hist2004
06-06-2004, 12:08 AM
Conflict Studies Research Centre
A102
1
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
C J ****
Contents
Background: The Forces, Terrain & Nature of the War 2
The Combatants 2
The Mujahideen 2
The DRA & Soviet Armies 4
Terrain 5
The Nature of the War 5
Mujahideen Tactics 6
Offensive Actions 6
Ambushes 6
Blocking Enemy Lines of Communication & Sieges 7
Raids 8
Attacking Strongpoints 9
Urban Combat 9
Defence 9
General 9
Cordon & Search Operations 10
Defence Against Raids 11
Fighting Against Heliborne Insertions & Attack
Helicopters 11
Counter-Ambush 12
Conclusion 13
A102
2
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
Conflict Studies Research Centre
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
January 2002
Background: The Forces, Terrain & Nature of the War
The Combatants
The Mujahideen
Afghanistan is little more than a geographical expression. Its borders were
arbitrarily drawn by outside powers. Its population comprises a loose collection of
antithetical tribes and nationalities, the most numerous of which straddle the
country's borders, artificial demarcation lines that mean little to them. The basic
social units and focus of loyalty are the family and the Qawm, a local grouping
defined by kinship, clan membership, residence and adherence to one of Islam's
sects. Thus, there is little sense of Afghan nationhood and patriotism has not
figured particularly highly as a motivating factor. The grip of central government
has normally been intermittent and weak and local issues generally dominated the
political agenda for most people, especially in the countryside. Any semblance of
national unity has historically been merely the consequence of outsiders trying to
impose alien rule on the country, as with the resistance to British occupiers in
1838-42 and 1878-1880.
The war started in the late summer of 1978 as a general uprising against the efforts
of the communist Khalq government's efforts to force Soviet-style socialism on a
deeply conservative, religious country. After little more than a year, it became clear
that the government could not retain control and the USSR, in accordance with the
"Brezhnev Doctrine", committed a "Limited Contingent" to assist, though it was
soon to take over the direction of the war. Soviet intervention changed the nature
of the struggle. Worried by Soviet expansionism, Pakistan, Iran and then the USA
(especially), China and some European and Arab states began to supply money and
arms to the Mujahideen. Most of this aid was funnelled through Pakistan, which
distributed it to seven major Islamist factions; Islamabad favoured the four most
fundamentalist of these. The religious leaders of the factions thus gained
unprecedented political power, undermining the authority of tribal and village
leaders. It was these factions that lifted the war from a myriad of local conflicts to
something resembling a national struggle.
The resistance was never united, however. Even common loathing for the Soviet
occupiers could not accomplish this (except, it would appear, to an extent in
Kandahar). There was never a central leadership and clear chain of command.
Rather, disunity characterized the resistance, with old disputes and enmities
continuing despite the war. Sometimes, factions (themselves more or less loose
groupings of sub-factions) would join up temporarily to pursue some venture.
Sometimes co-operation was refused, or broke down during an operation.
Routinely, factions appropriated aid meant for others. Sometimes they actually
fought each other. (The KGB exploited this disunity by creating false bands posing
as CIA-supported mujahideen which were used to sow confusion, flush out real
rebel groups and provoke infighting. Thus, unlike the Americans in Vietnam, the
Soviets never faced a monolithic enemy under tight central direction and capable of
exercising operational art. For the most part, the war comprised a series of
prolonged, largely local conflicts. There was never a prospect of the resistance
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
3
proceeding in time to the classic final phase of revolutionary war where the enemy
is fought in conventional battle by "regular" forces.
Mujahideen commanders owed their position to their social standing, education,
leadership abilities and commitment to their religion. They could not rely on
military discipline to gain their warriors' obedience. Rather, they led by force of
personality, moral persuasion and by achieving consensus. Not more than 15% of
them were former professional soldiers; ex-officers were usually regarded as
potential challengers to the authority of faction leaders and were therefore
sidelined, especially by Islamic fundamentalists who distrusted those trained by the
old regime. However, they made a significant contribution through their
understanding of military-technical issues, planning skills and ability to train the
fighters.
The Mujahideen warrior fought for his family, his tribe and his religion. He did so
out of a love of freedom and sense of duty, as a volunteer without pay. For the most
part, fighters were local men with family responsibilities. As such, they were
untrained and necessarily part-timers; the spoils of war (eg, weapons to sell in the
bazaars of Pakistan) were important to them as a source of income. As the war
dragged on, though, mobile groups emerged. These comprised mostly young,
unmarried men, sometimes paid, with higher standards of training.1 Controlled by
the major factions, these ranged over wider areas and made possible some largerscale
operations. In many ways, the Mujahideen rank and file were natural
guerrillas. They were hardy, stoical, courageous, accustomed to the use of weapons
in a land where conflict was endemic. They knew the terrain intimately in their own
localities and could move rapidly over considerable distances. They were excellent
in night combat (which was feared by their foes). They enjoyed the support of the
population whence they sprang, with all that meant for the supply of recruits, food,
shelter and intelligence.
They also suffered from the drawbacks common in a guerrilla force. Enthusiasm
was considerable, but discipline was generally poor. It was often difficult to
persuade volunteers, who wanted their share of the honour, excitement and loot
that came from fighting, to perform the unglamorous tasks of logistic support and
flank and rear area security. Sentries could not always be relied on. Poor fire
discipline sometimes compromised good plans. And prolonged operations were
vitiated by the tendency of fighters to drift home after a tactical success (or, for that
matter, a reverse, or through boredom); exploitation to build on a tactical victory
was a rarity.
The main weapons of the Mujahideen were the AK-47 (though the old British .303
inch Enfield, with its long range and power to penetrate Soviet flak jackets had its
adherents), PK light machine guns and the RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher. As
time went by, they acquired increasing numbers of heavy, crew served weapons.
Most significant actions featured the use of 60mm, 82mm and sometimes 107mm
mortars (the former described as the "guerrilla mortar"), 82mm recoilless anti-tank
guns, BM-1 single 107mm rocket launchers, 7.62mm and 12.7mm heavy machine
guns and sometimes howitzers; air defence was provided by 12.7mm and 14.5mm
weapons, often surprisingly effective, especially in ambushes in mountains, and
from 1988, the Stinger SAM, a show-stopper for Soviet aviation's low-level actions.
