| [Another LONG post… You’ve been warned! (LoL) — kmab] |
|
| The Third World War: August 1985 (1978©) — book review |
| This review is for the fictional portrayal (as a “future history”) of a “realistic” invasion of NATO allied European countries by the Warsaw Pact in August of 1985. The book was “written” primarily (et al) by (Ret.) British General John W. Hackett in consultation with a number of experts gathered to discuss how such an invasion might occur, what might lead up to it and what might be the end-of-war results. The “advisors” were listed as: John Barraclough (Air Chief Marshal), Kenneth Hunt (Brigadier), Ian McGeoch (Vice-Admiral), Norman Macrae (a deputy editor at “The Economist“), John Strawson (Major-General), and, Bernard Burrows (British Diplomatic Service). |
|
| The book was a best-seller in England back in 1978. It was published in the U.S. in early 1979 as a hardback and then released as a paperback in 1980. I initially read the paperback version. I believe it was shortly after I was released from the Active Reserves, but my memory isn’t that precise anymore. In any case, this review is of a re-reading of the book after my reading of “2034: A Novel of the Next World War” earlier this year. (review here: A Novel War). The author of that book, (ret) Admiral James Stavridis, cited this book as a primary inspiration for his work. This prompted my re-interest in the original… |
|
| During my (almost) two years in the Reserves I was assigned to a unit which tested and evaluated the readiness of National Guard units from California, Arizona and New Mexico. The officers would establish “war-game” scenarios for the Guard officers and I (as an NCO) would embed with the line units to evaluate actual field performance. We were artillery evaluators, so I watched Guard batteries fire cannons / howitzers, but I gained an understanding of scenario development and large scale tactical war-gaming. This led to a post-service interest in military style board games which carried on for most of the ’80s. I lost interest when gaming shifted to computers and became “mostly” shoot-em-up’s instead of (IMHO) about strategy. |
|
| Basically, the plot of this book is the leaders of the USSR feel their position as a superpower is being threatened by political and economic factors which are worsening (for them). They feel there has been a significant / progressive decrease in NATO’s readiness over the last decade and this may be their last / best opportunity to remove a potential military threat (NATO) and further subjugate the buffer countries of Eastern Europe who are members of the Warsaw Pact. The plan is a crushing invasion of Western Europe (West Germany and the low-lands) which leaves the USSR in command up to the border of France. The invasion fails because in the years between the book’s publishing (1978) and the date of the “future-history” event (August 1985), Europe (specifically Great Britain) comes to its senses and reverses the general military decline of the late ’60s to ’70s. The NATO forces are able to slow the advance of invasion (without the use of tactical nuclear weapons) and allows reinforcements to arrive from the U.S. just in the nick of time. |
|
| In a striking foreboding of the current (2022) invasion of Ukraine by Russia, the invasion portrayed fails because of (in no particular order of importance): |
| 1) an inability to dominate the air despite superior numerical assets; |
| 2) a failure of logistics (fuel and ammunition) by the Warsaw Pact, (it is believed the invasion will take less than two weeks AND there will not be enough time for the U.S. to resupply NATO forces); |
| 3) resistance by the native forces (in this case, the West German army / reserves) is surprisingly effective; and, |
| 4) the centralized command and control characteristic of authoritarian political systems, does not promote the flexibility / initiative of junior officers (and NCOs) to seize military opportunities when they arise, so opportunities for significant breakouts are lost. |
|
| When the war quickly (the “war” lasts weeks) devolves into a war of attrition, failure is viewed as inevitable and hard-liners in the Politburo decide to consolidate their gains for future armistice negotiations by the use of a limited (against only one city) nuclear strike. The result, however, is not fear and negotiation, but instead, fury and retaliation via a similar limited nuclear strike by Great Britain and the U.S. against a Russian city; (and like falling dominoes) the Warsaw Pact allies turn on the USSR to avoid nuclear annihilation; the Soviet military / security services stage a coup, over-throw the hardliners, and cease further combat; the non-Russian border states (the “-stans”) declare independence from the USSR; and, the rest of the world struggles with the effects of a new world order. The “war” is barely a month old before it is over. Because the book is written as a “recent” history of past events, it does not attempt to forecast / describe long term results of the war except to relate the world has to deal with unaccounted for Soviet nuclear weapons / warheads and large stocks of conventional weapons scattered around the global (mainly Africa). |
|
| Is this a “good” book? Is it realistic as a predictor of future conflict (lethality, if not participants)? Is it entertaining or interesting? Do I recommend this book? With the exception of the final question, the answer to all of these is (are): yes to so-so… |
|
| The book is not a “good” novel. There are no specified individual characters driving the action, so you cannot (as a reader) identify and grow with anyone. In this sense, although fictional, the book is written with more of an academic or journalistic feel. It is very much an military style “after-action” report. If you are comfortable with this writing style, you will enjoy the writing / book. If you are not, you will not. I did. Was the book able to realistically describe combat and the results (devastation) of war? Yes! Although, saying this, there was an obvious Western bias of vivid description of the destruction of the British city and virtually nothing about the similar (or much worse) destruction of the Russian city. (Very much: “Yeah, we took out one of theirs as payback…”) Is the book entertaining or interesting? This is the toughest question because every reader’s tastes varies so much… I was not “entertained”; but, I did find the book interesting. I particularly “enjoyed” the parts the authors get terribly wrong, because as a reader I (we) have 40+ years of hind-sight. There is no China – Japan alliance; the Shah is no longer in charge of Iran (or, rather, wasn’t in 1985); South Africa did not fall to external forces; and, East Germany did not resist consolidation with West Germany after the fall of the USSR. |
|
| Final recommendation: strong recommendation. I think most veterans (particularly my age group) will find this book relatable. I think most civilian “military” readers / historians – and quite a few regular historians – will, too. For political science readers, the “states” interests, goals, and stances will seem Machiavellian / Kissinger-ian (is that a real word?). Yet, they ring true – even 40 years later. It is entirely obvious why this book could seem as an inspiration for a future – updated version (a la “2034“), and I believe (I read) this book served as a similar inspiration for several of Tom Clancy’s works which followed. At any rate, I do remember “enjoying” the initial read from “way-back-when”, and don’t feel the re-read was less so. My reaction to “2034” was reinforced: this version is much better than the more recent book. If you have read “2034“, I recommend you read “WW3:1985” for the comparison value, if nothing else. |
|
| Final disclaimer: I purchased this book at normal / sale price (for an old / used book) and no compensation has been provided to me by anyone for my opinions in this review. |
|
| . |
| On This Day In: |
| 2022 |
Refreshing My Look Ahead (Back) |
|
I’m Still Mediocre With Easy |
| 2021 |
I’m An Optimist |
|
Talent Is A Ticket To Ride |
| 2020 |
Works For Me |
|
Rivers Versus Waterfalls |
| 2019 |
Better To Do |
|
News: Drunken Party Girl Saves Seoul |
| 2018 |
Keep Moving |
| 2017 |
Fighting Good |
| 2016 |
Size Matters |
| 2015 |
Maybe The Best Thing |
| 2014 |
Ready To Be Fried? |
| 2013 |
A Real Lover |
| 2012 |
Winning Wars |
| 2011 |
A Different Lesson |
|
|
Kevin Barrett's Blog 