day. Yet the story was less an April<br />
Fool than an ironic coincidence. As<br />
the head of education and interpretation<br />
at the National Archives told the<br />
BBC: “The Civil Service does not<br />
make jokes.”<br />
—Mark N. Lardas<br />
naval mine Warfare During<br />
the Cold War<br />
Naval mine warfare between<br />
1945 and 1990 was dominated by the<br />
two contending major naval powers,<br />
the Soviet Union and N<strong>AT</strong>O (North<br />
Atlantic Treaty Organization). In<br />
both cases, World War II experience<br />
shaped their systems, both operationally<br />
and technologically.<br />
In World War II, German minefields<br />
had so constrained Soviet naval<br />
operations that afterward the Soviets<br />
seized and held large numbers of Ger-<br />
many’s mine warfare experts in order<br />
to exploit their knowledge. In fact,<br />
most Soviet mines and mine warfare<br />
tactics of the Cold War were direct<br />
derivatives of World War II German<br />
mines, mine warfare research, and<br />
tactics. More, the Soviets came to<br />
maintain the world’s largest mine<br />
warfare and mine countermeasures<br />
forces.<br />
N<strong>AT</strong>O also took mine warfare<br />
seriously, but having enjoyed greater<br />
naval success against the Germans in<br />
World War II, showed less interest in<br />
studying or exploiting the defeated<br />
nation’s operations, research and<br />
systems. Nonetheless, N<strong>AT</strong>O navies<br />
dedicated significant resources to<br />
mine countermeasures. Having relied<br />
predominantly on the British for mine<br />
countermeasure support in European<br />
waters, and having encountered relatively<br />
few mines in their campaigns<br />
against the Japanese in the Pacific,<br />
the US Navy took almost no interest<br />
at all. That would prove embarrassing<br />
on several occasions.<br />
Mines come in two primary<br />
categories: moored and bottom. They<br />
also come in two types determined by<br />
their method of detonation: contact or<br />
influence. A contact mine detonates<br />
when the target makes contact with it,<br />
while influence mines are detonated<br />
by the target’s influence on the maritime<br />
environment (for example, how<br />
it changes the magnetic field, water<br />
pressure or electrical potential, or the<br />
sound it puts into the water).<br />
Moored mines are tethered on a<br />
cable moored to a casing resting on<br />
or above the bottom. Bottom mines,<br />
as the name indicates, lie on the<br />
bottom. Moored mines can be either<br />
contact-detonated or influence-detonated,<br />
while bottom mines are always<br />
influence mines. The tactics used to<br />
counter mines differ according to the<br />
category and type used. In fact, the<br />
oldest (and long-considered obsolete)<br />
moored contact mine was the most<br />
common naval mine employed operationally<br />
during the Cold War.<br />
Naval mine warfare can also be<br />
broken into two categories, offensive<br />
and defensive. Offensive mine<br />
warfare consists of those operations<br />
conducted to attack the enemy’s<br />
maritime operations and interests.<br />
Normally that means they’re conducted<br />
in enemy waters or waters<br />
used by the enemy. Defensive mine<br />
warfare consists of operations under-<br />
taken to protect friendly forces, their<br />
activities and interests. In either case,<br />
mine warfare can consist of mine-laying<br />
or countermeasures (operations<br />
conducted to neutralize mines).<br />
Mine-laying is the simpler of<br />
the two operations. Virtually any<br />
platform (surface ship, submarine or<br />
aircraft) can lay mines. For example,<br />
when Iran laid mines in the Persian<br />
Gulf in the late 1980s, they did so<br />
from a wide variety of innocuous<br />
surface craft, including dhows (small<br />
wooden cargo ships) indigenous to<br />
those waters. The Iranians’ purpose<br />
was to hide their involvement in a<br />
mining campaign the international<br />
community had condemned. Their<br />
responsibility could not be established<br />
conclusively until a US Navy vessel<br />
captured an Iranian supply ship delivering<br />
mines to one of the minelayers.<br />
That incident constituted the basis for<br />
one of the growing concerns of the<br />
late- and post-Cold War eras: terrorist<br />
use of mines to attack shipping.<br />
Where mine-laying is relatively<br />
simple and safe, mine countermeasures<br />
are complex and dangerous.<br />
Minesweeping is the oldest method,<br />
using ships that tow their countermeasures<br />
equipment through the area<br />
where mines are suspected or known<br />
to be. Minesweepers are constructed<br />
of non-ferrous materials (wood, reinforced<br />
fiberglass), use special propulsion<br />
systems, and are heavily sounddampened<br />
to reduce their “influence<br />
signatures,” all in order to prevent<br />
detonating any influence mines over<br />
which they might pass. Since they<br />
do precede their own “sweep gear,”<br />
however, they face a high risk of<br />
inadvertent detonation from the very<br />
mines they’re sweeping. (The US<br />
pioneered the use of helicopters for<br />
minesweeping during the late 1970s<br />
to provide its mine countermeasures<br />
forces greater mobility and speed.)<br />
Mine hunting is employed against<br />
bottom mines, and involves using<br />
precision sonar and other equipment.<br />
Before the late 1980s, divers would<br />
be sent to investigate and disarm<br />
suspected bottom mines. It was slow,<br />
difficult and dangerous work. As the<br />
Cold War ended, however, most Western<br />
mine hunting began to be done<br />
using underwater remotely piloted<br />
vehicles to approach and destroy suspected<br />
mines. The US also pioneered<br />
the use of highly trained dolphins for<br />
that mission.
The method of mine countermeasures<br />
used in any one place is always<br />
determined by the type of mine<br />
encountered. Moored mines can be<br />
swept by gear towed behind minesweepers.<br />
Once such mines’ mooring<br />
cables are cut, they float to the<br />
surface where they can be destroyed<br />
by gunfire. Bottom influence mines,<br />
however, particularly those that try<br />
to defeat influence sweeping through<br />
the use of a counter-countermeasure,<br />
are more difficult to defeat. Influence<br />
sweeping requires the sweeper to tow<br />
a system behind it that simulates the<br />
various influences ships impart on<br />
their environment. The intent is to<br />
detonate the mines at a safe distance<br />
behind the sweeper.<br />
Without foreknowledge of the<br />
mines’ type (magnetic, magneticacoustic,<br />
pressure, etc), the commander<br />
must simulate all the influences<br />
the mines may be targeting. By the<br />
1970s, some mines could also be set<br />
for specific target types (for example,<br />
cruisers or aircraft carriers instead of<br />
destroyers), further complicating the<br />
mine countermeasure problem.<br />
Mines with counter-countermeasures<br />
allowed a pre-set number of<br />
targets to pass before detonating.<br />
Others had pre-set activation and deactivation<br />
dates, either to ensure safe<br />
passage during set periods, establish<br />
a “sanitation date,” or just to further<br />
complicate the mine countermeasures<br />
problem. Defeating those mines<br />
necessitated extensive sweeping for<br />
several weeks just to provide a probability,<br />
not certainty, of safe passage.<br />
Worse, since pressure mines relied on<br />
the level of pressure engendered by<br />
a ship’s passage through the water,<br />
phenomena that varied according to a<br />
ship’s size and speed, they could not<br />
be fooled by simulation devices. They<br />
could only be detonated through the<br />
use of a specially designed ship of the<br />
size and type that generated both the<br />
required “pressure wave” and had the<br />
reinforced hull and systems to survive<br />
the blast. Ultimately, the problems of<br />
defeating pressure mines led to the<br />
development of mine hunting.<br />
Mine hunting is even slower than<br />
minesweeping and was, in its early<br />
days, far more dangerous. Though sonar<br />
and other sensors can detect bottom<br />
mines, those systems also detect<br />
a large number of non-mine objects<br />
with similar shapes and dimensions.<br />
Further, tides, marine life and bottom<br />
materials tend to obscure mines over<br />
time. Hence every suspected mine has<br />
to be investigated individually. Some<br />
mines have anti-diver devices, either<br />
attached or placed nearby, which<br />
detonate when any small metallic<br />
object remains near it for a set time.<br />
All the dangers involved led<br />
Western nations to develop and rely<br />
increasingly on methods that didn’t<br />
require divers. The American use of<br />
dolphins in Vietnam and the Persian<br />
Gulf was a controversial solution.<br />
Most Western nations relied on<br />
remote underwater robotic systems as<br />
the Cold War drew to an end, as does<br />
the US today.<br />
Mine warfare figured prominently<br />
in four of the hot wars that occurred<br />
during the Cold War: Korea, Vietnam,<br />
the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, and the<br />
Iraq-Iran War. Ironically, World War<br />
I-era moored contact mines dominated<br />
the minefields of all but the second<br />
of those conflicts. The US Navy was<br />
also embarrassed by its lack of mine<br />
countermeasures forces in three of<br />
those wars, and only avoided such<br />
embarrassment again in Vietnam<br />
because the North Vietnamese didn’t<br />
employ mines to any significant<br />
degree.<br />
The US encountered few mines<br />
during the early naval operations of<br />
the Korean War. Expecting a short<br />
war and seeing little risk of US<br />
involvement, North Korea saw little<br />
need for protective minefields when<br />
its troops invaded South Korea in<br />
1950. Then Gen. MacArthur’s landing<br />
at Inchon changed Pyongyang’s<br />
strategic thinking. China’s leaders<br />
were also aware of the US Navy’s<br />
amphibious capabilities, and they<br />
therefore emphasized the use of<br />
mines in coastal defense operations.<br />
The two allies laid thousands of<br />
Soviet-supplied naval mines off North<br />
Korea’s coast in 1950-51, placing<br />
the largest concentrations around the<br />
country’s eastern ports. With almost<br />
all of America’s mine countermeasures<br />
units having been decommissioned<br />
after World War II, the USN<br />
had to reactivate Imperial Japanese<br />
Navy mine sweeping units, including<br />
their crews, to sweep the thousands of<br />
moored contact mines encountered off<br />
Wonsan and Hangnam harbors. That<br />
embarrassment rejuvenated America’s<br />
mine warfare consciousness and<br />
efforts in the 1950s, but those new<br />
forces were placed in reserve by the<br />
early 1960s.<br />
The 1967 Arab-Israeli War saw<br />
the next significant employment of<br />
naval mines when Egypt closed the<br />
Suez Canal and the Israeli port of<br />
Eilat by laying thousands of mines<br />
in and around their approaches. The<br />
Egyptians sprinkled bottom influence<br />
magnetic mines among the moored<br />
contact mines in their minefields.<br />
Though the minefields didn’t affect<br />
operations by the Israeli Navy’s<br />
smaller combatants, it prevented their<br />
destroyers and transports from using<br />
those waters. It also deterred merchant<br />
shipping from entering Eilat.<br />
Fortunately for Israel, the fields off<br />
Eilat contained a manageable number<br />
of mines. The moored contact mines<br />
were cleared in a few days, but it took<br />
several months of mine hunting by<br />
divers to clear away the bottom influence<br />
mines.<br />
It was the US that employed naval<br />
mines in the largest numbers and to<br />
the greatest effect during the Vietnam<br />
War. The Viet Cong occasionally used<br />
floating mines in South Vietnam’s<br />
rivers, and the North Vietnamese<br />
employed a few moored contract<br />
mines on an ad hoc basis. The US,<br />
however, used aircraft-dropped mines<br />
to close North Vietnam’s Haiphong<br />
Harbor and other ports to shipping.<br />
Equipped with a variety of sensor and<br />
counter systems, those mines proved<br />
far beyond North Vietnam’s ability to<br />
sweep, closing the ports completely<br />
to shipping. The impact of those<br />
closures contributed to bringing North<br />
Vietnam to the negotiating table,<br />
and the agreement that ended that<br />
war included a requirement for the<br />
US to clear the minefields, a process<br />
that took over two months. A few<br />
months later, those same USN mine<br />
countermeasures units joined with<br />
Egyptian forces to conduct the mine<br />
clearing effort that allowed the Suez<br />
Canal to be reopened after eight years<br />
of closure. As the 1980s approached,<br />
however, the US refocused its naval<br />
forces on open ocean operations and<br />
left mine countermeasures to its allies.<br />
Iran employed mines surreptitiously<br />
during its war with Iraq in the<br />
1980s. Since laying mines in international<br />
waters violated international<br />
law, Iran conducted its operations<br />
covertly, using nominally civilian surface<br />
craft to lay moored contact mines<br />
in the Persian Gulf’s shipping lanes.<br />
strategy & tactics 35
36 #232<br />
Iranian-sponsored terrorist groups<br />
also used moored contact mines off<br />
the coast of Lebanon during that<br />
same time; however, that campaign<br />
inflicted little damage and proved a<br />
major embarrassment once Tehran’s<br />
involvement was exposed.<br />
It also embarrassed the USN.<br />
Lacking effective mine countermeasures<br />
units that could operate in<br />
the Persian Gulf, American forces<br />
escorting tankers there had to have<br />
the tankers they were protecting precede<br />
them. In effect, they used those<br />
tankers as ad hoc minesweepers. The<br />
need to do so was driven home on 14<br />
April 1988, when the USS Samuel B.<br />
Roberts was nearly sunk by an Iranian<br />
mine. A modern warship was put<br />
out of action for months, and nearly<br />
sunk, by a mine using 80-year-old<br />
technology. The Iranian mine wasn’t<br />
even as advanced technologically as<br />
the 1906 British mine from which it<br />
reportedly was derived. That incident<br />
highlighted mine warfare’s potential<br />
cost-effectiveness and inspired a<br />
new round of American investment<br />
in mine countermeasures. The USN,<br />
however, still had to rely on its allies’<br />
mine countermeasures units during<br />
the 1991 Gulf War, and two of its<br />
ships suffered mine damage during<br />
that deployment.<br />
The Cold War was not marked<br />
by major naval engagements, not<br />
even during the hot war conflicts<br />
that occurred during that era such as<br />
Vietnam. Naval mine warfare was a<br />
key concern, however, and remains so<br />
in the present day. It doesn’t take high<br />
technology to make or deploy a naval<br />
mine. They are cheap and easy to<br />
make and lay, particularly if accurate<br />
placement isn’t a concern. Their existence<br />
or suspected presence in a harbor<br />
or shipping lane has a paralyzing<br />
effect on the affected governments<br />
and populations. Defeating naval<br />
mines and, perhaps more importantly,<br />
identifying the perpetrators who made<br />
or laid them, will remain a political<br />
and military concern well into this<br />
new century.<br />
— Carl Otis Schuster<br />
Peace in Cambodia: untaC<br />
The UN Transitional Authority in<br />
Cambodia (UNTAC) was the largest<br />
UN operation conceived until that<br />
time, with an order of battle of up to<br />
22,000 personnel and US $3 billion<br />
in funding. It also had the broadest<br />
mandate ever given a UN force since<br />
the end of the Korean War: run the<br />
country until elections could be held,<br />
while also overseeing the withdrawal<br />
of the Vietnamese Army, and the<br />
repatriation from refugee camps of<br />
nearly a quarter of the population.<br />
UNTAC also marked firsts for several<br />
of the participant nations, as China<br />
deployed peacekeepers and Japan<br />
shared with Australia the leading diplomatic<br />
role in running the mission.<br />
Bulgarian infantry also participated<br />
for the first time.<br />
As has often happened with UN<br />
efforts, carelessness and expediency<br />
came close to defeating everyone’s<br />
best efforts. Though they had the<br />
mandate and manpower to do more,<br />
the international civil administration<br />
merely co-opted the existing government<br />
infrastructure. Predictably, that<br />
offended the other three factions in<br />
the country, with the enraged Khmer<br />
Rouge, who had never been enthusiastic<br />
about UNTAC, pulling out of the<br />
process altogether.<br />
Following elections, King Sihanouk<br />
was reinstated as the titular head<br />
of government, with his son Prince<br />
Ranariddh, in his capacity as leader<br />
of the royalist Funcinpec Party, and<br />
Hun Sen, of the Cambodian People’s<br />
Party, serving as joint deputy prime<br />
ministers. Unfortunately, the elections<br />
merely papered over existing<br />
divisions, and all parties maintained<br />
control of parts of the armed forces,<br />
which were actually “national” in<br />
name only.<br />
On 5 July 1997 the unstable<br />
situation changed when Hun Sen<br />
launched a coup with only minimal<br />
armed conflict. He claimed the coup<br />
was triggered by Ranariddh’s open<br />
alliance with the Khmer Rouge, at<br />
that time under Khieu Samphan’s<br />
control following Pol Pot’s death.<br />
One of the most important factors in<br />
the new government was the potential<br />
change to the military status quo, as<br />
the Khmer Rouge were still under<br />
arms. In fact, the future of Cambodia<br />
remains uncertain to this day.<br />
Factions<br />
Besides the Vietnamese staying<br />
behind, who are a mix of settlers,<br />
retired soldiers and members of the<br />
existing (Hang Samrin) government’s<br />
forces, there were four main Cambodian<br />
factions during the UNTAC<br />
period. In descending order of importance,<br />
they were as follows.<br />
The Heng Samrin-led, Vietnamesebacked,<br />
government based on the National<br />
Union Front for the Salvation of Kampuchea<br />
Party, which had been formed when<br />
the Khmer Rouge split into pro-China and<br />
pro-Vietnam factions during 1977 and<br />
1978.<br />
The Khmer Rouge were the rabidly<br />
Maoist communist remnants of the murderous<br />
Pol Pot regime, still supported by<br />
China and at least ideologically still under<br />
Pol Pot’s sway.<br />
The Armee Nationale Sihanoukist<br />
(ANS) was composed of the armed supporters<br />
of Prince Sihanouk, who had been<br />
deposed by his prime minister Lon Nol. His<br />
faction received the largest share of western<br />
support during the guerilla war against the<br />
Vietnamese occupation.<br />
The Khmer Peoples National Liberation<br />
Front (KPNLF) had its origins in the old<br />
American-backed Lon Nol government that<br />
had come to power in 1970.<br />
Peacekeepers<br />
For administrative purposes Cambodia<br />
was divided by UNTAC into 11 regions,<br />
usually along provincial boundaries,<br />
each under the titular command of the<br />
peacekeeping nation deploying the largest<br />
force. At the time of the elections, when<br />
UNTAC’s maximum strength was reached,<br />
there were a total of 15,991 military<br />
personnel including nearly 900 observers,<br />
3,359 civilian police and about 1,600 other<br />
UN civilians and contractors deployed.<br />
The following military order of battle<br />
lists units by those regions along with the<br />
unit’s main base town.<br />
1 – Sisophon: Dutch infantry battalion<br />
(including marines).<br />
2 – Siem Riep: Bangladeshi infantry battalion,<br />
Indian medical company, Polish<br />
logistics company, French engineering<br />
company.<br />
3 – Phnom Thbeng Meanchey: Pakistani<br />
infantry battalion.<br />
4 – Stung Treng: Uraguayan infantry battalion,<br />
Indian medical platoon, Singaporean<br />
logistics platoon.<br />
4 – Kratie: Polish engineer company.<br />
5 West – Kampong Thom: Indonesian<br />
infantry battalion, Chinese engineer battalion,<br />
Polish logistics platoon, Indian<br />
medical (field ambulance) platoon.<br />
5 East – Kampong Cham: Indian infantry<br />
battalion, Polish logistics company.<br />
6 – Sihanoukville: French infantry battalion,<br />
Polish logistics company, Philippine<br />
naval patrol.