1 There were also some volunteers from the Middle East. The Afghans regarded these
Arabs as little more than prima donnas, there for Jihad credit whose interest was less in
fighting than in making videos glorifying themselves.
A102
C J ****
4
The Mujahideen were also enthusiastic proponents of mine warfare (during the war,
the Soviets lost 1,191 vehicles and 1,995 men to mines). They mostly employed
anti-vehicle mines (often piling three on top of each other for a catastrophic kill) and
delighted in improvising huge home-made mines. Mines, sometimes command
detonated, were usually covered by fire and dug up for reuse if not set off by enemy
vehicles.
The DRA & Soviet Armies
The army of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) collapsed as an effective
fighting force after the Soviet invasion, defections reducing it from about 90,000
men in 1979 to 30,000 in early 1981. The remaining troops were generally of
limited combat value. They were ill-equipped and badly trained. Worse still, they
were unmotivated. The government enjoyed little popular support to begin with,
and that little was steadily eroded by the way it and its Soviet masters behaved.
The Soviet attitude, increasingly evident as the war dragged on, that DRA troops
were expendable and should be given the most dangerous jobs did not help. Some
officers who apparently remained loyal to the regime often secretly supported the
Mujahideen and provided the resistance with information and arms. Most others
showed little enthusiasm for real combat. The soldiery, both regular and militia
were even more unwilling (the latter defecting en masse in 1984). Morale was very
low and conscripts rarely put up much of a fight. Indeed, on many occasions whole
units either fled or deserted to the resistance. It was common for Mujahideen
groups to give captured conscripts a choice between going home or joining the
resistance (usually, initially, in logistic support roles).
The Soviet Army that invaded Afghanistan was prepared only for a high tempo,
mechanized war. Everything was geared to the demands of operational art within
the context of strategic offensive operations. It was not equipped or trained for the
sort of war it had to fight. It lacked an appropriate doctrine for counter-insurgency,
and it took an astonishingly long time for the 40th Army (or rather, elements of it) to
learn and adapt. Of course, adaptation was hampered by systemic limitations built
in to an army designed for a single variant of warfare. Company-level officers were
taught only basic tactics unsuited to conditions in Afghanistan and were unskilled
in such tasks as adjusting mortar or artillery fire that were not normally expected of
them. Low level commanders often displayed little capacity for independent action,
lacked initiative and often displayed poor leadership. A particular weakness was
the lack of an effective, professional NCO corps; tasks happily entrusted to British
sergeants and corporals required officers in the Soviet system.
For the most part, stereotyped, unsuitable tactics remained the norm. In defence,
there was a "bunker mentality" with the Mujahideen being allowed to manoeuvre
largely unchallenged and to own the night. Ground recce and flank and rear
security were neglected, with recce troops, whose quality and training standards
were higher, being misused as combat sub-units. There was excessive reliance on
artillery, air and AFV-delivered firepower at the expense of manoeuvre and
dismounted infantry closing with the enemy. Motor rifle troops were reluctant to
leave their armoured vehicles (especially the DRA) and engage in close quarter
battle; tanks were disinclined to advance against RPGs without them. Wise to these
failings, the Mujahideen would "hug" the enemy as close as possible to make it
impossible for him to use his artillery and attack helicopters.
There was also an endemic shortage of infantry. The "Limited Contingent" was just
that. It never rose above 104,000 men. Over three quarters of Soviet troops were
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
5
tied down in defence of cities, base camps, airfields and lines of communication. To
compound the problem, units were not maintained at full strength, with regiments
being reduced to the size of battalions, battalions to companies, etc, a problem due
in large part to the fact that, at any given time, a quarter to a third of personnel was
sick with hepatitis, amoebic dysentery, typhus, malaria and meningitis.
The Soviets did eventually create some effective light infantry and air-mobile units
which employed appropriate tactics. These were integrated with artillery, attack
helicopters and specialist ground attack aircraft to pose real problems for the
Mujahideen, but there were too few of them to make a significant difference, and the
advent of the Stinger SAM in 1988 drastically curtailed the activities of aviation.
For the most part, morale in ordinary Soviet motor rifle units was poor to start with,
and it deteriorated as the war dragged on. Soldiers found themselves in an alien
land, universally loathed as oppressive occupiers. Nor were they buoyed up by
support from home as the war was far from popular in the USSR. Some elite units,
airborne, air assault, spetsnaz and the two special separate motor rifle brigades
performed well, but the majority displayed a marked reluctance to engage in serious
combat.
Terrain
Afghanistan is almost the size of England and France combined. Little of its terrain
is suited to the mechanized, firepower-reliant force committed by the Soviets. Most
of it is inhospitable, largely roadless desert or mountain, much of the latter covered
by thick forests. Even the relatively populous areas proved difficult. The "green
zones" were intersected by numerous irrigation ditches and were thick with trees,
vines, crops and tangled vegetation. The flat plains contained many swampy
terraces for rice growing and river banks were often swampy too. There are no
railways and only 18,000km of road, less than one sixth of that surfaced. In other
words, the country is ideally suited to the sort of guerrilla warfare practised since
ancient times by its inhabitants against invaders.
The Mujahideen made full use of possibilities offered by the ground for concealed
manoeuvre, dispersion, ambush and defence. The Soviet advantage of air-mobility
was only able to offset terrain difficulties to a limited degree. It did enable them to
maintain some isolated garrisons deep in enemy territory, but there were
insufficient helicopters deployed to reduce significantly their reliance on ground
manoeuvre to carry the fight to the enemy.
The Nature of the War
The war was a contest of endurance and will. The Mujahideen did not fight in the
expectation of victory on the battlefield. They fought because it was the right thing
to do. They were prepared for a long, perhaps endless, struggle in which they, and
the Afghan people, would suffer many more casualties than their enemies. The
Soviets tried to win through the largely indiscriminate use of overwhelming
firepower. However, at the end of the day, sensitivity to casualties and Third World
opinion combined with the difficulty of maintaining larger forces in theatre and the
fact that Afghanistan was not of fundamental importance to the USSR prevented
the Soviets from deploying sufficient strength to destroy their implacable foe.
A102
C J ****
6
Strategically, the war resolved itself into a fight where each side tried to strangle the
other's logistics.
