YEAR 1982 Moscow imperial plans for Scandinavia

[Litwin]

any comments on this ?

 

[DakotaKai_fan20]

It would be almost impossible to take over that territory like they did in Ukraine.

 

[whitehall]

Scandinavia in 1982? Where do they find this stuff?

 

[Litwin]

It would be almost impossible to take over that territory like they did in Ukraine.

i see your point , but they have represented the world- Marxist empire in 1982, and 1/2 of the planet

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

 

[Litwin]

Scandinavia in 1982? Where do they find this stuff?

In 1957, Admiral Sergei G. Gorshkov was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Union’s four fleets and convinced Khrushchev that they could not be a superpower without declaring their oceanic interests,....
A frogman who belonged to the Baltic Fleet’s Spetsnaz unit in the middle of the 1970s (561st OMRP) confirms this conclusion when he writes in his memoirs that there were maps on the walls of the Spetsnaz training rooms that showed the locations for reconnaissance for landings. Along the operational axis in the northern Atlantic, the following targets were circled: Lofoten, Västerålen, the Faroe Islands, the Hebrides and Shetland Islands, the Bergen-Stavanger area in Southern Norway, the east and west coasts of Iceland and the southeastern coast of Greenland – a ring around the Norwegian Sea![28]
Previously the Norwegian researcher Kirsten Amundsen had stated that ‘the Soviet Union needed Svalbard, Jan Mayen, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and the Shetland Islands’ air bases for fighter and bomber aircraft, electronic warfare, warnings sensors and harbours for submarines and other vessels’.[29] The Warsaw Pact also had offensive engineer units for repairs and the rapid extension of harbours and airfields.[

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

 

[whitehall]

In 1957, Admiral Sergei G. Gorshkov was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Union’s four fleets and convinced Khrushchev that they could not be a superpower without declaring their oceanic interests,....
A frogman who belonged to the Baltic Fleet’s Spetsnaz unit in the middle of the 1970s (561st OMRP) confirms this conclusion when he writes in his memoirs that there were maps on the walls of the Spetsnaz training rooms that showed the locations for reconnaissance for landings. Along the operational axis in the northern Atlantic, the following targets were circled: Lofoten, Västerålen, the Faroe Islands, the Hebrides and Shetland Islands, the Bergen-Stavanger area in Southern Norway, the east and west coasts of Iceland and the southeastern coast of Greenland – a ring around the Norwegian Sea![28]
Previously the Norwegian researcher Kirsten Amundsen had stated that ‘the Soviet Union needed Svalbard, Jan Mayen, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and the Shetland Islands’ air bases for fighter and bomber aircraft, electronic warfare, warnings sensors and harbours for submarines and other vessels’.[29] The Warsaw Pact also had offensive engineer units for repairs and the rapid extension of harbours and airfields.[

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

Confirmed by what? A Russian frogman?

 

[Litwin]

Confirmed by what? A Russian frogman?

[24] Danmark under den kolde krig, vol. 2, p. 615.


[25] Conversation with Colonel Plavins, February 2007.


[26] Taken from the website of the newspaper Aftenposten, dated 26 March 2001, and checked by the Finnish Admiral Jan Klenberg.


[27] Rolf Tamnes, The United States and the Cold War in the High North (Brookfield, 1991), p. 235.


[28] Aleksandr Rzhavin, Navy Spetsnaz (Stockholm: Timbro, 1989). The book was published in English under the pseudonym Viktor Suvorov (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1987).


[29] William H. Burgess III (ed.), Inside Spetsnaz, Soviet Special Operations: A Critical Analysis (Novato, CA, 1990).


[30] Conversation with colleagues of General Jonas Kronkaitis, May 2007.


[31] Michael McCgwire, Military Objectives in Soviet Foreign Policy (Washington, DC, 1987).


[32] Taken from the PHP website in the winter of 2007 (www.php.isn.ethz.ch).


[33] Hillingsø, Trusselsbilledet, p. 206.

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

 

[Yarddog]

any comments on this ?

They saved themselves the embarrassment. They would have failed miserably

 

[ThirdTerm]

The Soviet plan was to pre-empt an imminent NATO attack from Scandinavia. The Soviets did not plan to invade Scandinavia without NATO's provocations, especially because Finland and Sweden were strictly neutral at the time. American submarines were not even allowed to enter Swedish waters in the 1980s.

In the summer of 2005, a study called Danmark under den kolde krig [Denmark during the Cold War] was published in Denmark.[1] In Sweden, this publication caused the biggest stir by accepting Ola Tunander’s theory that it was American submarines that – with the consent of some of those in central positions – violated Swedish waters in the 1980s.