7 – Takeo: Japanese engineer battalion.<br />
8 – Battambang: Malaysian infantry battalion, Thai engineer<br />
battalion, Pakistani logistics company, Australian<br />
signals company and air transport group, multi-national<br />
mine clearance training unit.<br />
9 East – Kampong Speu: Bulgarian infantry battalion.<br />
9 West – Kampong Chnang: Tunisian infantry battalion,<br />
Malaysian air transport group.<br />
Phnom Penh: Ghana and Indonesian infantry battalions,<br />
German medical battalion, Australian signals battalion,<br />
French air transport group, Uruguayan naval patrol.<br />
Most of those contingents were composite forces rather<br />
than standing formations. Forty New Zealanders served<br />
with the Australian communications unit. There was also a<br />
multi-national MP company with a maximum strength of<br />
217, including 20 Australians.<br />
Notable Events<br />
On 26 February 1992 an Australian soldier was wounded<br />
when his helicopter took ground fire in the Kompong<br />
Thom area.<br />
April 1993 was the most dangerous month for UN military<br />
personnel, with seven fatalities and 15 injured. Three<br />
separate incidents around Kampong Speu left four<br />
Bulgarians dead and nine wounded. One Japanese UN<br />
employee and his interpreter also died.<br />
During early May 1993, a Japanese policeman was killed<br />
and 13 UN personnel were injured.<br />
On May 20 1993, a rocket fired during factional fighting<br />
missed its target and killed two UN observers in the<br />
Chinese engineer compound in Kampong Cham.<br />
On 27 July 1993, an Australian soldier on guard at UNTAC<br />
headquarters in Phnom Penh killed a Cambodian policeman<br />
after he fired at a criminal suspect fleeing past the<br />
building.<br />
In August 1993, an Australian soldier was forced to<br />
smash his radio before fleeing from a Khmer Rouge attack<br />
with his mixed nationality team. The team was rescued by<br />
Thai soldiers and returned to their base unharmed. That<br />
same month, the commander of the Australian contingent,<br />
Lt. Col. Russell Stuart, faced charges after his service pistol<br />
was stolen along with his vehicle. And Chinese troops were<br />
forced to wear differently patterned uniforms because the<br />
Khmer Rouge were extensively supplied with standard<br />
green Chinese uniforms and weapons. A German army<br />
medic was shot dead in a motorcycle drive-by in Phnom<br />
Pehn. After the trouble experienced during the repatriation<br />
homeward of the first 400 Bulgarians, Australian military<br />
police escorted the second flight home.<br />
A total of 41 military personnel became casualties, as<br />
well as four observers and 14 civilian police.<br />
operation Gemini<br />
Australia’s military involvement in UNTAC reached its<br />
peak strength of 600 during the elections, winding down<br />
to 150 by the time UNTAC disbanded. There were also<br />
substantial contributions to the civilian police and election<br />
forces. Australia also provided the initial military commander,<br />
Lt Gen. John Sanderson, who retired in October<br />
1992.<br />
—Peter Schutze<br />
the Long tradition:<br />
50 issues ago, S&t 182:<br />
Balkans 1941. Joseph Miranda drives in<br />
with a simulation of the Wehrmacht’s 1941<br />
blitzkrieg against Yugoslavia and Greece.<br />
Veteran gamer Maj. Donald Mack marches<br />
into the Sudan with “Chinese” Gordon<br />
and the Khartoum campaign, while David<br />
Nicholas takes to the barricades with the<br />
Freikorps. Pierre Corbeil, Charles Plummer<br />
and Jay Schindler go Beyond Wargaming<br />
with an analysis of the simulation game as<br />
a professional tool. And Anthony Howarth<br />
closes out with a look at unit cohesion during<br />
the wars of religion.<br />
100 issues ago, S&t 132:<br />
iron Cross.Tactical level combat in World<br />
War II, brought to you by Mark Sprock<br />
and Allyn Vannoy. Thomas Kane updates<br />
everyone on the fighting in Beirut, and Al<br />
Nofi goes to historical extremes with pieces<br />
on both the gladiators and the proliferation<br />
of weapons in the modern world.<br />
150 issues ago, S&t 82:<br />
fifth Corps. This was something of a<br />
modern warfare issue, with Fifth Corps, a<br />
grand tactical simulation of the US Army<br />
versus the Soviets in a “what if” World War<br />
III. Design credits include the prolific Jim<br />
Dunnigan, the solid John Butterfield and<br />
the artistic Redmond Simonsen. Elsewhere<br />
in the issue, Col. Trevor Dupuy (yes, that<br />
Col. Dupuy!) analyzes the Suez battles in<br />
the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, and Charles<br />
T. Kamps covers N<strong>AT</strong>O’s Central Front.<br />
Rounding out the issue and keeping readers<br />
up to date are Briefings and FYI.<br />
200 issues ago, S&t 32:<br />
napoleon at War. John Young uses the<br />
Napoleon at Waterloo system to wargame<br />
the Battle of Borodino, where the Grande<br />
Armee took on the Russians on the road to<br />
Moscow in one of the biggest bloodbaths<br />
of the Napoleonic era. The game puts the<br />
slightly superior French against the entrenched<br />
Russians in a contest that is often<br />
not decided until the last roll of the die.<br />
Issue articles include Al Nofi’s Napoleon<br />
at War and Lenny Glynn and Dave Isby<br />
on Pershing in the Great War. Plus Pass in<br />
Review and Sid Sackson on games.<br />
strategy & tactics 37
38 sigNature #232<br />
Desert Fox<br />
Games<br />
TiTle<br />
QTY Price TOTAl<br />
Name<br />
address<br />
City, state Zip<br />
phoNe email<br />
Visa/mC (oNly)#<br />
expiratioN date<br />
www.decisiongames.com<br />
New games from Rio Grande include:<br />
Palazzo<br />
Inka<br />
Roma<br />
Torres<br />
Tikal and more!<br />
Yo u r on e St o p<br />
Wa r g a m e Sh o p!<br />
We specialize in carrying in and out of print wargames<br />
and the latest family games from all over the world.<br />
some of the companies we carry:<br />
SUB To Ta l<br />
TaX (Ca. RES.)<br />
$<br />
S&H<br />
$<br />
ToTal oRDER<br />
$<br />
Avalanche <strong>Press</strong><br />
Clash of Arms<br />
Columbia Games<br />
GMT Games<br />
Operational Studies Group<br />
Hasbro/Avalon Hill<br />
Rio Grande Games<br />
Twilight Creations<br />
Days of Wonder<br />
Mayfair Games<br />
and many, many more!<br />
Visit us on the web for a detailed list of<br />
games available.<br />
send payment to:<br />
Desert Fox Games<br />
PO Box 21598<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390<br />
661/587-9633<br />
Fax- 661/587-5031<br />
Desert Fox listing at<br />
www.decisiongames.com<br />
Hours: 9:00am-4:00pm (PDT), Mon.- Fri.
A complete game in every issue!<br />
Name:<br />
Address:<br />
City State Zip<br />
Country<br />
V/MC #<br />
Signature<br />
Exp. Phone #<br />
Fill out (please print legibly) the order form and send it with your check<br />
payable to <strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong> (please no Canadian Checks) to: Decision Games,<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390-1598 or call (661) 587-9633 (9:00am-<br />
4:00pm PST) to place your credit card order. 24hour fax line is 661/587-5031.<br />
next issue<br />
S&T 233 Dagger Thrusts. What if Patton had been<br />
given the supplies instead of Montgomery in September<br />
1944?<br />
Future articles: History of the US Army Air Force in<br />
Europe, Eugene of Savoy, and the unheralded Spanish<br />
victory in the American Revolution.<br />
Individual subscriptions are:<br />
S&T(6) S&T(12)<br />
U.S. $99.97 $189.97<br />
Canada $110.00 $210.00<br />
Overseas $130.00 $250.00<br />
Newsstand Issue<br />
(Magazine only)<br />
Individual subscriptions are:<br />
S&T(6) S&T(12)<br />
U.S. $29.97 $49.97<br />
Canada $36.00 $62.00<br />
Overseas $42.00 $74.00<br />
4 issues 8 issues<br />
U.S. $22.00 $42.00<br />
Canada $26.00 $49.00<br />
Overseas $28.00 $54.00<br />
Send name and address to: Fire & Movement, PO Box 21598,<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390 or call (661) 587-9633 (M-F, 9am to<br />
4pm) to place your credit card order (minimum charge is $40may<br />
be combined with Decision Games purchases).Checks<br />
or money orders payable to Fire & Movement, in US dollars<br />
and drawn on a US bank; please no Canadian checks.<br />
strategy & tactics 39
40 #232
Der Weltkrieg SerieS<br />
the Western Front:<br />
1914-1918<br />
Der Weltkrieg series #6. The Western<br />
Front: 1914-1918, contains six scenarios,<br />
each covering a major WWI campaign<br />
fought in France or Belgium. It can also<br />
be played as a start-to-finish simulation<br />
of the entire western front, or linked with<br />
other games in the series into a grandcampaign<br />
covering all the European fronts.<br />
The scenarios are: “August 1914: The Schlieffen Plan;” “May 1915:<br />
Ypres;” “February 1916: Verdun;” “July 1916: The Somme;” “April<br />
1917: Nivelle’s Offensive;” “March 1918: The Kaiser’s Battle.”<br />
Components: one 22” x 34” mapsheet, 1,680 die-cut counters, standard and<br />
scenario books, corps displays, and player aid cards.<br />
taNNeNberg & galiCia<br />
Der Weltkrieg series #2. This is a division/brigade level WW1 game<br />
that covers the campaign in East Prussia and southern Poland in 1914.<br />
You assume the role of the commander of either the German or Allied<br />
armies. The forces available to you are<br />
the same ones commanded by the historic<br />
participants.<br />
Components: 560 counters, two 22x 34” mapsheets,<br />
player aid cards, standard and scenario<br />
rule books.<br />
serbia & romaNia<br />
Der Weltkrieg series #3. Covers the World<br />
War I campaigns in Serbia and Romania<br />
with links between the two campaigns as<br />
well as to the previous volumes.<br />
Components: two 22x 34” mapsheets, one<br />
11x17” mapsheet, 560 die-cut counters, standard and scenario rule books, player<br />
aid cards.<br />
$69. 95<br />
the sChlieFFeN plaN<br />
Der Weltkrieg series #1. This game covers the fluid warfare of the<br />
western front from 1 August to 15 November 1914. You assume the<br />
role of commander of either the German or Allied armies. The forces<br />
available to you are the same as those commanded by the historic participants,<br />
but it is up to you to make your own strategic decisions and<br />
execute your own plans as you see fit.<br />
Components: one 22 x 34 inch mapsheet, a rule book and player aid cards, 560<br />
die-cut counters and one die.<br />
$39. 95<br />
$39. 95<br />
$39. 95<br />
Don’t forget to pledge for the next two games:<br />
Grand Campaign (#13) and middle east Campaigns (#17). information<br />
on the Pledge page on the Decision Games website.<br />
Send To: Decision Games,<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390<br />
661/587-9633<br />
Fax- 661/587-5031<br />
www.decisiongames.com click on WWI Games<br />
or use the order form on page 55<br />
italiaN FroNt: 1915-1918<br />
Der Weltkrieg series #5. This wargame contains five separate scenarios,<br />
and can be linked with East Front (and later West Front)<br />
games of the series for duration games.<br />
May 1915: 1st Isonzo<br />
The first battles along the Isonzo are a futile foreshadowing<br />
of what is to come.<br />
May 1916: Strafexpedition<br />
The Chief of Staff of the Austro Hungarian army, Conrad von<br />
Hotzendorff, feels the time is right to strike a blow against Italy.<br />
He ignores the advice of German Chief of staff von Falkenhayn,<br />
who sees the main threat coming from the Russian front.<br />
The Italians in the southern Tyrol have neglected their rear area<br />
defenses. That, and the fury of the Austro-Hungarian attack, puts<br />
the Italian army in peril. Cadorna, its commanding general, rushes<br />
reinforcements to the front. It is a dicey affair, but the Italian lines<br />
hold; the threat along the Isonzo is checked.<br />
May 1917: 10th Isonzo<br />
In endless offensives, valiant Italian infantry go over the top<br />
and into the maelstrom of the Isonzo. Each battle differs from the<br />
last only by its increasing intensity and skyrocketing casualty list.<br />
In the end, both armies are exhausted. The Italians have become<br />
weary of the war, but the Austrians believe one more effort on the<br />
Isonzo can break through.<br />
October 1917: Caporreto<br />
When the Central Powers strike, they break through the Italian<br />
lines along the headwaters of the Isonzo. German and Austrian units<br />
pour through the mountain passes and into the Italian rear areas.<br />
Caporreto is an overwhelming victory for Germany and Austria;<br />
but Italy is not fully defeated, and her citizens rally.<br />
June 1918: Albrecht & Radetzky<br />
Conrad’s attacks across the Piave are initially successful, but<br />
his divisions then bog down. The Austrians are unable to push their<br />
bridgeheads far enough forward to keep their pontoon bridges out<br />
of range of Italian artillery. Unable to reinforce their spearheads<br />
or maintain viable supply lines, the Austro-Hungarian armies fall<br />