• The Mujahideen launched never-ending attacks on the Soviets' long, vulnerable
lines of communication, both back to the USSR and within Afghanistan.
Security of the open, western LoC required only three battalions, but the difficult
eastern part needed 26 battalions manning 199 outposts and constantly
patrolling or escorting convoys. Generally, at any given time, over three quarters
of the Limited Contingent was tied down in essential security missions of
various sorts, drastically reducing the numbers available for offensive action.
Essentially, the initiative lay in the hands of the Mujahideen.
• The Soviets started from Mao Zedong's famous premise that the guerrilla is a
like fish that flourishes in the sea of a friendly population; he requires this
benign environment for food, shelter, recruits and intelligence. But there was no
attempt win the hearts and minds of the Afghan peoples in order to make the
environment hostile to the resistance; probably such an attempt would have
been foredoomed to failure. Instead, the Soviets set about draining the sea.
From 1981 to 1985, they depopulated the countryside and intimidated those
who remained. Villages, granaries, crops, herds and irrigation systems were
destroyed and fields and pastures were mined. Afghanistan became a land of
refugees; 5.5 million Afghans, one third of the pre-war population, were driven
into exile and a further two million became IDPs (with the young men returning
as guerrillas thirsting for vengeance). With the rural economy largely destroyed,
the Mujahideen could no longer obtain the sustenance they needed locally. Food
as well as arms, munitions and medical supplies had to be brought in from
Pakistan and delivered to base camps established within Afghanistan. From
1985 until their withdrawal, the Soviet offensive effort centred on finding and
destroying these bases and interdicting the hundreds of routes from Pakistan
into Afghanistan over which the $4 billion worth of US and others' military aid
flowed to the guerrillas.
Mujahideen Tactics
Offensive Actions
Ambushes
The ambush is a traditional and key feature of Afghan warfare, whether fighting the
government, other tribes or foreign occupiers. Ambushes were used to great effect
to interdict Soviet/DRA lines of communication, thus both limiting the size of force
the Soviets could sustain, tying down the bulk of that force in security tasks and,
an important factor, providing much needed supplies for the Mujahideen. Most
ambushes were used to interfere with general logistic effort, both from the USSR
and within country. However, they were sometimes deployed in support of other
operations, as, for instance, when an ammunition resupply convoy for a 70
Separate Motor Rifle Brigade's search and destroy mission was hit.
Many, perhaps most ambushes were based on good intelligence as to the route,
timing and composition of columns. Sites were selected where terrain offered good
fire positions and withdrawal routes and where enemy manoeuvre or escape would
be difficult. They would generally be occupied at the last minute, eg after a recce
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
7
helicopter sweeping ahead of the convoy had passed by. The ideal time for an
ambush was late afternoon as failing light would hamper Soviet/DRA reactions,
especially by aviation and artillery.
The size of ambushes varied from a few dozen men up to 350 or more on stretches
of road up to 10km or so. Determining factors were: the number of men available;
the amount of cover available; the length of the column to be hit; and the
importance of the target. The duration of actions varied from quick fire-andwithdraw
harassing actions up to fire-fights of 1-2 hours, followed where possible
by the looting of the damaged vehicles and weapons collection.
The most successful larger ambushes were characterized by: good intelligence;
secrecy; surprise; detailed planning; good co-ordination (often difficult as the
Mujahideen usually lacked radios); well-prepared, concealed fighting positions with
overhead cover to give protection from artillery fire; and sound organization into
indirect and direct fire support groups with heavy weapons, 1-2 assault groups, a
resupply and casevac group and flank security groups (ideally with air defence
weapons).
The success of Mujahideen ambushes often owed much to Soviet/DRA adherence to
stereotyped organization and tactics, incompetence and excessive passivity. Route
opening detachments were not deployed in advance or counter-ambushes set.
Neither were choke points or dominating terrain to the flanks occupied beforehand
(the need to picket the heights, a lesson learned painfully by the British in
Afghanistan, was never really grasped). There were rarely even pre-planned artillery
concentrations on likely ambush sites. Recce to the front and flanks was often
deficient. Even previously employed ambush sites were not reconnoitred by
dismounted infantry (motor rifle troops were always loath to leave their armoured
protection) and the guerrillas used favourable sites (and field works) time and
again. When ambushes were sprung, often after the strong forward security
element had passed through, the armoured vehicles deployed throughout the
convoy would stop and return fire while trucks endeavoured to motor out of the
killing zone. Attempts to counter attack, especially by infantry on foot, were rare,
thus ceding the initiative to the enemy. Command and control was sometimes lost,
the Mujahideen being adept at taking out command vehicles early as they knew that
junior leaders were often unable to take over effectively. Artillery, and especially air
support, was often disgracefully tardy. There were rarely rapid reaction forces,
particularly air assault troops, to come to the rescue of beleaguered columns or
pursue withdrawing enemy forces.
Blocking Enemy Lines of Communication & Sieges
While the hit and run ambush was the normal means of interdicting Soviet/DRA
LoCs, there were occasions when the Mujahideen established road blocks at river
crossings or in mountain passes which were intended to hold for days or even
weeks. This was done in support of other operations, to deny access to Mujahideen
bases, to prove a point or, on occasion, simply because an ambush developed into a
prolonged battle, with supporters streaming in (the British in the 19th Century
noted the magnetic attraction of a good fight for Afghans). Indeed, towards the
border with Pakistan, where the ground was as favourable to the guerrillas as it
was vital, some roads were blocked for months, even years. Several isolated DRA
garrisons were besieged for years. The town of Khost, for instance, was
permanently sealed off from the rest of the country and besieged, and the DRA
garrison had to be supplied by air; in Operation Magistral (November 1987), the
A102
C J ****
8
Soviets demonstrated that there were no "no-go" areas by opening land
communications to it – but they were able to keep the road open for only 12 days.
Such reversions to semi-conventional warfare required extremely favourable terrain
and elaborate fortifications to withstand overwhelming enemy artillery and air
power. Of course, these battles required large numbers of men and posed a
considerable, often insuperable, challenge to the Mujahideen's limited logistical and
command and control systems. They were most successful where only, or largely,
local Mujahideen were involved as mobile groups lacked the necessary supplies and
commitment and inter-factional co-operation was not always forthcoming. Towards
the end, as the Soviets were winding down their involvement, they did, however
become more frequent.
