"Soviet Invasion of Iran 1979?" Topic

Some years back, after reading "Guests of the Ayatollah", I played a small mini campaign based on the idea that the Iranians chose to take over the Soviet embassy, instead of the American, and that the Soviets had invaded Iran as a result.

I didn't consider much of the reasoning or probability of such a response. I just used it as the basis for what I thought were some interesting situations on the tabletop.

Since then, I've gained a bit more information about the workings of the Soviet Union, and their involvement in Afghanistan, Africa, Cuba, etc., and have come to wonder more about what a Soviet response might have been.

So, my question is: If the Iranians had chosen the storm the Soviet Embassy in Iran, and take Soviet staff hostage, what do you think the Soviet response might have been? Would the Soviets have invaded Iran?

And then these follow up questions if you are so inclined to consider them:

What would the US response have been to a Soviet Invasion of Iran?

Afghanistan was winding up around this time, the Soviets would invade there 6 weeks after the Iran crisis developed, would the Soviets still have invaded Afghanistan?

Would the US have continued to be involved in Afghanistan given a different situation in Iran?

Other thoughts?

Not sure, but reading Swordpoint seems to indicate so :)

Realistically, I don't know. Pretty sure the US would have not liked the Soviets sitting on top of the ports and oil fields in the region…. enough to go to war over…. big question… maybe in 1980, more than 1979. Even so, great gaming opportunity to do some Cold War in desert colors.

Chalfant

FUll on invasion is probably doubtful though it would make for some interesting gaming scenarios.

By the time the Soviets became involved in Afghanistan, the Afghan government had been badgering them for quite some time about aid and had already supplied weapons and possibly some advisors.

I don't know how far in advance the actual deployment was planned but 6 weeks seems quite reasonable.

No. For the Soviet Union it is generally not a reason to invade Iran (even if the embassy staff executed). Even fighting on the border would be a local incident (that actually happened ingda). And in general, then why? Iran's regime has become anti-American, so why just do make some gestures (well, except that to get a jar of popcorn and watch)?

Another thing is that Iran could start to try to connect, say, the Azerbaijan SSR to him seriously and began to pull back troops. Then, yes, quite likely a conflict.

The scenario which leads to the outbreak of WW3 in 'Threads' involves a Soviet invasion of Iran – for much the same reasons that they invaded Afganistan. Security of the southern states of the USSR, Islamic extremism etc.

A combined arms army crosses the frontier, an airborne division takes the airport outsde Tehran and fairly soon the US intervenes with airpower and marine landings. The Sovs shoot down a B-52 strike with a ground-air nuke, the US responds with a tac nuke on the airborne div and before you know it things have become a little unpleasant.

I used it as the background my mythical 1981 WW3 campaign.

My guess is they probably would have tried like we did, though sooner, to get their people out, and/or have threatened to strike, and/or struck Iran militarily, and economically to really hurt them.

There is the lure of gaining a warm-water port, which is always rather seductive to them, so they might have invaded.

If they had, clearly we would have at least strongly backed the Iraqis and/or Saudis, or both.

If the Russians tried to slow or stop the oil flow from the region there would have been a major war.

Interestingly this was the premise for the "Threads" TV series in the early 1980's done by the BBC, that escalated into nuclear war. :-/

Thanks for the replies.

I have to say that from the gaming standpoint, this storyline presents many interesting possibilities, but that in the real world, I can't imagine that Soviets would have pursued such a path.

First, it seems to me to be opposite of the direction that Brezhnev had taken through the 1970s. The situation in Afghanistan had already drawn the Soviets in and that still needed to be addressed. The attraction of warm water ports and control of oil supplies and the Persian Gulf, would be offset by the likelihood of direct conflict with US forces and the implications of such a conflict. And whatever embarrassment the Soviets might have felt by such an incident would have still been overshadowed by the embarrassment to the US over the fall of the Shaw. Additionally, the Soviets could even have spun it as a result of US bumbling on the propaganda front.

I suspect though, that the Soviets may have been less patient/passive in their response regarding a rescue attempt or punishment for the action.

Despite the unlikelihood of it all, I am still intrigued by the hypothetical matchups and the setting, and will probably revisit such a conflict in a future campaign.

Thanks again for the replies.

You do know that there were those who wanted to seize the Soviet embassy instead. The KGB let it be known that if such an act occurred, every family member and friend of the hostage takers would be kidnapped and killed until their hostages were released.

It would appear that the Soviets 'fell' into Afghanistan in '79, out-manoeuvered politically by the Afghan president into bolstering his regime…and then getting embroiled into the positioning of his successors….

On the Iran question ,I played Gulf Strike (AH?) with exactly this scenario, US counter invasion to deny the warm water ports and defend the oil facilities for the west…..
The KGB played similar threats in Beirut…..iirc their 'wet works' operatives were busier there…..