back, awaiting the inevitable Italian counterattack.<br />
Components: one 22” x 34” mapsheet, 560 die-cut counters, standard and<br />
scenario books, player aid cards.<br />
$39. 95<br />
strategy & tactics 41
entebbe:<br />
turning Point of terrorism<br />
by Kelly Bell<br />
42 #232<br />
On 27 June 1976, 11:35 a.m. local time, Air France<br />
Aerobus 139, en route from Tel Aviv to Paris, touched<br />
down at Athens International Airport. The Boeing 707<br />
was in Athens to refuel, offload some passengers and<br />
embark others. The situation was perfect for a hijacking—the<br />
terminal was packed with passengers and the<br />
Greek airport was notorious for its lax security.<br />
A young woman and a young man boarded the<br />
plane separately and handed their passports to a policeman<br />
at its entrance. The woman’s passport was Ecuadorian<br />
and identified her as M. Ortega. The man’s<br />
was Peruvian and named him as A. Garcia. The officer<br />
waved them aboard without bothering to examine<br />
the contents of a handbag the man was carrying. Had<br />
anyone gone to the trouble to check “Ortega’s” and<br />
“Garcia’s” first-class tickets, they might have noticed,<br />
though neither was listed as Kuwaiti, reservations had<br />
been made in Kuwait, and on the same day of 20 June<br />
1976.<br />
Two young Arab men entered and sat down in row<br />
28. One of those newcomers carried a large package<br />
that, again, was not checked by airport security.<br />
Eight minutes after liftoff the “Peruvian” rose from<br />
his front-row seat and raised his champagne glass high<br />
while facing the plane’s rear. It was a signal to his<br />
comrades, and he and the “Ecuadorian” woman headed<br />
for the cockpit. At that moment the two Arabs in<br />
row 28 produced pistols and yelled, “Hands up!” Air<br />
France 139 was being hijacked. While this seemed to<br />
be one more hijacking in a decade known for political<br />
violence, it would become a turning point for counterterrorism.<br />
And it would all happen at a remote airport<br />
in the heart of Africa—Entebbe.<br />
in the air<br />
The “Peruvian” pulled a handgun and a hand grenade<br />
from his satchel and pushed his way into the<br />
pilots’ compartment. He ordered the crew to fly to<br />
Benghazi, Libya, where the plane refueled. The Aerobus<br />
took on 42 tons of fuel in Libya, and at 9:35 p.m.,<br />
local time, it lifted off and headed south. At 3:35 the<br />
following morning with 15 minutes of fuel remaining,<br />
Air France 139 landed at Entebbe, Uganda.<br />
The hijackers were German-born Wilfried Bose<br />
and his female accomplice, known only as Halima.<br />
Bose had matriculated in the Baader-Meinhof terrorist<br />
organization. A confirmed radical, he later joined<br />
Dr. Wadia Hadad’s Popular Front for the Liberation<br />
of Palestine (PFLP). Their Arab comrades were Haled<br />
Haleileh and Ali el Meyari. They were met at Entebbe<br />
by Abd-el Razak el-Abed, Jail el Arja and Faiz Jaaber.<br />
All were members of Dr. Hadad’s PFLP.<br />
Hadad was coordinating the operation from his<br />
headquarters in Mogadishu, Somalia. He had a list
of 53 terrorists to be released from Israeli, American,<br />
French and West German prisons in return for the hostages.<br />
Hadad had chosen Entebbe partly because he believed<br />
it beyond the reach of Israel’s military and any<br />
possible rescue. Also attractive were Ugandan dictator<br />
Idi Amin’s anti-Semitic views. Among other things,<br />
Amin had stated that Adolf Hitler had not murdered<br />
enough Jews during the Holocaust. Hadad figured the<br />
Ugandan dictator would provide troops to protect the<br />
operation once on the ground. And sure enough, the<br />
hijackers were greeted warmly at Entebbe Airport by<br />
Amin himself, who placed his army at the hijackers’<br />
service.<br />
The hostages were herded into the Old Terminal<br />
building (as the structure was called) to await developments<br />
as the Israeli government negotiated with<br />
the PFLP. When Amin first visited the hostages he announced:<br />
“I support the Popular Front for the Liberation<br />
of Palestine, and I think that Israel and Zionism is<br />
wrong. I know that you are innocent, but the guilty one<br />
is your government. I haven’t slept since you arrived. I<br />
haven’t yet received the demands of the Popular Front,<br />
but I promise you that I will do everything to protect<br />
your lives.”<br />
jerusalem<br />
In Jerusalem, Tuesday evening, 29 June, a cable<br />
arrived at the foreign ministry. It was from the Israeli<br />
embassy in Paris. Haim Baron, the prime minister’s<br />
personal assistant, immediately took the communiqué<br />
to Foreign Minister Yigal Allon. The message relayed<br />
detailed instructions from Entebbe:<br />
• All 53 terrorist prisoners to be released and brought<br />
to Entebbe Airport.<br />
• A plane for the hijackers to be brought to Entebbe.<br />
• Air France must arrange the flight to Entebbe of<br />
the terrorists imprisoned in Israel. The aircraft will<br />
carry the prisoners released by Israel, the aircrew,<br />
and no one else.<br />
• The other countries requested to release prisoners<br />
must make their own arrangements to transport<br />
them to Entebbe.<br />
• The ambassador for Somalia in Kampala, Uganda,<br />
Hashi Abdulla, will represent the Popular Front for<br />
the Liberation of Palestine in negotiations with the<br />
government of France, and the hijackers will recognize<br />
no one else as representing their interests.<br />
• France will appoint a representative who will handle<br />
negotiations with the Popular Front for the Liberation<br />
of Palestine.<br />
A 1:00 p.m., Thursday, 1 July, Israel time, was given<br />
as the deadline for these demands being met. Though<br />
Hadad meant business, so did the Israelis. As soon as Israeli<br />
Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin and his cabinet were<br />
clear on the situation, they ordered the military to commence<br />
plans for a rescue mission.<br />
Back in Entebbe the PFLP members separated the<br />
49 non-Jewish prisoners from the Jewish ones, jamming<br />
192 of the latter into a room 40 by 80 feet. This<br />
segregation of prisoners reminded Yitzak David of<br />
how SS Dr. Josef Mengele had separated him from<br />
the rest of his family upon their arrival at Auschwitz<br />
concentration camp in Poland. He had been healthy<br />
enough to be selected as a slave laborer, and therefore<br />
survived the war. His loved ones were sent straight to<br />
the gas chambers.<br />
On the evening of the 29 th , Israeli Army Gen. Mota<br />
Gur, chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF),<br />
addressed a group of high-ranking officers: “Gentlemen,<br />
I was asked this afternoon by the prime minister<br />
if the IDF can rescue the hijacked hostages from Entebbe<br />
Airport. Gentlemen, what have you got to say?”<br />
There was no shortage of suggestions.<br />
The following day Maj. Gen. Yitzak Hofi, head of<br />
Israel’s secret service organization, Mossad issued orders<br />
to his operatives to gather every scrap of information<br />
on what was transpiring at Entebbe Airport.<br />
Rabin’s advisor on counter-terrorism and espionage,<br />
Maj. Gen. Rehavam Zeevi, went to work assembling<br />
a staff of Mossad’s senior intelligence agents. When<br />
he had summoned all his operatives, he outlined mission<br />
directives: get data and distribute it to competent<br />
authorities, produce situation scenarios for the prime<br />
minister and the ministerial team, keep the heads of<br />
secret services in the diplomatic and operational picture,<br />
and evaluate the possibilities of diplomatic and<br />
strategy & tactics 43
44 #232<br />
military action. Rabin quickly rejected a proposal to<br />
drop paratroopers to free the hostages. “It would be<br />
an Israeli Bay of Pigs,” he exclaimed, referring to the<br />
suicidal 1962 CIA assault on Castro’s Cuba.<br />
Israel’s Air Force was commanded by Gen. Benny<br />
Peled, and during 30 June’s morning tactical conference<br />
he assured his fellow military chies that Entebbe<br />
was not beyond the range of the IDF’s C-130 Hercules<br />
transport plane. If a rescue mission were to be carried<br />
out, it would be the transport of choice to carry a team<br />
of commandoes to the target zone. As Peled saw it, the<br />
only real danger in such a mission would be if hostiles<br />
opened fire on the aircraft as they came in to land, but<br />
he considered that unlikely since the terrorists would<br />
probably be taken by surprise.<br />
At 12:30 a.m. Allon telephoned the Israeli ambassador<br />
in Paris, Motke Gazit. “The government is meeting<br />
in Tel Aviv, and I guess we will have a decision,<br />
one way or another, by 10:30 or 11:00 [the morning<br />
of the next day] at the latest. I’ll let you know the results<br />
immediately, and you will have to relay it to the<br />
French so they can tell Kampala before the ultimatum<br />
expires.”<br />
The statement was carefully worded to make it<br />
sound like the Israeli government had decided to agree<br />
to the hijackers’ demands. At that time the terrorists<br />
also released their non-Jewish and non-Israeli captives.<br />
By sundown 30 June, 105 Israelis remained imprisoned<br />
in the sweltering Old Terminal.<br />
The first deadline was approaching. Four hours<br />
before it expired, Rabin addressed his top-ranking<br />
ministers on the subject of whether to submit to the<br />
hijackers’ demands. Allowing no one to shirk their<br />
responsibility by abstaining, he called for a show of<br />
hands. The gloomy politicians (who were not yet privy<br />
to the developing plans for a rescue mission), voted<br />
unanimously to give the terrorists what they wanted.<br />
All were already pondering the dismal future sure to<br />
come as other terrorists would inevitably move to ex-<br />
Lt. Gen. Mota Gur goes over the plans.<br />
ploit this precedent. Finance Minister Yehoshua Rabinowitz<br />
grumbled: “We have let ourselves in for a very<br />
dangerous example—very dangerous! Did we have<br />
any other choice?”<br />
The military was working desperately to create that<br />
choice.<br />
The newly released captives were flown to Paris.<br />
As soon as they touched down, Israeli officials and<br />
Mossad operatives grilled them on the site and situation.<br />
Rabin’s officers needed to know precisely where<br />
the prisoners were being held, how many Ugandan<br />
soldiers were guarding the terminal, what kind of<br />
weapons they were carrying, how they and the terrorists<br />
were dressed, exactly what the terminal looked<br />
like, and a plethora of other information. They found<br />
out two cordons of Ugandan troops had encircled Old<br />
Terminal, one just outside the building, and another<br />
forming an outer perimeter. Floodlights illuminated<br />
the tarmac in front of the structure.<br />
About an hour before 2:00 p.m., Saturday, the time<br />
limit for the imprisoned terrorists’ release, the hijackers<br />
extended the deadline to 11:00 a.m., Sunday. At that<br />
time Israel used the French ambassador in Kampala,<br />
Pierre Renard, to tell the terrorists Rabin’s administration<br />
was willing to come to terms. That bought more<br />
time.<br />
On the morning of 1 July, Mossad officers visited<br />
the Israeli firm that had built Entebbe Airport and<br />
picked up blueprints, maps and photos of the facility.<br />
Other agents fanned out in search of even the most<br />
obscure facts concerning the target. The Israelis were<br />
making the most of the limited time available.<br />
At 2:30 a.m., Friday, 2 July, Rabin summoned Gen.<br />
Zeevi to his office for a mutual briefing on the situation.<br />
As dawn broke over Tel Aviv, the soldiers in the<br />
general staff building still worked feverishly. Col.<br />
Avner Ram pointed out a crucial flaw shared by every<br />
rescue plan proffered so far: “For the time being all of<br />
them are crazy. They all deal with hitting the terrorists<br />
in Entebbe without evacuating the hostages.”<br />
An evacuation plan was quickly formulated, and,<br />
as evening began, there seemed to be just one technical<br />
dilemma remaining—how would the Hercules<br />
transports be refueled for the long flight home?<br />
That evening Lt. Col. Jonathan Netaniahu, commanding<br />
the rescue team, assembled his men for<br />
some quick and dirty training. The commandoes were<br />
recruited from the elite Golani Brigade and the paratroopers<br />
and Sayeret Matkal (the elite Israeli special<br />
operations force), though the actual identities are still<br />
classified. After meticulously briefing his officers,<br />
he dismissed them at 3:00 a.m. to take naps while he<br />
stayed up until dawn preparing supply lists for each<br />
detachment. He later told his men the mission would<br />
be “like a needle plunging into a body, and we are the<br />
needle.”