Raids
Raids served several purposes. Such high profile attacks as those on the Soviet
embassy and the DRA KHAD (secret police) headquarters and MoD in Kabul, and
on district HQs demonstrated the ability of the Mujahideen to strike anywhere, with
consequent effects on the morale of both sides. They were used to destroy enemy
facilities and/or to draw government or Soviet troops into ambush. Raids on
security outposts undermined enemy morale. Above all they were a primary source
of arms and ammunition for the guerrillas.
Like ambushes, raids depended for success on good intelligence (often coming from
within DRA/militia ranks), careful recce, covert deployment and concentration,
flank and rear security, surprise and careful co-ordination. Fire suppression of
supporting posts, quick execution and withdrawal were usually important to negate
enemy reactions. The Mujahideen generally preferred quite large raiding parties,
from scores to a few hundreds of fighters, rather than the dozen or so used by
special forces. In part, this was due to the need for manpower to carry off spoils
and casualties. Late afternoon and, more commonly, night were the times of choice
for raids as darkness generally inhibited enemy reactions and rendered artillery and
air support ineffectual.
Two major problems beset raiders. Protective minefields were effective against
fighters lacking mine detection and clearance means more effective than a nearby
flock of sheep to drive into the obstacle or the use of boulders as stepping-stones.
And lack of radio communications often hindered co-ordination of fire support,
assault, logistic support and security groups.
Night fire raids were also a popular tactic. The bombardment of outposts, bases,
airfields and city targets with rockets, mortars, recoilless anti-tank weapons and
sometimes howitzers was a daily event. The aim was to destroy materiel, harass the
enemy, deprive him of sleep and demonstrate the depressing ubiquity of the
Mujahideen. Multiple, pre-surveyed fire positions would be established to enable
weapons to "shoot and scoot", avoiding retaliatory counter-bombardment.
Soviet and DRA failings usually contributed to the success of raids. DRA and
militia posts were always preferred targets as the defenders would usually run away
or give up after token resistance. Both government and Soviet troops were
operating blind as they lacked intelligence, and both, partly for this reason, suffered
from a "bunker mentality", preferring to hole up in their field works rather than
dominate the surrounding countryside. The Mujahideen owned the night, a
precondition for successful approach marches and withdrawals. Often, fearing
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
9
ambush if they sallied forth, Soviet/DRA forces near enough to intervene actually
confined themselves to speculative artillery fire. Counter-attacks were rare and
never appeared to be pre-planned, and withdrawals were not followed up
immediately.
Attacking Strongpoints
Attacks on strongpoints were similar in execution to raids, though they usually
employed greater numbers of fighters – sometimes over 1,000. The main difference
rested in the purpose. Government administrative centres were occupied for a
period of days for the propaganda value of the act. However, the Mujahideen
leaders found it difficult to co-operate with each other, to organize, control and resupply
large numbers in conventional combat and to keep their forces together.
The resultant counter-attacks were usually successful and inflicted heavy
casualties on the guerrillas, who had forfeited their greatest advantage, their
mobility. Thus such actions were undertaken in only two phases of the war: at the
start when the DRA was losing control and the Soviet intervention was in its early
days; and towards the end when the Soviets had abandoned offensive operations
and were withdrawing, the DRA morale was at rock bottom and the Mujahideen
could sense victory.
Urban Combat
The Mujahideen's main interest and base of support lay in the countryside and the
refugees, not, by and large, in the towns. Indeed, often indiscriminate shelling of
urban areas may have demonstrated the inability of the government to protect its
citizens, but it also antagonized many town dwellers. Even so, there was enough
popular support, especially from IDPs, to ensure good intelligence and freedom of
movement and action, especially in the suburbs. The DRA was never in full control
of Herat or Kandahar, and, while things were better in Kabul, it was unable to
prevent attacks.
Urban guerrilla groups were usually small, not least through fear of KHAD
informers. They lacked the same level of organization, command and control,
equipment, training and cohesiveness as their rural counterparts. For these
reasons, actions tended to be small-scale and of short duration. They sought
political and psychological rather than military impact. Ambushes and raids (for
example on the Soviet embassy and the DRA's MoD) were practised. The favourite
tactic, however, was the bomb attack. The aim was usually the elimination of
selected individuals or targets and the consequent inculcation of fear amongst
government servants and supporters.
Defence
General
Like all successful guerrilla movements, the Mujahideen preferred to keep the
initiative through offensive action. There were circumstances, however, when they
were forced onto the defensive. This happened during the course of blocking
actions and sieges, as mentioned above. Even more important was the defence of
bases. As Soviet denial operations took their toll of the rural population and local
food sources, the Mujahideen were forced to bring in food and medical supplies,
mainly from Pakistan, as well as the weapons and ammunition being provided in
A102
C J ****
10
increasing quantities from abroad. These had to be stockpiled in a series of
dispersed base depots, sited in inaccessible areas. Such bases were also needed for
training and rest and the treatment of wounded. Still valuable, but less critical
because they were smaller, were forward supply points established to support
current operations. The latter could be moved relatively quickly and frequently to
avoid attack. The former, on the other hand, required defending
In defence, the guerrillas exploited rugged or otherwise difficult terrain and their
detailed knowledge of it. They also put immense efforts into preparing their bases
for defence, as for instance in the Zhawar cave and tunnel complex in Paktia
province or the green zone of Baraki Barak district between Kabul and Gardez. All
other advantages lay with the Soviet/DRA forces. Where the Mujahideen were
compelled to hold ground, their enemy could make full use of his immensely
superior artillery and air supremacy and could concentrate superior numbers of
motor rifle troops and back them with ample armour. From the mid '80s, the
Soviets also started to use airmobile forces more aggressively in combination with
strong ground elements; vertical envelopment made hitherto secure bases more
vulnerable and posed threats to the guerrillas' ability to withdraw if defeated. In
fact, the Mujahideen found it increasingly impossible to hold onto large bases and
staging areas and these were pulled back over the Pakistani border.