Continental Europe or what the Soviet Union called the Western TSMA was therefore the strategic area that was at the centre of all thinking regarding how a military confrontation between the superpowers could be prevented, break out or accomplished. Great importance was, however, also attached to the Nordic region, i.e., the Northwestern TSMA, due to its flank position in relation to the Continent and NATO’s sea communications across the Atlantic. For the Soviet Union, Scandinavia was also an area over which air and, later, missile strikes could be directed not just at the satellite states and communications with them, but also directly at the Soviet Union’s heartland. The direction was what could be called the Soviet Union’s ‘soft underbelly’, an important area in its neighbourhood that it had no control over.[13]

In The Voroshilov Lectures, there is a description of how, in the mid-1970s, the Soviet General Staff Academy regarded the Nordic area from military strategic points of reference. It says, among other things, that the Northwestern TSMA consists of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland and the Northwestern Soviet Union and surrounding waters. It is explicitly stated that Finland and Sweden are neutral.

The Northwestern TSMA at its western boundary meets the Atlantic Ocean TSMA, where large groupings of NATO naval forces are deployed. Important air and sea routes across the Atlantic Ocean connect America with Western Europe. Operations conducted in the Atlantic Ocean, particularly in its northeastern parts, will have close connection with operations carried out in the Northwestern TSMA, and will have great impact on the general strategic situation on the European continent.
In the south, the Northwestern TSMA borders the Western TSMA, where the most active NATO countries, primarily West Germany and England, are located. Strong NATO armed force groupings are deployed here, which is at the same time the centre of the main economic regions of West European countries. Lines of communication of worldwide significance pass through this area. Operations in the Northwestern TSMA will have to be coordinated with operations in the Western TSMA in terms of unified concepts and strategic political aims.
As discussed above, the Northwestern TSMA occupies an important strategic position between the West European TSMA and the oceanic TSMA of the Atlantic Ocean. In the context of NATO plans, the countries outside the USSR in the TSMA will be used as NATO´s bridgeheads for military operations directed to the east. That is the area where NATO has already deployed forces which will be employed to protect its northern flank to the Western and Atlantic Ocean TSMAs.
The main naval forces of the Warsaw Pact countries are deployed in the Northwestern TSMA. This area will provide favorable conditions for Warsaw Pact naval forces to get access to the northern and central Atlantic Ocean, which is under NATO control and influence. This action will isolate Norway and Denmark and provide suitable opportunities for the Northern and Baltic Fleet of the Soviet Navy, as well as for Poland and the German Democratic Republic, to accomplish missions for the purpose of destroying the main groupings of NATO forces operating in the Western TSMA.[14]

With a strategic view like this of the Nordic area, we undeniably get the impression that the Nordic area would be affected by any Soviet operation – and at an early stage – in any war on the European Continent. The question is how a militarily non-aligned Sweden would be dealt with in an operation like this in the Northwestern TSMA. A Sweden that would undeniably become isolated, along with Norway and Denmark.

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

 

[Litwin]

They would have failed miserably

Marxism /Moscow = failure
The Finnish saying "Everything a Muscovite touches turns to shit"

 

[Zebra]

poor Viborg

 

[Litwin]

The Soviet plan was to pre-empt an imminent NATO attack from Scandinavia. The Soviets did not plan to invade Scandinavia without NATO's provocations, especially because Finland and Sweden were strictly neutral at the time. American submarines were not even allowed to enter Swedish waters in the 1980s.

In the summer of 2005, a study called Danmark under den kolde krig [Denmark during the Cold War] was published in Denmark.[1] In Sweden, this publication caused the biggest stir by accepting Ola Tunander’s theory that it was American submarines that – with the consent of some of those in central positions – violated Swedish waters in the 1980s.

Continental Europe or what the Soviet Union called the Western TSMA was therefore the strategic area that was at the centre of all thinking regarding how a military confrontation between the superpowers could be prevented, break out or accomplished. Great importance was, however, also attached to the Nordic region, i.e., the Northwestern TSMA, due to its flank position in relation to the Continent and NATO’s sea communications across the Atlantic. For the Soviet Union, Scandinavia was also an area over which air and, later, missile strikes could be directed not just at the satellite states and communications with them, but also directly at the Soviet Union’s heartland. The direction was what could be called the Soviet Union’s ‘soft underbelly’, an important area in its neighbourhood that it had no control over.[13]

In The Voroshilov Lectures, there is a description of how, in the mid-1970s, the Soviet General Staff Academy regarded the Nordic area from military strategic points of reference. It says, among other things, that the Northwestern TSMA consists of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland and the Northwestern Soviet Union and surrounding waters. It is explicitly stated that Finland and Sweden are neutral.



With a strategic view like this of the Nordic area, we undeniably get the impression that the Nordic area would be affected by any Soviet operation – and at an early stage – in any war on the European Continent. The question is how a militarily non-aligned Sweden would be dealt with in an operation like this in the Northwestern TSMA. A Sweden that would undeniably become isolated, along with Norway and Denmark.

Introduction

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security (PHP, the former Parallel History Project on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. A...

phpisn.ethz.ch

whats interesting here, that you guys have always been out of touch with reality, Sweden and Finland were not part of NATO IN 1882, MEANWHILE D. AND Norway were. which meant war with the much stronger military coalition . Did you guys real believe that you could beat NATO in 1982 ?

 

[Litwin]

poor Viborg

Miensk, Königsberg, Bakhmut, etc.

the only solution :