thunderball<br />
The rescue mission was code-named Operation<br />
Thunderball (in some sources, Thunderbolt),<br />
and on the morning of 2 July several young Israeli<br />
men rented a couple of twin-engine planes<br />
at Wilson Airport outside Nairobi, Kenya. Their<br />
specified destination was the Kenyan coastal<br />
city of Kisumu, but instead they headed for Entebbe.<br />
They circled the airport and nearby Lake<br />
Victoria, exposing multiple rolls of film as they<br />
photographed the runways and all buildings and<br />
the roads leading to them. After the youthful<br />
spies shot every frame they had, they flew on to<br />
Kisumu, then back to Nairobi, from where they<br />
hastily departed. No one in Entebbe noticed the<br />
aviators winging overhead that morning. Thunderball<br />
was beginning. Netaniahu used their photographs<br />
to enhance the training of his men using<br />
mock-ups of the Entebbe terminal.<br />
During the three days since the rescue plan<br />
had been proposed, the IDF had learned there<br />
were three doors into Old Terminal; terrorists<br />
were standing guard in twos and threes (mostly<br />
by the doors); terrorists not on guard were resting<br />
in a side room; Ugandan soldiers were stationed<br />
on the Old Terminal’s second floor, and the control<br />
tower was roughly the height of a four-story<br />
building, commanding a view of the entire area.<br />
Using that data, Netaniahu had his men build a<br />
sandbag rampart, complete with openings, to the<br />
dimensions of the wall encircling Old Terminal.<br />
Playing the parts of rescuers, terrorists and hostages,<br />
the commandoes tirelessly practiced their<br />
upcoming mission.<br />
The commandoes also purchased an old white<br />
Mercedes at a used car lot and drove it to the assembly<br />
area, where it was meticulously serviced<br />
and painted black so as to look like Amin’s favorite<br />
vehicle. When the action started, that car<br />
would be a centerpiece of the Israeli tactics.<br />
Meanwhile, Radio Israel was repeating the<br />
claim its government would be bargaining with<br />
the terrorists momentarily, shattering the country’s<br />
morale while lulling the hijackers into believing<br />
they had won. The PFLP was demanding<br />
the terrorists whose release it sought be brought<br />
to Entebbe before the hostages would be freed.<br />
The long-distance exchange would give the Israelis<br />
an excuse to take even longer to “comply,”<br />
and the time was being well spent.<br />
As the rescue mission prepared to kick off,<br />
disturbing intelligence reports began arriving<br />
from Uganda—the terrorists were not so much<br />
interested in freeing their imprisoned comrades as<br />
they were in humiliating Israel before the whole<br />
world. More details out of Entebbe pointed to the<br />
hijackers planning to hang on to the captives af-<br />
the terrorists<br />
At the time of the Entebbe affair, Dr. Wadia<br />
Hadad (a dentist) was the most dangerous man on<br />
Israel’s most-wanted list. Forsaking dentistry for<br />
terrorism, he took his new calling seriously. Unlike<br />
other terror paladins, he was virtually never seen<br />
in public and was careful not to allow himself to<br />
be photographed. After narrowly escaping death in<br />
a 1970 Katyusha rocket attack on his Beirut apartment,<br />
Hadad was terrified of assassination, staying<br />
hidden and constantly on the move. A photograph<br />
allegedly of him printed in newspapers worldwide<br />
following the Entebbe hijacking was a fake.<br />
In the 1950s Hadad had joined forces with an<br />
optician by the name of George Habash. Opening<br />
a joint medical practice, they also founded<br />
the Kaumion el-Arab (Arab Nationalism Movement).<br />
Following the 1967 Six-Day War, Hadad<br />
changed his organization’s name to the Popular<br />
Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and<br />
began directing international terror attacks, attempting<br />
to assassinate Israeli founding father<br />
David Ben-Gurion He later received 5 million<br />
dollars in exchange for the release of a hijacked<br />
Lufthansa airliner.<br />
Part of that ransom was used to pay the<br />
Japanese Red Army to send some of their men<br />
to fight as mercenaries for the PFLP and attack<br />
travelers in Israel’s Lod Airport in 1972. With<br />
a keen mind for finances, Hadad realized huge<br />
sums of money were essential to establish an international<br />
terror infrastructure, with himself as<br />
commander. Apart from ransom and widespread<br />
robberies of banks (mostly in Lebanon), there<br />
were enormous contributions from oil-rich Libya,<br />
Iraq and South Yemen. Additional income<br />
came from smuggling stolen automobiles from<br />
Europe into the Middle East. The man Hadad<br />
placed in charge of the massive car theft ring<br />
was Faiz Jaaber, who would later participate in<br />
(and be killed during) the Entebbe operation.<br />
Hadad and his subordinates also invested in<br />
Arab financial houses that provided steady, dependable<br />
profits. The huge volume of money supported<br />
terror cells and sanctuaries throughout the<br />
Mideast and Europe.<br />
Hadad eventually became too radical for Habash,<br />
and the two parted ways after the Lod attack,<br />
which Habash had not sanctioned. Late in<br />
June 1976, Hadad arrived in Mogadishu, Somalia,<br />
to direct his latest offensive against Israel.<br />
The top prisoner whose release he would demand<br />
was Greek Catholic Bishop Hilarion Capucci, who<br />
then resided in an Israeli prison. Capucci was serving a 12-year sentence<br />
for smuggling hand grenades, submachineguns, detonators, pistols, carbines,<br />
magazines and explosives into Israel for use by terrorist organizations.<br />
The next-most-significant terror figure on the list was 29-year-old Japanese<br />
Kozo Okamoto. A former member of the Japanese Red Army, he had<br />
hired on with the PFLP. On 30 May 1972, he and two comrades had opened<br />
fire on an unarmed crowd in Israel’s Lod Airport, killing 24 persons and<br />
wounding another 72. His two fellow gunmen were killed in the attack, but<br />
Okamoto surrendered and became a terrorist hero.<br />
strategy & tactics 45
46 #232<br />
ter the deal was completed, and make even more demands.<br />
From Uganda, Renard reported to Paris: “This<br />
business will never end.”<br />
On the morning of 2 July, Gur presented the completed<br />
rescue plan to Rabin. That evening, Peled<br />
briefed the pilots who would fly the C-130s. The airmen<br />
were astounded by their new mission. In a testament<br />
to the project’s cloak of secrecy, they had known<br />
nothing of the developing operation.<br />
As the soldiers assembled for departure, Rabin’s<br />
gravest concern was a telephoned statement made by<br />
Amin shortly before. The dictator had remarked to<br />
Col. Baruch Bar Lev, former head of Israel’s military<br />
mission to Uganda: “I want to tell you in the name of<br />
the Palestinians that if there is any aircraft noise over<br />
the airfield other than at the times set by us, they’ll<br />
blow up the terminal!”<br />
Netaniahu and his superiors were already convinced<br />
casualties would be high among the hostages<br />
and commandoes, but considering the situation they<br />
had no choice but to accept that possibility.<br />
Just before 10:00 p.m., 2 July, Rabin headed for<br />
his office to confer with his military advisors. His secretary,<br />
Froike Poran, handed him a reassuring report<br />
meticulously addressing the unanswered questions<br />
that had plagued the prime minister the previous day.<br />
The especially critical problem of how the transports<br />
were to refuel for the return trip was solved by planning<br />
to have them top off their tanks from the Entebbe<br />
airport’s fuel stores.<br />
At 11:15, Gur took over the discussion. Using<br />
maps, photos, timetables, drawings and a detailed operational<br />
plan, he carefully explained every aspect of<br />
the proposal.<br />
Following Gur’s presentation, Defense Minister<br />
Shimon Peres pointed out the grave consequences of<br />
submitting to terrorist blackmail:<br />
The objective: Entebbe airport, Uganda.<br />
“If we capitulate we will become a doormat.<br />
Our image will be harmed as it never<br />
has been before. So far we have never hesitated<br />
to risk human lives when there was<br />
a chance of saving others. We preached<br />
to the whole world not to give in to extortion.<br />
If we succeed, and I think we have<br />
more than a fair chance of succeeding,<br />
this nation will straighten its back, and<br />
other nations will be encouraged to follow<br />
the same path. Between the almost certain<br />
rescue of 100 or more Israelis by military<br />
action, and the danger to innocent people<br />
in humiliating and doubtful negotiations,<br />
there is no other way but to accept the first<br />
alternative. That’s the way we have behaved<br />
over all the years. The eyes of Israel<br />
and the rest of the world are on us.”<br />
Rabin sighed, rubbed his hands together and asked,<br />
“When do the planes have to go?”<br />
A buoyant Peres replied: “They have to take off<br />
from central Israel for an airport in the south at 1:50<br />
p.m.”<br />
It was the IDF’s first-ever operation outside the<br />
Mideast.<br />
At 2:35 the following afternoon, Rabin, with Peres<br />
at his side, addressed the Knesset—Israel’s Parliament.<br />
He outlined the situation to his colleagues, dwelling on<br />
the critical statement: “the list of prisoners demanded<br />
from Israel is not final.”<br />
By then the rescue aircraft were already en route,<br />
but could have been recalled; however when the prime<br />
minister called for a vote on whether to sanction the<br />
rescue mission every one of the suddenly hopeful men<br />
in attendance eagerly raised his hand.<br />
into africa<br />
Operation Thunderball was underway. Its objective<br />
was to raid Entebbe International Airport and liberate<br />
the 105 hostages taken from an Air France airliner.<br />
The mission’s stages were:<br />
A. Flight from Israel to Uganda (2,187 miles).<br />
B. Land at Entebbe International Airport.<br />
C. Raid Old Terminal, where terrorists are located.<br />
D. Kill terrorists.<br />
E. Transfer hostages to aircraft.<br />
F. Refuel and take off.<br />
The latest terrorist deadline was for 1:00 p.m. Israel<br />
time the following day.<br />
Back in Tel Aviv, Rabin awaited word of the commandoes’<br />
arrival in hostile territory. Four C-130s were<br />
flying through a storm front that had the pilots worried<br />
about falling behind schedule. There were also two<br />
Boeing 707s, one acting as an airborne command post,
the uganda Connection<br />
In the late 1950s the new state of Israel needed to strengthen its diplomatic and economic ties with the outside world. Uganda, a nation<br />
on the frontier of a hostile Arab and Muslim world, was a country whose friendship the Israelis thought worth cultivating. In April<br />
1963, Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir signed a treaty of cooperation with newly independent Uganda. But the friendship would end<br />
when Idi Amin seized control of the government in January 1971. Ironically, an Israeli firm had built Entebbe Airport during friendlier<br />
times.<br />
Amin had been chief of the Ugandan armed forces, and had initially come to power promising to restore the constitutional government<br />
former President Milton Obote had usurped. Amin made himself dictator, however, and proceeded to establish a reputation for<br />
torture and massacre. He gained some notoriety in the West for statements praising Hitler. Still, many Africans saw him as a shrewd<br />
leader clearing the last vestiges of European colonialism from the continent.<br />
In the summer of 1971 the Israelis inadvertently offended Amin. Four African heads of state flew to Israel as emissaries of the Organization<br />
of African Unity to attempt to mediate peace in the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict. Amin decided he wanted to attend, but the<br />
Israeli government, aware he was not popular with the other African delegates, hinted a visit at that time might not be prudent. Amin’s<br />
attempt to muscle into the African delegation was a failure. He blamed the Israelis.<br />
Soon afterward, Amin requested a squadron of Israeli Phantom fighter jets attack neighboring Tanzania and Kenya so he could seize<br />
tracts of land from those countries. When Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dyan refused to provide the aircraft, Amin threw in his lot<br />
with oil-rich Libya and began virulent verbal attacks on Israel.<br />
In March 1972, Amin began admitting student pilots from terrorist organizations into the Ugandan Air Force Academy. He also<br />
began to compare himself to Hitler. That same month he gave Uganda’s sizable Israeli colony a few hours to get out of the country.<br />
(Amin had perhaps another reason for his erratic policies. He had briefly visited Israel in order to be treated for syphilis, but proved a<br />
most uncooperative patient.)<br />
Gideon Gera, former senior officer in the Israeli military and an expert on Middle East affairs, speculated on why the terrorists had<br />
struck in June 1976: “It seems the Palestinian question is no longer enjoying enthusiastic and growing support as it did a year ago when<br />
it peaked with Arafat’s appearance at the U.N. The war in Lebanon, the terrible slaughter, has damaged the Palestinian organization’s<br />
prestige, and detracted from their popularity even in the Arab world. The terror groups that thought up this hijacking wanted to prove<br />
one thing—the war against Israel continues!”<br />
A major policy of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was<br />
that in negotiations with terrorists the main objective was to free<br />
hostages rather than give in to demands to release prisoners from<br />
Israeli jails. When a hijacking took place in a country friendly to<br />
Israel, Rabin’s policy was that the responsibility for saving the<br />
hostages lay with the host country. Uganda, however, was no longer<br />
friendly to Israel, and the French (who owned the hijacked<br />
airliner) showed little inclination to take the lead in resolving the<br />
situation. When the Entebbe crisis broke, Rabin realized the Israelis<br />
would have to take on the terrorists by themselves.<br />
As for Idi Amin, he would later be overthrown following a<br />
disastrous war with Tanzania. He fled to Saudi Arabia where he<br />
died in 2003.<br />
the other an airborne hospital. They were all escorted<br />
by Israeli Air Force F4 Phantom fighters, the Phantoms<br />
then having to turn back owing to fuel limitations.<br />
The operation’s precise planning left no margin<br />
for tardiness, but the weather was not severe enough to<br />
significantly interfere. As the aircraft approached Entebbe,<br />
the men within them strapped on equipment and<br />
ammunition, checked their weapons, and prayed. Just<br />
before 11:00 p.m., 3 July, a bell in the lead transport<br />
signaled imminent landing.<br />
on the Ground<br />
A teen-aged soldier named Tzur Ben-Ami had been<br />
chosen to drive the Mercedes and, as he cranked its<br />
freshly tuned engine, Netaniahu and seven other commandoes<br />
squeezed into the compact. More soldiers<br />
climbed into two jeeps lashed into place behind the<br />
Mercedes.<br />
Ground view: hostages in front of the Entebbe terminal.<br />
Fortunately, a passenger plane was scheduled to arrive at Entebbe<br />
Airport at about the same time, and one runway’s landing<br />
lights were burning, guiding in the Israelis. At 11:03, 30 seconds<br />
behind schedule, the first Hercules touched down. Before the<br />
plane came to a full stop, the Mercedes, closely followed by the<br />
jeeps, was out and headed to the terminal.<br />
More soldiers charged from the lead plane and headed for the<br />
control tower to ensure there would be no interference from there<br />
when the time came to leave. At that moment, the Mercedes was<br />
approaching the terminal where the hostages were imprisoned.<br />
The car was of a type the Israelis were not expecting to be challenged.<br />
High-ranking Ugandan Army officers were issued black<br />
Mercedes for their personal use, and the rescuers hoped the sen-<br />
strategy & tactics 47
48 #232<br />
tries would assume theirs contained at least one senior<br />
officer. The Ugandan soldier on duty, however, signaled<br />
the automobile and jeeps to stop. An Israeli automatic<br />
pistol barked, and the guard fell wounded. Netaniahu<br />
yelled at Ben-Ami: “Step on it!”<br />
A second guard standing near the control tower fired<br />
on the three vehicles. A paratroop sergeant in one of the<br />
jeeps opened up with his machinegun and killed him.<br />
Moments later the Mercedes and jeeps slid to a halt,<br />
their occupants spilled out and charged into the terminal.<br />
Wilfried Bose, the lead terrorist, had heard the commotion<br />
and stepped outside to see what was happening.<br />
A burst missed him and he ducked back inside. He<br />
turned toward the room where his cohorts were sleeping,<br />
bellowed, “Retreat!” and then aimed his carbine at<br />
the huddling hostages an instant before being shot dead<br />
by an Israeli commando<br />
Halima hurled a hand grenade at the prisoners, but it<br />
failed to explode. Seconds later she was gunned down<br />
with two of her confederates. Netaniahu and his men<br />
raced up the stairs, killed several Ugandan soldiers and<br />
had the three-story building secure in about a minute.<br />
Ugandans who did not resist were allowed to run<br />
away, but there were a few in the not-yet-secured control<br />
tower who had nowhere to go. One broke a window<br />
and aimed his rifle at an Israeli soldier who had just<br />
emerged from the terminal. It was Netaniahu, and the<br />
nameless Ugandan shot him in the back.<br />
In a few more minutes the control tower was neutralized<br />
and the airport secured. Eighteen minutes had<br />
elapsed since the Mercedes crossed the runway, and<br />
the commandoes were escorting the former hostages<br />
toward the waiting aircraft, but there were some missing.<br />
Seventy-five-year-old Dora Bloch had become seriously<br />
ill the previous night. The terrorists had allowed<br />
her to be taken to a nearby hospital, and there was no<br />
time to go after her.<br />
Men in black cars: the Mercedes the Israelis commandos used.<br />
Somewhere in the desert: Israeli paratroopers<br />
pracice air assaults.<br />
To assure there would be no aerial interception, the<br />
Israelis blew up 11 Ugandan MiG jet interceptors on the<br />
tarmac, while the Hercules crews hustled to refuel their<br />
planes from the airport’s tanks. Time was running short,<br />
however and Ugandan reinforcements were arriving.<br />
The remaining Israelis piled into the aircraft; the pilots<br />
cranked their engines and they all went thundering into<br />
the stormy African sky. It was 11:43 p.m., 40 minutes<br />
since the first plane had landed.<br />
Homeward Bound<br />
At Nairobi the C-130s landed and topped off their<br />
fuel tanks. Early the next morning the transports landed<br />
at Israel’s Ben Gurion International Airport to the cheers<br />
of thousands. One of the hostages, Pasco Cohen, died of<br />
a thigh wound suffered in the terminal from a wild burst<br />
from one of the terrorists. Seventeen-year-old Jacques<br />
Maimoni and elderly Ida Borowitz were two hostages<br />
mortally wounded by terrorists during the raid.<br />
Lt. Col. Netaniahu died moments after the planes<br />
took off, and Israel’s government quickly changed<br />
Thunderball’s name to Operation Jonathan in honor of<br />
the fearless young martyr. Six of Wadia Hadad’s terrorists<br />
were killed in the terminal, and the additional operatives<br />
who had arrived after Air France 139 landed<br />
survived only because they were not present during the<br />
rescue operation. Twenty Ugandan soldiers were also<br />
slain. Apart from Netaniahu, the only Israeli military<br />
casualty was Sgt. Hershko Surin, killed in action.<br />
On Amin’s direct orders four of his secret police operatives<br />
went to the hospital and dragged Dora Bloch<br />
from her sickbed and into a waiting car. They drove the<br />
terrified old woman to a nearby sugar cane plantation<br />
and shot her to death. She wasn’t the only one to feel<br />
the Ugandan dictator’s wrath. Amin also executed some<br />
200 of his own officers in a mass scapegoating. These<br />
murders, of course, did nothing to change the outcome<br />
of the Entebbe raid.<br />
Rabin later announced, “We are steadfast in our<br />
determination not to allow terror to harm us. We shall<br />
strike at them in any place and at every opportunity.