Cordon & Search Operations
Rather than seeking to defeat the guerrillas through the cumulative effect of a
myriad of successful tactical actions, defensive and offensive, the Soviets preferred
large-scale cordon and search operations, involving as many as 20,000 men, to deal
with large areas of Mujahideen-dominated territory and bases. Often, particularly
latterly, Soviet troops would establish the cordon and provide the artillery and DRA
forces would be left to sweep the area and root out the guerrillas from the local
population. This arrangement suited 40th Army as it gave the most dangerous role,
with likely attendant casualties, to the Afghans. It also suited the Kabul
government as it enabled the DRA to extort taxes and press-gang conscripts for the
army. It did not suit the Afghan soldiers, who were reluctant to run the risks
required to push home attacks.
In the early days, the Mujahideen were vulnerable to search and destroy operations.
However, they quickly learned through experience to prepare their heartland areas
for defence. Capitalising on their intimate knowledge of the terrain, they created
large numbers of well-camouflaged field fortifications with deep, artillery-proof
shelters and communications trenches;2 redundancy was an important feature as
the intention was to conduct an active, area, manoeuvre defence which exploited
interior lines. Their forces would be organized in small groups for manoeuvre
between fortifications and the launching of small counter-attacks from many
directions. A central reserve was kept to reinforce critical sectors at critical times.
The search force would precede its sweep with heavy artillery and air attack,
usually of minimal effectiveness. When it advanced, however, it would find that the
Mujahideen defence and local counter-attacks slowed and fragmented its efforts and
that the intermingling of forces and the poor nature of the targets provided by the
guerrillas reduced the effectiveness of supporting artillery and aviation. The
problem of fighting through was further compounded by generally poor tankinfantry
co-operation. Each element was often used separately and neither wished
2 The typical two-man fighting position was a 2x3m pit with a log roof topped with
1.5m of earth and rocks.
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
11
to risk close-in combat with a determined and effective opponent, especially at
night. At the end of the day, the Mujahideen were prepared to die for their cause,
taking as many of the enemy with them as possible. The Soviet troops, and still
less the DRA men, were not so prepared. Attacks tended to founder as soon as
casualties were taken.
Neither the DRA nor Soviet forces tried to break cordoned areas down into more
manageable sub-sectors, clearing each systematically and thoroughly in turn.
Rather, if the offensive made progress at all, the sweep tended to be perfunctory,
missing many guerrilla groups. Moreover, large cordons, even when established on
favourable ground, tended to be porous and large numbers of Mujahideen (expert in
the role) would exfiltrate at night as individuals or in small groups. There was
seldom any pursuit.
Sometimes, if a battle was prolonged enough, the beleaguered Mujahideen were
reinforced by other factions, or attacks were mounted against the enemy's lines of
communication to deny him the immense quantities of ammunition without which
nothing was usually attempted.
Defence Against Raids
As well as major cordon and search operations, the Soviets mounted smaller raids
for more limited objectives, eg, the destruction of a small guerrilla band or the
elimination of a commander. These were often successful where KHAD infiltrators
or informers in the local population provided intelligence to government forces
and/or the people failed to give early warning of an enemy approach. This could
happen in war-weary areas where the people wished to be left in peace, where the
Mujahideen had taken reprisals against collaborators or where the locals were of a
different tribe or faction to the guerrillas. Mujahideen security tended to be lax in
areas they controlled or where the enemy had not visited for some time. Security
posts were frequently placed too near the target to give adequate notice of an enemy
approach so that the guerrillas could not deploy or withdraw in time; and sentries
were often inattentive. The problem could be compounded by the lack of fighting
positions, plans (preferably rehearsed) for reaction to attack and standard drills to
cope with emergencies.
Fighting Against Heliborne Insertions & Attack Helicopters
For the most part, superior weapon systems gave the Soviets little tactical
advantage during the war. Strategically, air power played a critical role in
depopulating the countryside and denying it through the scattering of mines. But
tactically, neither fixed wing aircraft (except the Su-25, when it appeared) nor
artillery proved battle winners save to an extent in set-piece engagements. There
were insuperable problems of target acquisition, and when the Mujahideen did
present targets, they tended to be small and often fleeting. Plentiful armoured
vehicles did not give the Soviets much of an edge either. Motor rifle troops tended
to cling to the frequently dubious protection of their BTRs/BMPs and tanks were
reluctant to approach RPG-armed guerrillas too closely. There was a marked
tendency to stand off from the enemy and engage areas with indiscriminate fire
from AFVs rather than to employ manoeuvre and then close with the guerrillas with
tanks and dismounted infantry working together intimately. The tactics used by
the Mujahideen's 19th Century predecessors against the British worked well enough
against the Soviets.
A102
C J ****
12
The exception to this generalisation was the attack and transport helicopter and the
Su-25. The Mujahideen had great difficulty in coping with heliborne assaults
supported by gunships and ground attack aircraft. Soviet/DRA troops inserted by
helicopter could achieve surprise in a way that ground forces could rarely do. They
could also reach places inaccessible to the latter. Attack helicopters could deliver a
high volume of fire accurately against small, point targets that were invisible to
tanks or artillery observers. For this reason, they were feared and their arrival
often silenced heavy weapons and could be the signal for breaking-off an action and
withdrawing
At first, the Soviets seem to have used airmobile troops largely in small-scale raids
to snatch or kill local Mujahideen commanders. They were also used to insert
ambush parties and elements of the cordon in search and destroy operations. As
time went on, however, air assaults went deeper and became more aggressive, even
against more formidable groupings. Several mountain bases that had proved
impervious to purely terrestrial attack fell to a combination of vertical envelopment
and a ground thrust; a link up by ground forces was usually considered essential if
lightly-equipped heliborne troops were to stay for any great time in an area where
the guerrillas were strong (eg, to destroy supplies and facilities in a captured base
depot).
The Mujahideen suffered from inadequate air defence until the war was approaching
its closing stages. Heavy machine guns could be effective when firing from ambush,
eg, from caves against passing aircraft, from mountain tops downwards or from fire
positions sited away from the target on likely approach routes. Sometimes, bait
was offered to attract aircraft into an ambush. However, only the advent of the
Stinger made it unsafe for Soviet low-level flight wherever they wished. Another
favoured Mujahideen tactic was to destroy aircraft at their bases with rocket and
mortar attacks.
The guerrillas learned through experience that certain measures were necessary to
counter heliborne raids, or at least to minimize their impact. Early warning from
outposts and air defence ambushes were important. So too was contingency
planning and the establishment of drills for quick reaction and the creation of a
rapid reaction force. An effective answer was to hit the assault force as it was
landing, helicopters being vulnerable to massed RPG and light machine gun fire,
and then to overrun the LZ before the assault troops could get organized. However,
the Mujahideen often failed to establish in advance air defence and/or minefields on
likely LZs, despite the fact that the Soviets used some mountain ones repeatedly.
Better prior preparation would have prevented the establishment of an effective
cordon in many search and destroy operations.
Counter-Ambush
The Soviets/DRA did not make much use of ambushes for the local protection of
garrisons. They were, however, a favourite Soviet tactic in the on-going struggle to
interdict guerrilla lines of communication; long columns of pack animals offered
vulnerable targets. These ambushes, often by spetsnaz, were usually well laid with
due attention to security; for instance, parties would be delivered by helicopter to a
LZ distant from the ambush site, with the approach march conducted in the hours
of darkness.
When moving through what they considered safe territory, the Mujahideen often
failed to establish route security outposts in advance. Sometimes they even
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
13
neglected to send out forward and flank security patrols. Not infrequently, they
paid the penalty for over-confidence.
When ambushed, the guerrilla command and control often broke down, leading to
increased casualties. Counter-ambush procedures and drills were often neglected,
leading to costly errors such as fighting back from within the enemy kill zone.
More savvy Mujahideen commanders took tedious, time-consuming precautions
before moving supplies or combat forces. They would check with local guerrillas for
intelligence and to arrange co-ordination, prove the route and establish security
posts on dominant terrain and likely ambush sites. They would vary the routes
they used and times of travel. Columns would move well spread-out and in groups
with an hour or so between each (not least through fear of air attack); forward,
flank and rear security patrols would be formed. Anti-ambush drills would be
established and rehearsed: if the ambushers were outnumbered, efforts would be
made to roll them up from a flank; if the ambush was too strong (they grew up to
company-sized), an attempt would be made to bypass and head for the nearest
cover.
Conclusion
It is to be hoped that British and other western troops will not become embroiled in
conflict with guerrillas in Afghanistan while helping to rebuild that unhappy
country. Were that to happen, however, today's coalition forces would presumably
not make the mistake of alienating virtually the entire population, as did the
Soviets/DRA. They would be operating only at the request of an Afghan
government which enjoyed wide popular legitimacy. The enemy would comprise
fringe factions and would not, it can be expected, succeed in provoking
peacekeepers into the sort of reprisals that proved such good recruiting material for
the Mujahideen. In such circumstances, the advantage in the all-important
intelligence struggle would lie with the government and its allied forces.
Modern western armies have technology that will have more impact on combat in
Afghanistan than did the Soviets'. Contemporary communications and navigation
aids impart a flexibility and firmness of command and control that did not exist in
the eighties. Night combat has no fears for a force well equipped with night vision
and sighting equipments, even on aircraft. Helicopters, both attack and transport,
are not only much more capable but are also available in numbers the 40th Army
could only dream of. Precision weapons can engage point targets effectively without
excessive collateral damage. Above all, perhaps, contemporary surveillance and
target acquisition systems would hinder the guerrilla's ability to manoeuvre,
concentrate and deploy undetected.
Even more important than equipment is the man that uses it. The Soviets
displayed appallingly low skills levels in the minor tactics that characterized most of
the fighting. They also suffered from very low morale. Professional western soldiers
with a sound counter-insurgency doctrine and high levels of training ought to be
able to do much better, even with less – provided always that they are not given an
impossible task and that their determination is not undermined by lack of support
at home.
This paper is largely a paraphrase of two excellent books. These are:
• Lester W Grau (ed): "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" (National
Defence University, Washington, DC, 1996). The book comprises a series
of tactical vignettes translated from a Frunze Military Academy study of
the war, together with perceptive comments by the editor, a one time
American infantry lieutenant colonel with Vietnam experience.
• Ali A Jalali and Lester W Grau: "The Other Side Of The Mountain" (US
Marine Corps Studies and Analysis Division, Quantico, Va, 1998). Ali
Jalali was an Afghan colonel who attended both the British Staff College
and the Frunze and was a member of the resistance in Afghanistan. He,
and an assistant, conducted dozens of interviews of Mujahideen veterans
(several his former students at the Afghan Staff college) to produce
vignettes from the resistance point of view. Again, the authors' comments
are invaluable.
I wish to acknowledge the work of my two friends of over a decade and thank
them for producing such valuable insights into a bygone war that has
suddenly acquired such contemporary relevance.
Disclaimer
The views expressed are those of the
Author and not necessarily those of the
UK Ministry of Defence
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
Published By:
The Conflict Studies Research
Centre
Directorate General Development and Doctrine
Royal Military Academy Sandhurst
Camberley Telephone : (44) 1276 412346
Surrey Or 412375
GU15 4PQ Fax : (44) 1276 686880
England E-mail: csrc@gtnet.gov.uk
http://www.csrc.ac.uk
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
Regards,
Hist2004
A102
1
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
C J ****
Contents
Background: The Forces, Terrain & Nature of the War 2
The Combatants 2
The Mujahideen 2
The DRA & Soviet Armies 4
Terrain 5
The Nature of the War 5
Mujahideen Tactics 6
Offensive Actions 6
Ambushes 6
Blocking Enemy Lines of Communication & Sieges 7
Raids 8
Attacking Strongpoints 9
Urban Combat 9
Defence 9
General 9
Cordon & Search Operations 10
Defence Against Raids 11
Fighting Against Heliborne Insertions & Attack
Helicopters 11
Counter-Ambush 12
Conclusion 13
A102
2
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
Conflict Studies Research Centre
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
January 2002
Background: The Forces, Terrain & Nature of the War
The Combatants
The Mujahideen
Afghanistan is little more than a geographical expression. Its borders were
arbitrarily drawn by outside powers. Its population comprises a loose collection of
antithetical tribes and nationalities, the most numerous of which straddle the
country's borders, artificial demarcation lines that mean little to them. The basic
social units and focus of loyalty are the family and the Qawm, a local grouping
defined by kinship, clan membership, residence and adherence to one of Islam's
sects. Thus, there is little sense of Afghan nationhood and patriotism has not
figured particularly highly as a motivating factor. The grip of central government
has normally been intermittent and weak and local issues generally dominated the
political agenda for most people, especially in the countryside. Any semblance of
national unity has historically been merely the consequence of outsiders trying to
impose alien rule on the country, as with the resistance to British occupiers in
1838-42 and 1878-1880.