the rescuers<br />
With a distinguished military career already behind him, 30year-old<br />
Lt. Col. Jonathan “Yoni” Netaniahu was chosen by the<br />
general staff to command Operation Thunderball. At age 18, Netaniahu<br />
had received his officer cadet school graduate pin from then-<br />
Army Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin, so the prime minister knew of<br />
the young man and his abilities from way back.<br />
Netaniahu was born in New York City in 1946, and later moved<br />
to Israel. He joined the Israeli Army, volunteered for the paratroopers<br />
and graduated from officer training school. He served during<br />
the 1967 Six Day War, then briefly returned to the United States<br />
to attend Harvard. He went back to Israel in order to engage in the<br />
ongoing struggle against the Arabs. His brother Benjamin (who<br />
would later go on to international fame as a counter-terrorism<br />
expert) was a member of the top secret special operations force<br />
called the Sayeret Matkal (known sometimes as “the Unit”). Jonathan<br />
joined up and demonstrated his abilities in special operations,<br />
quickly becoming the unit’s deputy commander.<br />
In 1972 he led an Israeli commando team in a raid into Lebanon<br />
that seized several high ranking Syrian officers to be exchanged<br />
for Israeli pilots who had been captured. During the 1973 war he<br />
and his men fought the Syrians on the Golan Heights. He briefly<br />
transferred to command an armored brigade, but in June 1975 was<br />
appointed commander of Sayeret Matkal. During the following<br />
year he was involved with several special operations missions, all<br />
of which have remained classified—except Entebbe.<br />
…terror is a cancer in the body of the Free World, and Israel sees it<br />
as her duty to lop off the malignant tentacles. It is to be hoped that<br />
[Operation Jonathan’s] influence will not die away, that the terror<br />
organizations will understand the capability that is the fist of the<br />
Israeli Army.”<br />
turning Point<br />
The success of the Entebbe rescue mission was just what Israel<br />
needed. Rabin and his ministers were relieved to see their country<br />
revive from the dark mood which had blanketed the nation since the<br />
1972 terrorist massacre of the Israeli Olympic team in Munich, and<br />
the Arabs’ battlefield successes early in the 1973 war.<br />
The impression had been well made. Throughout the West and<br />
even in parts of the Third World praise for the Israeli raid on Entebbe<br />
left no doubt that there was widespread support for a new<br />
offensive against terrorism. The IDF showed how counter-terrorist<br />
operations could be executed even against seemingly impossible<br />
odds. Good intelligence, thorough training and, most importantly, a<br />
refusal to give in to demands were the winning combination.<br />
References<br />
Ben-Porat, Yeshayahu. Haber, Eitan. Schiff, Zeevi. Entebbe Rescue,<br />
Dell Publishing, 1977.<br />
Hastings, Max. Yoni: Hero of Entebbe, The Dial <strong>Press</strong>, 1979.<br />
Kyemba, Henry. A State of Blood: The Inside Story of Idi Amin,<br />
Ace Books, 1977.<br />
Netaniahu, Jonathan. Self-Portrait of a Hero: The Letters of Jonathan<br />
Netaniahu, Random House, 1980.<br />
Lt. Col. Jonathan<br />
Netaniahu<br />
Route chosen for the raid.<br />
strategy & tactics 49
Name<br />
address<br />
Game Scale<br />
Units: Primarily brigade/divisional<br />
1000 to 1500 men per strength point for<br />
infantry, 450 to 900 men per strength<br />
point of cavalry, 2 to 3 batteries per<br />
strength point of artillery.<br />
Time: Weekly turns composed of two to<br />
three impulses.<br />
Map: 5 miles per hex.<br />
game<br />
Qty priCe total<br />
City, state Zip<br />
phoNe email<br />
Visa/mC (oNly)#<br />
expiratioN date<br />
sigNature<br />
50 #232<br />
Cossacks are Coming $60.00<br />
The Cossacks Are Coming! 2nd Edition is a brigade/division<br />
level model of the Russian invasion of Germany in August and September<br />
of 1914. The design is a revision of the original “The Cossacks<br />
are Coming!” (People’s War Games 1982). Based on the 3rd edition<br />
Death of Empires rules system the five scenarios include an introductory<br />
scenario, three individual battle scenarios (Gumbinnen, Tannenberg and<br />
First Masurian) and a campaign game scenario.<br />
S&H<br />
TOTAL ORDER<br />
Available through:<br />
Game Contents<br />
• 840 two sided die cut counters<br />
• One 22” x 34” Map<br />
• Standard and Exclusive Rule Booklets<br />
• 4 Player Aid Charts<br />
• 6 Strategic and Army Charts<br />
• 8 Campaign Scenario Set-up Charts<br />
• Two 6-sided dice<br />
PO Box 21598<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390<br />
661/587-9633 • fax 661/587-5031 • www.decisiongames.com<br />
shipping Charges<br />
1st item Adt’l items Type of Service<br />
$8 $2 UPS Ground/US Mail Domestic Priority<br />
15(20) 4 UPS 2nd Day Air (Metro AK & HI)<br />
14(10) 2(7) Canada, Mexico (Express)<br />
17(25) 7(10) Europe (Express)<br />
20(25) 9(10) Asia, Africa, Australia (Express)
Kaiserschlacht 1918<br />
This classic game covers the climactic campaigns of 1918<br />
on World War I’s western front, and was designed by Richard<br />
Spence.<br />
After the surrender of Russia, Germany massed its elite assault<br />
Stoss (shock) divisions in the west in order to seek a final, decisive<br />
victory. The question therefore became: could the Allies hold until<br />
fresh American units and the new tank weapon turned the tide in<br />
their favor?<br />
The game includes the campaign scenario along with three<br />
shorter ones. Special rules cover morale, air superiority, artillery,<br />
tanks, cavalry, trenches, rail nets, supply, replacement pools and<br />
much more. Game components include four original style maps,<br />
over 500 die cut counters, a rules book and player aid card; ziplock.<br />
Ships in its own mailing envelope. $85<br />
3<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
15Co<br />
6<br />
2<br />
6<br />
2<br />
4<br />
1<br />
XX<br />
77<br />
XX<br />
6<br />
6<br />
1<br />
4<br />
2<br />
1<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
5<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
5A<br />
TITle<br />
QTY PRICe TOTAl<br />
Shipping Charges<br />
5<br />
6<br />
2<br />
1<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
23<br />
5<br />
1<br />
4<br />
2<br />
Ziplocks count as 2 for 1 for<br />
shipping.<br />
1st item Adt’l items Type of Service<br />
$8 $2 UPS Ground/US Mail Domestic Priority<br />
15(20) 4 UPS 2nd Day Air (Metro AK & HI)<br />
14(10) 2(7) Canada, Mexico (Express)<br />
17(25) 7(10) Europe (Express)<br />
20(25) 9(10) Asia, Africa, Australia (Express)<br />
15<br />
1 3 0<br />
4<br />
2<br />
6<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
3<br />
XX<br />
25<br />
4<br />
1<br />
4<br />
2<br />
6<br />
2<br />
XX<br />
10<br />
6<br />
1<br />
trajaN: aNCieNt Wars series<br />
expaNsioN<br />
Prepare to march with a special edition of the Ancient Wars series:<br />
Trajan, Roman Civil War, Caesar in Gallia and Germania,<br />
which appeared in various issues of <strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong> over the<br />
years. Trajan: Ancient Wars Series Expansion includes special<br />
rules to combine all four maps into campaigns covering the entire<br />
Roman Empire. There is also a set of additional counters which<br />
provides every legion of the early Empire, plus assorted foes such<br />
as Spartacus and Boadicea. New scenarios include the Crisis of the<br />
Republic, Year of the Four Emperors, Marcus Aurelius versus the<br />
Germans, Septimus Severus versus everyone, and “what if” Julius<br />
Caesar had not been assassinated? The game includes the campaign<br />
scenario along with three shorter ones.<br />
The Basic Kit includes 180 new counters, new standards rules<br />
& scenario booklets, and 20 assorted player aid cards; ziplock.<br />
This requires the player to have the original map/counter sets<br />
that appeared in S&T. $30<br />
The Enhanced Expansion Kit includes all of the above plus<br />
additional Player Aid Cards that are cardstock reprints of the<br />
original Player Aid Cards plus choice of one map/counter set<br />
(Gallia or Germania); ziplock. $40<br />
• Boxes are $15. (Enhanced Kit in a box $50)<br />
SUB To Ta l<br />
TaX (Ca. RES.)<br />
$<br />
S&H<br />
$<br />
ToTal oRDER<br />
$<br />
Send To:<br />
Decision Games,<br />
PO Box 21598,<br />
Bakersfield CA 93390<br />
661/587-9633<br />
Fax- 661/587-5031<br />
www.decisiongames.com click on Excalibre banner<br />
strategy & tactics 51
52 #232<br />
Miyamoto Musashi (1584–1645)<br />
“The Legendary Swordsman”<br />
by Lt. Col. Alistair Pope, psc (Retired)
The Early Years<br />
In 1584, Miyamoto Musashi was born into a minor<br />
branch of the samurai nobility. He was orphaned<br />
at an early age and brought up by his uncle, a priest<br />
and samurai. Little is known of his early years, but<br />
Musashi himself has written he fought his first duel<br />
when he was only 13 years old. Since he was the son<br />
of a low ranked samurai, it is probable his uncle had<br />
schooled him in kendo (or kenjutsu), sword-fighting<br />
technique.<br />
The duel is mentioned in the Introduction to<br />
Musashi’s book on strategy and life, The Book of the<br />
Five Rings, his great legacy to Japan. In it he sets out<br />
the story of his life and the philosophy of his warrior<br />
code: the way of the sword. The book was written<br />
by Musashi late in life, as a series of letters to one<br />
of his students, but was not compiled until long after<br />
his death when his students collated the stories of his<br />
duels and preserved his philosophy.<br />
Musashi was an exceptional warrior who combined<br />
the great natural abilities of a prodigy with thorough<br />
training. His skill, courage and focused ruthlessness<br />
made him a formidable warrior with his chosen weapon,<br />
the sword. At 16 he fought and won another single-handed,<br />
mortal-combat duel against a samurai. As<br />
the samurai class lived and trained constantly for just<br />
such professional duels, those two victories at such a<br />
young age marked Musashi as having the potential to<br />
be as a legendary swordsman. And such legends were<br />
common in Japan. For example, there was Tsukahara<br />
Bokuden who, a century before, had traveled the land<br />
as a wandering ronin. The ronin were unattached samurai<br />
without mentors or allegiances to specific lords.<br />
They sometimes sought employment as teachers of<br />
martial skills or mercenaries.<br />
Soon after his second duel, Musashi began his own<br />
pilgrimage as a ronin in search of enlightenment. For<br />
the next three years his life was solely focused on developing<br />
his martial skills and seeking enlightenment<br />
through the way of the sword. His dedication was such<br />
that he did not wash, was unkempt and wandered Japan<br />
in poverty until he joined in the fight for the Shogunate<br />
as a samurai in the pay of Hideyori, the son of<br />
Toyotomi Hideyoshi.<br />
Japan in the Age of the Warlords<br />
For many centuries Japan had been a land of constant<br />
warfare among local warlords. Changing alliances,<br />
assassination and a web of intrigue prevented<br />
any single family or alliance of families from gaining<br />
dominance. Each warlord feared if a rival, or even an<br />
ally, became too powerful, his own power and position<br />
would be lost. Between 1573 and 1582, the Shogun<br />
Oda Nobunaga almost succeeded in uniting the<br />
country before he too was assassinated. His successor,<br />
Toyotomi Hideyoshi, continued consolidating the<br />
gains made and in the end succeeded. With Hideyo-<br />
Spear fighting in the mountains from the Wars of the<br />
Nambokucho period.<br />
shi’s death in 1598, new wars of succession broke out,<br />
ending with the defeat and death of Hideyoshi’s son<br />
Hideyori at the decisive battle of Seki ga Hara in 1603.<br />
Tokugawa Ieyasu became shogun. He ushered in the<br />
era of his Tokugawa clan, which maintained control<br />
of the country well into the 19th century. Musashi, age<br />
19, fought at Sekigahara on Hideyori’s side, and barely<br />
escaped with his life from the merciless slaughter<br />
that took place afterward.<br />
The Tokugawas influenced every part of Japanese<br />
society. They established rules of behaviour that affected<br />
education, law and government, creating a rigid<br />
structure of four classes: samurai (including the ruling<br />
elite), farmers, artisans and merchants. Under the<br />
Tokugawa dynasty’s laws, only a samurai could wear<br />
the long sword.<br />
strategy & tactics 53
54 #232<br />
Musashi the Ronin<br />
The warlords maintained large private armies of<br />
samurai to defend their estates and extend their power<br />
over weaker neighbours. By cleverly controlling the<br />
movement of the warlords and by the use of spies and<br />
assassins, the Tokugawas maintained their position.<br />
Consequently, the need to maintain private armies declined<br />
and many samurai found themselves without<br />
work. They became ronin (“wave men”) and offered<br />
their swords to fight as the opportunity arose. Many of<br />
the warrior brotherhood gave up the struggle to maintain<br />
their status and became artisans or merchants.<br />
Those samurai who remained in service had little<br />