The war started in the late summer of 1978 as a general uprising against the efforts
of the communist Khalq government's efforts to force Soviet-style socialism on a
deeply conservative, religious country. After little more than a year, it became clear
that the government could not retain control and the USSR, in accordance with the
"Brezhnev Doctrine", committed a "Limited Contingent" to assist, though it was
soon to take over the direction of the war. Soviet intervention changed the nature
of the struggle. Worried by Soviet expansionism, Pakistan, Iran and then the USA
(especially), China and some European and Arab states began to supply money and
arms to the Mujahideen. Most of this aid was funnelled through Pakistan, which
distributed it to seven major Islamist factions; Islamabad favoured the four most
fundamentalist of these. The religious leaders of the factions thus gained
unprecedented political power, undermining the authority of tribal and village
leaders. It was these factions that lifted the war from a myriad of local conflicts to
something resembling a national struggle.
The resistance was never united, however. Even common loathing for the Soviet
occupiers could not accomplish this (except, it would appear, to an extent in
Kandahar). There was never a central leadership and clear chain of command.
Rather, disunity characterized the resistance, with old disputes and enmities
continuing despite the war. Sometimes, factions (themselves more or less loose
groupings of sub-factions) would join up temporarily to pursue some venture.
Sometimes co-operation was refused, or broke down during an operation.
Routinely, factions appropriated aid meant for others. Sometimes they actually
fought each other. (The KGB exploited this disunity by creating false bands posing
as CIA-supported mujahideen which were used to sow confusion, flush out real
rebel groups and provoke infighting. Thus, unlike the Americans in Vietnam, the
Soviets never faced a monolithic enemy under tight central direction and capable of
exercising operational art. For the most part, the war comprised a series of
prolonged, largely local conflicts. There was never a prospect of the resistance
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
3
proceeding in time to the classic final phase of revolutionary war where the enemy
is fought in conventional battle by "regular" forces.
Mujahideen commanders owed their position to their social standing, education,
leadership abilities and commitment to their religion. They could not rely on
military discipline to gain their warriors' obedience. Rather, they led by force of
personality, moral persuasion and by achieving consensus. Not more than 15% of
them were former professional soldiers; ex-officers were usually regarded as
potential challengers to the authority of faction leaders and were therefore
sidelined, especially by Islamic fundamentalists who distrusted those trained by the
old regime. However, they made a significant contribution through their
understanding of military-technical issues, planning skills and ability to train the
fighters.
The Mujahideen warrior fought for his family, his tribe and his religion. He did so
out of a love of freedom and sense of duty, as a volunteer without pay. For the most
part, fighters were local men with family responsibilities. As such, they were
untrained and necessarily part-timers; the spoils of war (eg, weapons to sell in the
bazaars of Pakistan) were important to them as a source of income. As the war
dragged on, though, mobile groups emerged. These comprised mostly young,
unmarried men, sometimes paid, with higher standards of training.1 Controlled by
the major factions, these ranged over wider areas and made possible some largerscale
operations. In many ways, the Mujahideen rank and file were natural
guerrillas. They were hardy, stoical, courageous, accustomed to the use of weapons
in a land where conflict was endemic. They knew the terrain intimately in their own
localities and could move rapidly over considerable distances. They were excellent
in night combat (which was feared by their foes). They enjoyed the support of the
population whence they sprang, with all that meant for the supply of recruits, food,
shelter and intelligence.
They also suffered from the drawbacks common in a guerrilla force. Enthusiasm
was considerable, but discipline was generally poor. It was often difficult to
persuade volunteers, who wanted their share of the honour, excitement and loot
that came from fighting, to perform the unglamorous tasks of logistic support and
flank and rear area security. Sentries could not always be relied on. Poor fire
discipline sometimes compromised good plans. And prolonged operations were
vitiated by the tendency of fighters to drift home after a tactical success (or, for that
matter, a reverse, or through boredom); exploitation to build on a tactical victory
was a rarity.
The main weapons of the Mujahideen were the AK-47 (though the old British .303
inch Enfield, with its long range and power to penetrate Soviet flak jackets had its
adherents), PK light machine guns and the RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher. As
time went by, they acquired increasing numbers of heavy, crew served weapons.
Most significant actions featured the use of 60mm, 82mm and sometimes 107mm
mortars (the former described as the "guerrilla mortar"), 82mm recoilless anti-tank
guns, BM-1 single 107mm rocket launchers, 7.62mm and 12.7mm heavy machine
guns and sometimes howitzers; air defence was provided by 12.7mm and 14.5mm
weapons, often surprisingly effective, especially in ambushes in mountains, and
from 1988, the Stinger SAM, a show-stopper for Soviet aviation's low-level actions.
1 There were also some volunteers from the Middle East. The Afghans regarded these
Arabs as little more than prima donnas, there for Jihad credit whose interest was less in
fighting than in making videos glorifying themselves.
A102
C J ****
4
The Mujahideen were also enthusiastic proponents of mine warfare (during the war,
the Soviets lost 1,191 vehicles and 1,995 men to mines). They mostly employed
anti-vehicle mines (often piling three on top of each other for a catastrophic kill) and
delighted in improvising huge home-made mines. Mines, sometimes command
detonated, were usually covered by fire and dug up for reuse if not set off by enemy
vehicles.
The DRA & Soviet Armies
The army of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) collapsed as an effective
fighting force after the Soviet invasion, defections reducing it from about 90,000
men in 1979 to 30,000 in early 1981. The remaining troops were generally of
limited combat value. They were ill-equipped and badly trained. Worse still, they
were unmotivated. The government enjoyed little popular support to begin with,
and that little was steadily eroded by the way it and its Soviet masters behaved.
The Soviet attitude, increasingly evident as the war dragged on, that DRA troops
were expendable and should be given the most dangerous jobs did not help. Some
officers who apparently remained loyal to the regime often secretly supported the
Mujahideen and provided the resistance with information and arms. Most others
showed little enthusiasm for real combat. The soldiery, both regular and militia
were even more unwilling (the latter defecting en masse in 1984). Morale was very
low and conscripts rarely put up much of a fight. Indeed, on many occasions whole
units either fled or deserted to the resistance. It was common for Mujahideen
groups to give captured conscripts a choice between going home or joining the
resistance (usually, initially, in logistic support roles).