to occupy them. Real or imagined insults frequently<br />
resulted in duels and deadly combat, simply as tests of<br />
skill. A ronin depended on his courage, skill and reputation<br />
to precede him and make him a welcome guest<br />
at the castles of local lords. With so many professional<br />
warriors in the land, the martial arts flourished among<br />
the nobility and was regarded as the highest form of<br />
study.<br />
It was within that context Musashi joined the ranks<br />
of the ronin. Under the new class system he had been<br />
granted high status but no means of support. So he<br />
wandered throughout Japan, following the tide of fortune<br />
and seeking enlightenment. Still, there were many<br />
brave and skilled samurai who did not fear Musashi.<br />
They too had no fear of death and were willing to test<br />
their skill and courage by challenging him to duels—<br />
duels from which Musashi inevitably emerged the victor.<br />
In 1605, Musashi arrived in Kyoto and began a<br />
vendetta against the powerful Yoshioka clan of fencing<br />
instructors. It is unclear if the feud extended back<br />
to his father, but it resulted in a series of duels between<br />
Musashi and several of the Yoshiokas. The first fight<br />
Kendo, Zen & Shinto<br />
Japanese society developed a unique combination of religion and the<br />
military arts. Kendo became an integral part of Japanese society and was<br />
interwoven into religion. The ultimate enlightenment for a warrior was<br />
to spiritually accept death in combat. For the samurai the abandonment<br />
of life without regret was the goal. Killing an opponent or being killed in<br />
combat were outcomes to be accepted with equanimity. That is why the<br />
last chapter of Musashi’s book is called “Void” in which the understanding<br />
of the student has reached such heights the knowledge of all things<br />
reduces everything to nothing. The end becomes the beginning and everything<br />
is simplicity.<br />
Few samurai claimed to have ever achieved that state of consciousness.<br />
To the Western mind it is an almost incomprehensible concept,<br />
though Zen precepts are often quoted by Westerners as a way of providing<br />
insight into the unknowable.<br />
Shintoism is essentially a peaceful religion, but it also was preferred by<br />
the samurai class. It recognized death as a transcendence from one state to<br />
another and was therefore particularly appropriate for those who routinely<br />
faced their own demise. For Musashi, it was no unattainable goal—it was<br />
a life’s quest and one he claimed to have succeeded in achieving.<br />
occurred because Musashi insulted Seijiro, head of the<br />
Yoshioka clan. To add further insult, Musashi fought<br />
Seijiro with a wooden sword while Seijiro used a<br />
steel blade. Musashi defeated him easily and beat him<br />
fiercely when he fell. Seijiro lost face and withdrew<br />
from the samurai ranks. He had been defeated with<br />
inferior weapons and had survived.<br />
This insult to the clan could not go unanswered,<br />
and Seijiro’s brother, Denshichiro, issued his own<br />
challenge. In a few seconds of combat Musashi killed<br />
his opponent with a blow to the head with his wooden<br />
sword. On the third occasion the challenge came from<br />
a boy who had no chance against Musashi, but it was<br />
an ambush. Many heavily armed Yoshioka retainers<br />
were present at the appointed site determined to kill the<br />
famous swordsman, but it was Musashi who surprised<br />
them. He rushed from hiding and in seconds fought his<br />
way through the small army of warriors determined to<br />
kill him. It was a ruthless, fanatically courageous and<br />
impressive demonstration of his unparalleled martial<br />
skills.<br />
As a result of those duels Musashi’s fame spread<br />
throughout Japan. Musashi found his reputation led<br />
to more and more challenges. Not every duel was to<br />
the death, but anyone crossing blades with him could<br />
not be certain of that. In the Niten Ki, or Two Heavens<br />
Chronicle, his followers recorded each of his contests.<br />
In eight years he fought over 100 duels and won them<br />
all, killing at least 60 of his opponents. Musashi’s opponents<br />
used real swords, but he had become so convinced<br />
of his own invincibility he usually preferred to<br />
use a wooden practice sword. Even so, he carried his<br />
long and short steel swords at all times. For instance,<br />
when he killed Shishido Baikin with a knife during a<br />
duel, Baikin’s followers attacked him and he had to<br />
draw both his blades to fight them off.<br />
Musashi continued to find employment as a mercenary<br />
in several local wars, and continued to duel with<br />
all-comers. In Edo, he once defeated another famous<br />
samurai, Muso Gonosuke, with a willow sword. He<br />
did not kill Gonosuke, who chivalrously accepted his<br />
defeat as Musashi struck him with his willow while<br />
avoiding the cut of Gonosuke’s sharp steel. After<br />
further wanderings, Musashi visited Izumo province<br />
where he defeated both Lord Matsudaira and his fencing<br />
instructor in mock combat duels, though both his<br />
opponents used real weapons. At Matsudaira’s invitation,<br />
Musashi stayed on as his teacher.<br />
Probably Musashi’s most famous fight—and the<br />
one in which he probably came closest to losing—was<br />
with Sasaki Kojiro in 1612. The duel was to be held<br />
on an island near Ogura. Musashi arrived late by boat<br />
and was particularly unkempt, even by his standards.<br />
His weapon was a wooden sword fashioned from an<br />
oar. Kojiro’s first slash cut the scarf from Musashi’s<br />
head, narrowly missing him. Musashi’s riposte was<br />
true and smashed into Kojiro’s skull, killing him. As
The Age of the Samurai<br />
The geographic isolation of Japan guarded the islands from invasion by the Mongol and<br />
Chinese Empires, and also shielded the Japanese from the influences of the wider world. As<br />
a consequence, Japan developed a unique political and military culture.<br />
Ancient Japanese society was theoretically based on the Confucian ideal of a central<br />
government ruled by an emperor. Those in the army were essentially armed civil servants,<br />
instruments of the state. In AD 684 a law was passed that made every peasant liable for<br />
military service in the rmperor’s army when required; however, that system broke down<br />
in periods of protected conflict. The Gempei War of the 12 th century, essentially a feud between<br />
powerful military families, resulted in Mimanota Yoritomo declaring himself Shogun<br />
(supreme barbarian-fighting general). In effect, the Shogun was military dictator.<br />
For the next several centuries, the Shogunate dominated the military and political<br />
spheres, with the emperor reduced to a shadowy figurehead. Under the Shogunate, troops<br />
were increasingly provided by daimyos (local nobility) from their retainers. Those retainers<br />
became the samurai military caste. In the latter part of the 16th century, Oda Nobunaga<br />
and Toyotomi Hideyoshi unified Japan with the usual bloodbath. Hideyoshi would go on<br />
to invade Korea and fight the Chinese in a pointless war. A brief civil war followed, with<br />
Tokugawa Ieyasu finally coming out on top. By the mid-17th century, the power of the<br />
Tokugawa Shogunate was such<br />
that peace and unity reigned in<br />
Japan until the coming of the<br />
Americans in 1854.<br />
Samurai Weapons & <strong>Tactics</strong><br />
“Samurai” literally means “one in service”, that<br />
is, a soldier. The Samurai traditionally carried two swords, the long<br />
(katana or tachi) and the short (wakizashi or tanto). Japanese blades were<br />
constructed from multiple strips of iron and steel. The former gave the blade<br />
flexibility, the latter its razor sharpness.<br />
The longbow was also a samurai weapon, and much was made of the art of<br />
skillfully drawing an arrow and firing. Interestingly, despite the length of the<br />
weapon, the Japanese bow was short ranged. Consequently, the Japanese were<br />
quick to take to the arquebus (an early musket) when they were introduced by<br />
European merchants in the 16th century.<br />
A wide array of spears and glaives, such as the naginata were also used.<br />
The latter were frequently carried by peasant soldiers, or ashigaru. Japanese<br />
cavalry were skilled in horse archery, though they frequently dismounted to<br />
fight.<br />
There is little evidence of military units such as European regiments in<br />
samurai armies. Instead, samurai and ashigaru apparently fought as warbands<br />
under the leadership of various daimyos.<br />
The samurai made much of individual combat, even in pitched battle, and<br />
the ideal was to fight the enemy’s champion. Nonetheless, skillful generals took<br />
a more disciplined approach, and tactics such as arquebus volley fire and the<br />
defense of field fortifications were common in Musashi’s era.<br />
strategy & tactics 55
56 #232<br />
Kojiro’s razor sharp sword fell from his dead hand,<br />
it cut through the hem of Musashi’s skirt. Those two<br />
near misses made that fight the closest he ever came to<br />
being wounded or killed.<br />
In 1614, Musashi joined his old foes, the Tokugawas,<br />
as a mercenary and fought in the bloody siege of<br />
Osaka Castle. He continued to wander for another 20<br />
years plying his deadly trade until in 1634 he returned<br />
to Ogura and stayed with Lord Churi in Kumamoto. In<br />
1638, Musashi was present as an officer in the army<br />
that fought against the southern lords and the Japanese<br />
Christians who had risen in rebellion. The rebellion<br />
was ruthlessly crushed. Following that campaign, the<br />
Japanese closed their countries to foreigners for the<br />
next two centuries. Musashi once again chose his own<br />
course, and in 1643 at the age of 59 he sought solitude.<br />
He became a recluse living in a mountain cave called<br />
Reigendo.<br />
Go Rin No Sho –The Book of the Five Rings<br />
It was in Reigendo that Musashi dictated Go Rin<br />
No Sho, the Book of the Five Rings, to his student Teruo<br />
Nobuyuki as a series of letters. Go Rin No Sho is<br />
one of those cryptic books in which meaning is to be<br />
found in the interpretation of the reader. Beginners and<br />
Warrior elite: Samurai in full armor with bow.<br />
masters can read the same passage and find different<br />
meanings. Musashi himself stated he did not reach a<br />
full understanding of the Way until 1634, at the age of<br />
50, and that despite years of training and experience.<br />
Musashi wrote: “When you have attained the Way<br />
of strategy there will not be one thing that you cannot<br />
understand. You will see the Way in everything.”<br />
Musashi commanded no great armies and never<br />
sought power for himself. His dedication to his warrior<br />
skills and his almost mystical seeking of the Way<br />
has had influence on the psychology of the Japanese,<br />
not unlike the impact the Medieval European quest<br />
for the Holy Grail had on Western civilization (though<br />
Musashi is much better documented historically than,<br />
say, King Arthur). Indeed, the preface to every text<br />
on Kendo acknowledges a debt to Go Rin No Sho.<br />
Musashi had proved the Way was achievable. The enlightenment<br />
it brought was the essence of Musashi’s<br />
persona made him invincible in combat. To the Japanese<br />
he is ranked among the few who have been given<br />
the title of Kinsei, or Sword Saint, and even among<br />
that group Musashi stands alone.<br />
Musashi was not a brutal man, but his code meant<br />
he was merciless. He did not fear death in combat and<br />
expected no quarter from his opponents. By the same<br />
token, he gave no mercy if the circumstances demanded<br />
it. In his 30 years as a wandering ronin and mercenary,<br />
Musashi probably killed more than 100 men in<br />
combat, yet never suffered a single wound, no matter<br />
how many opponents faced him.<br />
In May 1645, shortly after dictating his last letter<br />
on the concept of void, Musashi died. He left behind<br />
no family and no Kendo school to carry on his work.<br />
Yet his reputation was such that he was not forgotten,<br />
and his book became the core text for those seeking to<br />
follow the Way. Musashi had sought only personal enlightenment,<br />
but his legacy for the Japanese is that he<br />
set such a high standard and laid out a code of behaviour<br />
many have sought to follow his example. None<br />
has equaled his achievements to this day.<br />
Bibliography<br />
The Book of the Five Rings – Miyamoto Musashi, Cassell Military Paperbacks,<br />
First Published 1994, Reprinted 2001 (Great Britain).<br />
A Book of Five Rings – Miyamoto Musashi, Translated by Victor Harris.<br />
The Outlook <strong>Press</strong>, Petere Mayer Publishers Inc, Woodstock, New<br />
York First Published 1974.<br />
The Book of Five Rings for Executives: Musashi’s Classic Book of Competitive<br />
<strong>Tactics</strong> – Donald G. Krause. W.S. Bookwell, Nicholas Brearley<br />
Publishing, 1998. (This is a well known popular book which<br />
mangles every idea Musashi championed to suit the business ideas<br />
of the author.)<br />
Musashi – Eiji Yoshikawa, translated by Charles Terry, ISBN 4-7700-<br />
1957-2<br />
Samurai Warfare – Dr. Stephen Turnbull. Arms and Armour <strong>Press</strong> (UK),<br />
(1998).
Musashi writes<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> is the craft of the warrior. Commanders must enact the craft, and<br />
troopers should know this. There is no warrior in the world today who<br />
really understands the Way of strategy<br />
In strategy your spiritual bearing must not be any different from normal. Both<br />
in fighting and in everyday life you should be determined though calm.<br />
In my strategy, the training for killing enemies is by way of many contests,<br />
fighting for survival, discovering the meaning of life and death, learning<br />
the Way of the sword, judging the strength of attacks and understanding<br />
the Way of the “edge and ridge” of the sword.<br />
In strategy you must know the Ways of other schools.<br />
What is called the spirit of the void is where there is nothing. It is not included<br />
in man’s knowledge. Of course the void is nothingness. By knowing things<br />
that exist, you can know that which does not exist. That is the void.<br />
strategy & tactics 57
58 #232<br />
mega feedback 232<br />
Please take a few minutes to review the following game<br />
proposals and select the ones you would like to see us publish.<br />
Mail in the card found in this issue or e-mail your feedback with<br />
your name and address to Doc at: ccummins@bak.rr.com. This<br />
annual feedback is the most important source for determining<br />
what games we will be working on for future issues of <strong>Strategy</strong><br />
& <strong>Tactics</strong>. In addition, we are seeking your input on other projects<br />
we’re considering.<br />
We also have a feature on our web site (decisiongames.com)<br />
where you can pledge your support for future boxed games. As<br />
the boxed games move up the rankings, they move forward into<br />
design, development, artwork, printing and release. You can<br />
also see the latest listing in the next Dispatch.<br />
The game line-up for the next year will be:<br />
S&T#233: Dagger Thrusts: Monty and Patton<br />
S&T#234: Lest Darkness Fall: Rome<br />
S&T#235: Cold War Battles: Budapest and Angola<br />
S&T#236: They Died With Their Boots On: Custer & Quebec<br />
S&T#237: No Prisoners!: WWI Middle East<br />
S&T#238: Marlborough<br />
S&T Games in development include:<br />
Operation Winged Horse Holy Roman Empire<br />
1066 SEALORDS<br />
Ottomans Twilight Triple Alliance War<br />
Boots 2: Pershing & Mad Anthony Manila ‘45<br />
We need your help in ranking the current candidates for<br />
<strong>Strategy</strong> & <strong>Tactics</strong> to determine our priorities. Remember to<br />
rank each set from first (the one you would like to see published<br />
sooner or have more interest in) to whatever number is in the set<br />
(a set of five proposals for Ancient games would be marked 1,<br />
the most preferred choice, to 5, the least preferred choice).<br />
ancient/medieval/renaissance (to circa aD<br />
1600; mark 1 to 5)<br />
A1. Second Punic War. The epic conflict between the Roman<br />
and Carthaginian republics, 219-202 BC, using the Charlemagne-Xenophon<br />
system. Both the Roman and Carthaginian<br />
players would have to face not only enemy forces in the field<br />
but also shifting alliances, backstabbing stratagems and barbarian<br />
invasions. The game would also include combat results<br />
tables differentiating between the Roman, Carthaginian and<br />
Hellenistic forms of warfare. Joseph Miranda.<br />
A2. Caesar. The civil wars that wracked the Roman Empire<br />
during the late republic, using the classic SPI Battle for Germany<br />
system. Each player would control one faction in the<br />
civil wars (Caesarian, Senatorial, Antonine, etc.) as well as one<br />
“barbarian” faction (Gauls, Parthians, etc.). Players will have to<br />
fight not only their Roman opponents, but also the barbarians<br />
facing them across the frontiers of their particular section of the<br />
Roman world. To win, players must seize control of the city of<br />
Rome and gain public support, the latter measured by a popularity<br />
index. High popularity provides recruits and income; low<br />
popularity means troop desertions. Units will include historic<br />
legions, plus auxiliaries, fleets and barbarian hordes. Joseph<br />
Miranda.<br />
A3. Julian. A strategic/operational-level game of the campaigns<br />
of the 4th century AD Roman Emperor Flavius Claudius<br />
Julianus, who led the later Roman Empire in several campaigns<br />
of military glory, defeating the Germans on the Rhine and<br />
then conducting an invasion of Persia.<br />
A4. Great Medieval Battles. More battles using the system<br />
from the SPI edition. Battles drawn from Crecy (the first<br />
great triumph of the longbow over feudal knights), Hastings<br />
(William the Conqueror versus King Harold), Manzikert (the<br />
turning point of the Byzantine Empire), Leipzig (Mongols<br />
versus Europe), and Arsouf (Richard the Lionhearted versus<br />
Saladin), Battle of the Standard (English versuss Scots), The<br />
Hidden Valley (Mongol Tuman versus The Pagan Empire of<br />
Burma), Maldon (Vikings versus Saxons. The Great Medieval<br />
Battles system uses different sized counters to represent<br />
different troop formations. Rules include fire, melee, cavalry<br />
charges, broken lances, morale, and leaders. Joseph Miranda,<br />
Dick Vohlers, Heath Avery.<br />
A5. Great Renaissance Battles. This will use a system similar<br />
to Great Medieval Battles to simulate two decisive actions<br />
of 1400-1600. The game will use variably sized counters to<br />
show tactical formations: large squares for Spanish tercios<br />
and Swiss phalanxes, rectangles for cavalry, small squares<br />
for skirmishers, etc. Units will be rated for their weapons,<br />
defense and morale, with rules to trace the improvements of<br />
gunpowder weapons in this period. Historic leaders will be<br />
included, and command rules will show the increasing professional<br />
quality of the battlefield. Joseph Miranda.<br />
Gunpowder (circa 1600 to 1900 a.D.;<br />
mark 1 to 6)<br />
B1. Sedan Sequel. We have two possible follow-up games<br />
for Sedan, “On to Paris,” which covers the second half of the<br />
Franco-Prussian War in which the Germans besieged Paris<br />
and the French mounted desperate counteroffensives, and<br />
“1866,” which covers the Austro-Prussian War. If they can<br />
fit on one map and counter sheet we’ll publish both, otherwise<br />
we’ll put the two up for a vote on the next round. Ty<br />
Bomba and Joseph Miranda.<br />
B2. Raj. The Asia Crossroads system recreates the British-<br />
French struggle for control of the Indian sub-continent in the<br />
18th century. Game map will use a square grid, and turns<br />
will each represent four years of operations. Units will be<br />
brigade-level, which can be built up into larger formations.<br />
All major leaders will be shown, as well as naval forces.<br />
Diplomacy will be critical as players must gain the support<br />
of local Indian forces, including the powerful Maharattas.<br />
Players will also be able to develop their economic base by<br />
building trading posts and colonies. There will be several<br />
scenarios, including the Indian part of the Seven Years War.<br />
Joseph Miranda.<br />
B3. War of the Austrian Succession (1741-45). This was<br />
Frederick the Great’s first great campaign, in which he contested<br />
Silesia with Maria Teresa of the Habsburg Empire<br />
in a conflict that involved all the major European powers.<br />
The game will use the S&T Seven Years War/On To Moscow<br />
system to recreate the era of formal warfare. Units will be<br />
infantry and cavalry brigades rated for their strength, morale<br />
and movement. All major leaders will be included. The diplomatic<br />
system will recreate the shifting alliances of the period,<br />
and the balance of power index will let players keep an<br />
eye on whoever is getting too far ahead. Joseph Miranda.<br />
B4. Unknown Napoleonic Wars. This would include two<br />
operational-level games of Napoleonic campaigns rarely<br />
covered. Units will be brigade to division, with leaders and<br />
depots. Campaigns will be drawn from: Beyond the Pyramids
(the French campaign in Egypt and Syria, 1798-1800); On to<br />
Constantinople (Russia versus Turkey, 1806-07, a campaign<br />
that saw, among other things, the citizenry of Constantinople<br />
repulse a British fleet); Winter War (Russia invades Finland<br />
and fights Sweden, 1808-09). Each side will have a morale<br />
index that will give bonuses in combat and movement if you<br />
are winning, and can lead to collapse if it goes too low—but<br />
can also be used to obtain an armistice on favorable terms<br />
even if you are losing. Joseph Miranda.<br />
B5. Sun Never Sets II. This will be a sequel game to DG’s<br />
Sun Never Sets, covering the wars of the British Empire in<br />
the 19 th century. Units are battalions for “civilized” armies<br />
and warbands for others. Each unit is rated for its weapons,<br />
type, strength, morale and movement. A unique quasitactical<br />
combat resolution system catches the spirit of the<br />
era with everything from Gatling guns to bayonet charges.<br />
There’s always the chance to break a British square, or rout a<br />
superior enemy force. All major leaders are included, as well<br />
as random events, supply, engineers and railroad building.<br />
Game scale is operational, with the entire theater of operations<br />
covered. Scenarios will be drawn from: Egypt 1882,<br />
Second Afghan War, Asante War and Persia.Designer: Roger<br />
Deal<br />
B6. Thirty Years War Battles. More battles using the Thirty<br />
Years War Quad system. Two battles would be drawn from:<br />
Fleurus, Alte Veste, Wittstock, and Lens (others from the era<br />
may be substituted). Joseph Miranda.<br />
americana (circa 1700 to 1900 a.D.; mark 1<br />
to 5)<br />
C1. War in the Far West. A simulation of the American<br />
Civil War in the southwest USA, Texas to California, 1861-<br />
62. The historic campaign saw small Confederate and Union<br />
armies maneuvering over vast territories in actions that contested<br />
control of the American frontier and could have decided<br />
the course of the entire war. The order of battle will<br />
include regular infantry, cavalry, engineers, artillery, militia,<br />
rangers and Indian scouts. All major leaders will be represented.<br />
Also included will be supply depots (which can be<br />
captured), forts, buffalo hunts, brevet ranks and the infamous<br />
“mule mines.” Chuck Diamond.<br />
C2. American Revolution. The game will have several scenarios,<br />
representing different times in the war, as well as a<br />
campaign scenario. Option cards will play off raising troops<br />
against maintaining the loyalty of different colonies as well<br />
as gaining or preventing French intervention. They will also<br />
generate temporary objectives, such as the invasion of Canada.<br />
Units will be different types of brigades (regulars, militia,<br />
dragoons, light infantry) that can be built into “wings”<br />
(divisions). Joseph Miranda.<br />
C3. La Glorieta Pass. At the high tide of the Confederate<br />
advance in the far west in March 1862, Gen. Sibley had captured<br />
Sante Fe and was threatening to advance into Colorado.<br />
Union forces were hastily gathered at Fort Union to<br />
counter his advance. The advance guards of the two forces<br />
clashed in Apache Canyon on 26 March, and the two main<br />
forces fought near La Glorieta Pass two days later. The Confederates<br />
were unable to break the Union forces, and lost<br />
most of their supplies to a Union raid, thereby forcing their<br />
retreat to Texas. The game would focus on the two battles<br />
using the original Twilight’s Last Gleaming system. Chuck<br />
Diamond.<br />
C4. Battles of The Valley. Jackson’s campaign in the<br />
Shenandoah Valley was one of the great sideshows of the<br />
Civil War. He never commanded more than 18,000 troops,<br />
yet managed to tie down over 60,000 Union troops, winning<br />
several battles and inflicting disproportionate losses. The<br />
game would use a system similar to Twilight’s Last Gleaming<br />
and feature two or three battles drawn from Kernstown,<br />
McDowell, Front Royal, Winchester, Cross Keys, and Port<br />
Royal. Chuck Diamond.<br />
C5. Pea Ridge. In February 1862, Confederate Gen. Earl<br />
Van Dorn launched his forces against the Union Army of<br />
the Southwest. After a night march in a snowstorm, the exhausted<br />
rebels nearly brought off a double envelopment of<br />
the enemy. Except for the untimely death of three key officers,<br />
Van Dorn might have cleared Missouri of Federals and<br />
precluded Grant’s Donelson campaign. Pea Ridge will use<br />
the Fateful Lightning system to recreate this critical battle.<br />
Units are regiments and battalions. Leaders enhance combat<br />
and movement, but only the key leaders are represented<br />
in the game. Hexes are 250m across; turns are 30 minutes.<br />
Both sides will have variable orders of battle, organization,<br />
deployment and missions to add to the fog of war. Chris Perello.<br />
early 20th century (circa 1898 to 1929 a.D.;<br />
mark 1 to 6)<br />
D1. First Battle of Britain. In World War I German zeppelins<br />
and Gotha bombers intruded into the skies over Britain<br />
in the first strategic air campaign. First Battle of Britain<br />
would be a fast moving simulation of this campaign. Units<br />
would represent individual zeppelins, aircraft squadrons, antiaircraft<br />
emplacements and various types of targets. Victory<br />
conditions would be a combination of military, economic<br />
and psychological objectives. The British would have the<br />
opportunity to strike back by launching raids against German<br />
airdromes, and developing early aircraft carriers. Players<br />
would have the opportunity to develop new technologies,<br />
such as radio coordination and early warning systems. Pilot<br />
quality would be a critical factor, and there would also be<br />
several historical individuals represented. 22 x 34” map, 280<br />
counters. To be designed by Joseph Miranda.<br />
D2. The Kaiser’s War. At the end of 1917, the Kaiser’s<br />
armies had triumphed in the Balkans, Italy and Russia,<br />
and the Second Reich stretched from central France to the<br />
Ukraine. A year later, that imperial edifice had come crashing<br />
down in ruin. The Kaiser’s War would be a strategiclevel<br />
wargame of the year 1918. The game map would cover<br />
France, the Low Countries, northern Italy, central Europe,<br />
the Balkans, Russia to the Volga, and the Ottoman Empire.<br />
Units would be mostly armies along with “army detachment”<br />
breakdowns. There would be special units such as<br />
shock troops (of all nations, not just Germany), tanks, the<br />
Asian Korps, Bolshevik Red Guards, etc. There would be<br />
a simple air war system, and naval units would be shown at<br />
fleet level, with the possibility of a sortie by the Austro-Hungarian<br />
Fleet if the Italians are defeated. Joseph Miranda.<br />
D3. First Blood Marne—Battles on the Marne, June-August<br />
1918. Though previously involved in battle, American<br />
troops were only blooded well and true for the first time in<br />
the First World War at the important Battle of Chateau-Thierry<br />
in June 1918. The green Yankees were committed at the<br />
very nose of the still potent German penetration along the<br />
Marne and not only stopped the enemy drive, but managed to<br />
strategy & tactics 59
60 #232<br />
mount their famous counterattack at Belleau Wood. A month<br />
later, a combined US and French force mounted a smashing<br />
attack on the German salient which still threatened Paris. In<br />
three bloody weeks the Allies reduced the salient, drew off<br />
Ludendorf’s reserves (until then earmarked for yet another<br />
German offensive in Flanders) and permanently wrested the<br />
strategic initiative from the Imperial German Army. This<br />
game would simulate these summer battles along the Marne<br />
at the regiment and brigade level, employing a variation of<br />
the Lost Battalions game system. Ty Bomba.<br />
D4. Plan 1919. Based on the premise World War I lasted another<br />
year, using the Reinforce the Right system. The game<br />
would include Gen. Fuller’s planned tank corps, strategic<br />
bombing, railroad guns and even an Allied parachute division.<br />
The Germans would also have elite Freikorps units that<br />
can use storm tactics. Units would be corps, with divisional<br />
breakdowns. American reinforcements for the Allies would<br />
be critical, including US Marine Corps amphibious assaults.<br />
There would also be an option for German tank fleets, which<br />
will allow for mass tank-versus-tank battles. The map will<br />
cover the Western Front from Paris to the Ruhr. Joseph Miranda.<br />
D5. Soldiers 2: Mobile Tactical Combat in Europe, 1918.<br />
An update of the SPI classic that covered the pre-trench warfare<br />
of 1914-15. Scenarios would include historic and whatif<br />
episodes from the western front, 21 March-11 November<br />
1918. The system would be kept simple, but expanded to<br />
cover heavy artillery, CW, air support, tanks, and infiltration<br />
tactics. Ty Bomba.<br />
D6. Operation Gericht—The Battle of Verdun, 1916. Turns<br />
equal one week and are of two types: attrition, in which the<br />
effects of a week’s shelling and contact are abstracted; and<br />
assault, broken into daily impulses of fluid movement and<br />
higher losses of major offensives. Artillery will be crucial.<br />
Rules for pioneers, Brandenburgers, Moroccans, territorials,<br />
melee, fortress reduction, isolation, morale, linear attack and<br />
morale are included. Units represent infantry battalions and<br />
regiments; artillery is designated abstractly by type. Large<br />
hex map with small counters. Ty Bomba.<br />
World War ii (circa 1930 to 1945 a.D.; mark<br />
1 to 6)<br />
E1. Barbarossa, 3rd ed. Army-level (with some corps) units<br />
are used on both sides to allow to players to game WWII’s<br />
entire eastern front, from Barbarossa to Berlin, in single evening.<br />
One map, one counter sheet. Ty Bomba.<br />
E2. Ty Bomba’s Kursk. The 1971 SPI flatbox edition of<br />
Kursk battle game was redesigned, in a mechanically overdone<br />
way, in 1979, as “Eric Goldberg’s Kursk.” This edition<br />
would return it to a simpler level using a derivation of the<br />
recent Drive on Stalingrad system, concentrate play on the<br />
July scenario, while also allowing for Manstein’s options of<br />
maximum reinforcements taken from all other fronts and attacking<br />
the western face of the salient. Ty Bomba.<br />
E3. Strike North: Japan Attacks the USSR. One of the<br />
great “what-ifs” of World War II, a hypothetical Japanese<br />
invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. The assumption is the<br />
Japanese decide to forego their offensive in the Pacific and<br />
instead invade the USSR to support the Third Reich. Units<br />
will be divisional and corps level, including air units. There<br />
will be different CRTs demonstrating Japanese and Soviet<br />
tactics. Joseph Miranda.<br />
E4. USAAF. An update/remake of Flying Fortress, origi-<br />
nally offered to Avalon Hill by the early SPI-crew. This<br />
game takes an operational/strategic, effects-based approach<br />
to modeling air operations in 1944, the decisive year in the<br />
air war over Hitler’s Europe. There would be two 1944 scenarios,<br />
one covering just US daylight efforts and a second,<br />
“Grand Campaign Game,” that would also include RAF<br />
night bombing. There will also be a one-month “mission<br />
game,” covering the destruction of the Luftwaffe fighterarm<br />
in March. Chrome would include: a full German FLAK<br />
order of battle, airfield strafing, variable German aircraft<br />
production (including exotic jet and rocket planes, with<br />
the player being able to choose where to put the emphasis),<br />
FLAK busting, P-47 drop tank problems, variable “critical”<br />
German industrial sectors, plus all kinds of optional aircraft<br />
to see the effects of faster R&D efforts on both sides. Additional<br />
scenarios will include the 1943 strategic bombing<br />
campaign, the pre-Overlord campaign, and alternative campaigns.<br />
Bomba/Miranda.<br />
E5. Salerno. The Victory in the West system moves on from<br />
Sicily (S&T#89) to the landings on the mainland. Nathan<br />
Kilgore.<br />
E6. Rhineland. What if Britain and France confronted<br />
Hitler when he reoccupied the Rhineland and did not back<br />
down? World War II breaks out in 1936. Both sides would be<br />
woefully unprepared, but there would have been some real<br />
potential for a Spanish Civil War style conflict in which the<br />
emerging military systems of armor and airpower would be<br />
employed. There would also be the chance for Soviet and<br />
US intervention. The game map would cover western and<br />
central Europe. Units would be divisions and corps, as well<br />
as airpower. Joseph Miranda.<br />
modern (circa 1946 to present; mark 1 to 3)<br />
F1. Air War 73. This would be a simulation of the 1973<br />
Arab-Israeli air war. Units would be squadron level, differentiated<br />
by aircraft type. The system would emphasize<br />
command control, electronic warfare, suppression of air defenses,<br />
and logistical planning. Players would have to trade<br />
off aircraft losses versus requirements of the ground war.<br />
Joseph Miranda.<br />
F2. Angola. This will be a strategic-level game of the Angolan<br />
civil war of 1976-1990s, using the S&T Holy War:<br />
Afghanistan system. During the Cold War, Angola became<br />
a major battleground of East versus West, which eventually<br />
developed into some major mechanized clashes. Forces will<br />
include the MPLA, Unita, FNLA, Cubans, South Africans,<br />
and CIA mercenaries, as well as possible UN and Organization<br />
of African Unity intervention forces. Units will be brigade-division<br />
level, with some special operations battalions.<br />
Units will be rated for their conventional military capability<br />
and their insurgency value. The political aspect of the war<br />
will be simulated via a chit picking system that will mobilize<br />
various forces and allow for the vicissitudes of international<br />
intervention. Turns will be yearly. The game will include<br />
several short scenarios as well as one grand campaign of the<br />
entire war. Joseph Miranda.<br />
F3. Cold War Battles II. This would include two games<br />
from the following: Pentomic (Soviet combined arms army<br />
versus US divisions in 1960 Germany, with plenty of tactical<br />
nukes);Kabul Strike (the initial Soviet intervention in<br />
Afghanistan, which saw airborne, Spetsnaz and mechanized<br />
forces seize control of the capital); Congo (mercenaries versus<br />
rebels in the 1960s); Sandinista (Nicaragua 1979, the final<br />
rebel offensive against Somoza’s National Guard). Game
system is based on Modern Battles, with battalions, air support<br />
and simple command control. Joseph Miranda.<br />
F4. Insurgency. Covers the first two years in Iraq following<br />
the ground campaign as the American-led Coalition attempts<br />
to rebuild infrastructure in the face of armed Iraqi resistance.<br />
Features a strategem chit system for special events and assymetrical<br />
advantages. George Carter.<br />
annual Double-Sized Game (mark 1 to 6)<br />
(Subject to positive results for question H1.)<br />
G1. Cobra. This third edition represents a new version of<br />
the original classic SPI/TSR D-Day to Cobra Allied Invasion<br />
and Breakout from the Normandy peninsula in one<br />
complete, expanded game. Results include the addition of<br />
the previously missing 3rd Sturm-Flak Korps to the German<br />
order of battle, appropriate terrain modifications to the map,<br />
and historic airborne drop zones. The new edition allows for<br />
more flexibility to the German invasion response and the<br />
elimination of the previous editions’ Allied “stroll through<br />
the Caumont Gap,” while retaining the flavor and excitement<br />
of the original SPI magazine game. Randy Heller.<br />
G2. Axis of Evil: North Korea. This two-map game examines<br />
the possibilities inherent in the US attempting a “regime<br />
change” war. The maps cover the Korean peninsula down to<br />
Seoul at eight miles per hex. The system is from Back to Iraq,<br />
allowing for solitaire play. Scenarios include a Chinese/US<br />
offensive and a Coalition-only campaign. The North will go<br />
down, but can they hold out long enough to score sufficient<br />
“Media Perception Points” with their SAMs, SCUDs and<br />
No-Dong-1 nuclear missiles. Bomba and Miranda.<br />
G3. Brigade Combat Team. An intensive simulation of<br />
modern Brigade Combat Team (BCT) operations. The player<br />
controls a combined arms brigade in scenarios drawn from<br />
1990 to the present and hypothetical situations in the future.<br />
Units would be companies and platoons. Players deal with<br />
a wide array of forces: combat, electronic warfare, various<br />
types of fire support, logistics, and special operations. Command<br />
control will be critical, as well as battlefield intelligence.<br />
Opposition forces would include conventional forces,<br />
terrorists, and urban warfare threats. Joseph Miranda.<br />
G4. Drive on Moscow. If the Germans had driven on Moscow<br />
in the summer of 1941 instead of turning south to encircle<br />
the Soviet armies at Kiev, could the Axis have won<br />
the war? Drive on Moscow allows you to explore this and<br />
other possibilities. The game has three scenarios: the first<br />
showing a hypothetical German concentration on Moscow<br />
in September of 1941; the second showing the historical<br />
German campaign, beginning in October; and a December<br />
scenario showing the Soviet counterattack. Game system is<br />
operational level, with divisions, airpower, allocation of logistics<br />
resources, and a unique multi-impulse system which<br />
models differences in German and Soviet mobile doctrines.<br />
Joseph Miranda.<br />
G5. Famous Divisions. Follow the exploits of the Gross<br />
Deutschland division against opponents at four battles of<br />
WWII. Company and platoon sized units and a command<br />
driven system. Scenarios include: Kursk, Mischurin Rog,<br />
Akhtyrka and Lutchessa Valley. John Schettler.<br />
G6. Chosin/Gauntlet. Chosin/Gauntlet covers the initial<br />
Chinese offensive in late 1950. Gauntlet was previously<br />
published in S&T and covers the fighting on the western side<br />
of the north Korean peninsula. Chosin was planned for S&T<br />
but could not meet the parameters for publication. It covers<br />
the fighting on the eastern side of Korea, including the epic<br />
US Marine fighting withdrawal from the Chosin resevoir.<br />
With this new format, the campaign can be shown across the<br />
entire front in one game. It’s a unique situation with the mobile<br />
Chinese infantry army versus the mechanized UN force.<br />
Units are regiments and some battalions, with plenty of infantry,<br />
armor and even rear area units that can be thrown into<br />
the fray. Rules cover air and naval power. Joseph Miranda.<br />
other Questions<br />
Please circle the letter of the response that most represents<br />
your interest or reaction.<br />
H1. S&T is considering adding an annual special issue with<br />
a double-sized game (7 issues per year), or two more regular<br />
issues (8 issues per year). Would you prefer:<br />
a) a double-sized game once a year;<br />
b) two more issues a year;<br />
c) something else (please specify).<br />
H2. S&T is considering starting a new version of the magazine<br />
with a computer game in each issue. These games<br />
would include iconic or animated symbols for the counters,<br />
options to see the historic battle or campaign played<br />
out by the computer, and options for AI, or the ability to<br />
play by e-mail or hot seat. Cost is expected to be about<br />
the same as the board game edition (about $23 per issue,<br />
or $100 for a 6-issue sub). Game topics would initially<br />
be drawn from the vast reserve of DG/SPI titles and then<br />
expand into new designs. The magazine would continue<br />
to be one printing with two feature articles, one for the<br />
board game and one for the computer game, plus two<br />
additional articles.<br />
a) Sign me up now!<br />
b) Tell me more and then I’m in (what do you need to<br />
know?) _______________________ .<br />
c) I’ll pick up a few issues when it’s out and then decide<br />
whether to subscribe.<br />
d) I’ll buy an occasional issue if it interests me.<br />
e) I’m a board wargamer and would never consider playing<br />
computer games.<br />
f) Other response: ___________________________ .<br />
H3. S&T is considering publishing card games for some issue<br />
games (something like our Lightning series). If there is<br />
favorable interest, we will run some proposals in the next<br />
Mega-Feedback.<br />
a) More variety in game presentation sounds great. Let’s<br />
see the proposals.<br />
b) No, I’m a counters and map wargamer and would never<br />
consider playing a card game.<br />
c) Other response: ______________________.<br />
H4. We are working on a new line of military history books.<br />
Many of the books would expand on topics found in S&T,<br />
going into greater depth. What topics would you like to see<br />
in future books? (Please list as many as you would like to<br />
see.)<br />
H5. What is your favorite wargame snack?<br />
Please use the enclosed Feedback card or a sheet<br />
of paper and mail to Decision Games.<br />
strategy & tactics 61
TiTle<br />
QTY Price TOTAl<br />
Shipping Charges<br />
1st item Adt’l Units Type of Service<br />
$8 $2 UPS Ground/US Mail Domestic Priority<br />
15(20) 4 UPS 2nd Day Air (Metro AK & HI)<br />
14(10) 2(7) Canada, Mexico (Express)<br />
17(25) 7(10) Europe (Express)<br />
62<br />
20(25)<br />
#232<br />
9(10) Asia, Africa, Australia (Express)<br />
A Place to Start<br />
Seven Days Battles<br />
Seven Days Battles covers the American Civil War battles before Richmond. The Confederates attempt to drive<br />
the Union away from their capital and deliver decisive blows at Seven Pines, Gaines Mills, and Frayser’s<br />
Farm. Finally, the Union makes a dramatic stand at Malvern Hill. The game also includes a scenario that<br />
brings the whole campaign together.<br />
Components: 400 counters, (2) 22” x 34” mapsheets, 16-page rule book. $28. 00<br />
Blue & Gray<br />
Refight five of the crucial battles of the American Civil War: First Bull Run (new),<br />
Shiloh, Second Bull Run (new), Cemetery Hill, and Chickamauga. Brigades<br />
and divisions slug it out—brother against brother. Players maneuver the counters<br />
representing the infantry, cavalry and artillery units that actually fought at<br />
each battle. This updated edition of the SPI classic makes for an enjoyable set of<br />
games for an afternoon or evening of fun.<br />
Components: 360 counters, 8-page rule book, (4) 22” x 17” maps, 1 die. $35. 00<br />
Battles of the Ancient World, Complete set<br />
Includes Volumes I, II & III A Total of 14 battles in one box!<br />
Volume I has four decisive battles—Arbela, Cannae, Pharsalus and Teutoburger Wald—presented<br />
in easy, quick-playing wargames for each volume. The average playing time is<br />
30 minutes to two hours. Each game utilizes short standard rules which are divided into<br />
introductory, basic and advanced to provide a span of simplicity and detail for every experience<br />
level. Components: 400 counters, (4) 17” x 22” mapsheets, rule book. Volume<br />
Two adds more battles to the popular Ancient World series. Scenarios include: Issus,<br />
Metaurus, Carrhae and Idivisto. Components: 8 page rulebooklet, 4 22” x 17” Maps, 420<br />
die-cut counters. Volume Three rounds out this collection with the following scenarios: Megiddo, Qadesh,<br />
Lake Trasimene, Munda, Boudicca, and Adrianople. Components: 520 die-cut counters,<br />
three 22 x 34” mapsheets, rules/scenario booklet and player aid card. $69. 95<br />
SUB To Ta l<br />
TaX (Ca. RES.)<br />
$<br />
S&H<br />
$<br />
ToTal oRDER<br />
$<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390-1598<br />
• (661) 587-9633 •fax 661/587-5031<br />
www.decisiongames.com
An Evening of Fun!<br />
NUTS!<br />
NUTS!: The Battle of the Bulge is a card game for two, three, or four players. Each player<br />
has a hand of cards, from which he may play cards each turn, and a draw deck, from<br />
which he may bring new cards into his hand. The cards include combat units, events,<br />
and significant pieces of terrain. Combat units are rated for Infantry, Armor, and Artillery<br />
combat strengths, leg or mechanized movement, and cohesion. Events are the situations<br />
from the actual battle. Terrain cards represent the significant geography of the battle (e.g.<br />
Bastogne, Meuse River, and Ellsborne Ridge) that was used to speed or slow the Germans<br />
attack. NUTS! comes in two 150-card sets (North & South). Each set is complete<br />
and can be played on its own, or the two sets can be played together.<br />
Components: Rulebook, 300 full color cards (North & South sets). $40. 00<br />
Operation Kremlin<br />
Operation Kremlin, designed by Ty Bomba, uses the corps-army level<br />
units that were historically available for this campaign. The orders of<br />
battle are extrapolated from both sides’ historic organizational charts<br />
of mid to late 1942. Each hex represents approximately 10 miles (16.2<br />
kilometers) from side to side. Airpower is represented abstractly,<br />
representing the effects of one side or the other having local air superiority.<br />
Each full game turn represents one week. Operation Kremlin gives wargamers the opportunity to<br />
discover what would have happened had the Germans struck for Moscow in 1942.<br />
Components: One 34 x 22 inch mapsheet, rulesbook, 176 die cut counters, storage bags and 1 die. $35. 00<br />
XXXX<br />
1<br />
2-2-5<br />
1<br />
XXX<br />
1<br />
2-1-8<br />
4<br />
XXX<br />
2<br />
+2-0-10<br />
3<br />
XXX<br />
6<br />
XXX<br />
3-6-5<br />
6-6-7<br />
Beyond the Urals<br />
Beyond the Urals is a two-player strategic-level simulation of a campaign that might-have-been in Russia during<br />
World War II. Each hexagon on the map represents approximately 20 miles (32.4 kilometers) from side<br />
to opposite side. The Soviet units are armies, while all German units<br />
are corps. Air power is represented abstractly, with two counters representing<br />
the effects of German tactical air superiority. Each full game<br />
turn represents one week.<br />
Components: One 34 x 22 inch mapsheet, rulesbook, 176 die cut counters,<br />
storage bags and 1 die (ziplock). $25. 00<br />
XXX<br />
XXX<br />
4-2-10 2-4-6<br />
XXXX<br />
XXXX<br />
4-2-5 2-4-5<br />
Name<br />
address<br />
City, state Zip<br />
phoNe email<br />
Visa/mC (oNly)#<br />
expiratioN date<br />
sigNature<br />
5<br />
59<br />
3<br />
1g<br />
3sh<br />
40<br />
2<br />
24<br />
29<br />
strategy & tactics 63
Each issue is packed full of:<br />
64 #232<br />
• In-depth analysis<br />
• Detailed maps<br />
• Orders of Battle<br />
Future issues will feature articles on:<br />
montgomery & patton<br />
Airland battle of the bulge<br />
South Africa vs. Cubans<br />
battle of breitenfeld<br />
Catherine the Great<br />
German paratroopers<br />
Conquest of Florida<br />
and much, much more!<br />
PO Box 21598, Bakersfield CA 93390-1598<br />
(661) 587-9633 •fax 661/587-5031<br />
www.decisiongames.com<br />
The premier military history<br />
magazine!<br />
Visit our website for more<br />
information and subscription rates.