The Soviet Army that invaded Afghanistan was prepared only for a high tempo,
mechanized war. Everything was geared to the demands of operational art within
the context of strategic offensive operations. It was not equipped or trained for the
sort of war it had to fight. It lacked an appropriate doctrine for counter-insurgency,
and it took an astonishingly long time for the 40th Army (or rather, elements of it) to
learn and adapt. Of course, adaptation was hampered by systemic limitations built
in to an army designed for a single variant of warfare. Company-level officers were
taught only basic tactics unsuited to conditions in Afghanistan and were unskilled
in such tasks as adjusting mortar or artillery fire that were not normally expected of
them. Low level commanders often displayed little capacity for independent action,
lacked initiative and often displayed poor leadership. A particular weakness was
the lack of an effective, professional NCO corps; tasks happily entrusted to British
sergeants and corporals required officers in the Soviet system.
For the most part, stereotyped, unsuitable tactics remained the norm. In defence,
there was a "bunker mentality" with the Mujahideen being allowed to manoeuvre
largely unchallenged and to own the night. Ground recce and flank and rear
security were neglected, with recce troops, whose quality and training standards
were higher, being misused as combat sub-units. There was excessive reliance on
artillery, air and AFV-delivered firepower at the expense of manoeuvre and
dismounted infantry closing with the enemy. Motor rifle troops were reluctant to
leave their armoured vehicles (especially the DRA) and engage in close quarter
battle; tanks were disinclined to advance against RPGs without them. Wise to these
failings, the Mujahideen would "hug" the enemy as close as possible to make it
impossible for him to use his artillery and attack helicopters.
There was also an endemic shortage of infantry. The "Limited Contingent" was just
that. It never rose above 104,000 men. Over three quarters of Soviet troops were
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
5
tied down in defence of cities, base camps, airfields and lines of communication. To
compound the problem, units were not maintained at full strength, with regiments
being reduced to the size of battalions, battalions to companies, etc, a problem due
in large part to the fact that, at any given time, a quarter to a third of personnel was
sick with hepatitis, amoebic dysentery, typhus, malaria and meningitis.
The Soviets did eventually create some effective light infantry and air-mobile units
which employed appropriate tactics. These were integrated with artillery, attack
helicopters and specialist ground attack aircraft to pose real problems for the
Mujahideen, but there were too few of them to make a significant difference, and the
advent of the Stinger SAM in 1988 drastically curtailed the activities of aviation.
For the most part, morale in ordinary Soviet motor rifle units was poor to start with,
and it deteriorated as the war dragged on. Soldiers found themselves in an alien
land, universally loathed as oppressive occupiers. Nor were they buoyed up by
support from home as the war was far from popular in the USSR. Some elite units,
airborne, air assault, spetsnaz and the two special separate motor rifle brigades
performed well, but the majority displayed a marked reluctance to engage in serious
combat.
Terrain
Afghanistan is almost the size of England and France combined. Little of its terrain
is suited to the mechanized, firepower-reliant force committed by the Soviets. Most
of it is inhospitable, largely roadless desert or mountain, much of the latter covered
by thick forests. Even the relatively populous areas proved difficult. The "green
zones" were intersected by numerous irrigation ditches and were thick with trees,
vines, crops and tangled vegetation. The flat plains contained many swampy
terraces for rice growing and river banks were often swampy too. There are no
railways and only 18,000km of road, less than one sixth of that surfaced. In other
words, the country is ideally suited to the sort of guerrilla warfare practised since
ancient times by its inhabitants against invaders.
The Mujahideen made full use of possibilities offered by the ground for concealed
manoeuvre, dispersion, ambush and defence. The Soviet advantage of air-mobility
was only able to offset terrain difficulties to a limited degree. It did enable them to
maintain some isolated garrisons deep in enemy territory, but there were
insufficient helicopters deployed to reduce significantly their reliance on ground
manoeuvre to carry the fight to the enemy.
The Nature of the War
The war was a contest of endurance and will. The Mujahideen did not fight in the
expectation of victory on the battlefield. They fought because it was the right thing
to do. They were prepared for a long, perhaps endless, struggle in which they, and
the Afghan people, would suffer many more casualties than their enemies. The
Soviets tried to win through the largely indiscriminate use of overwhelming
firepower. However, at the end of the day, sensitivity to casualties and Third World
opinion combined with the difficulty of maintaining larger forces in theatre and the
fact that Afghanistan was not of fundamental importance to the USSR prevented
the Soviets from deploying sufficient strength to destroy their implacable foe.
A102
C J ****
6
Strategically, the war resolved itself into a fight where each side tried to strangle the
other's logistics.
• The Mujahideen launched never-ending attacks on the Soviets' long, vulnerable
lines of communication, both back to the USSR and within Afghanistan.
Security of the open, western LoC required only three battalions, but the difficult
eastern part needed 26 battalions manning 199 outposts and constantly
patrolling or escorting convoys. Generally, at any given time, over three quarters
of the Limited Contingent was tied down in essential security missions of
various sorts, drastically reducing the numbers available for offensive action.
Essentially, the initiative lay in the hands of the Mujahideen.
• The Soviets started from Mao Zedong's famous premise that the guerrilla is a
like fish that flourishes in the sea of a friendly population; he requires this
benign environment for food, shelter, recruits and intelligence. But there was no
attempt win the hearts and minds of the Afghan peoples in order to make the
environment hostile to the resistance; probably such an attempt would have
been foredoomed to failure. Instead, the Soviets set about draining the sea.
From 1981 to 1985, they depopulated the countryside and intimidated those
who remained. Villages, granaries, crops, herds and irrigation systems were
destroyed and fields and pastures were mined. Afghanistan became a land of
refugees; 5.5 million Afghans, one third of the pre-war population, were driven
into exile and a further two million became IDPs (with the young men returning
as guerrillas thirsting for vengeance). With the rural economy largely destroyed,
the Mujahideen could no longer obtain the sustenance they needed locally. Food
as well as arms, munitions and medical supplies had to be brought in from
Pakistan and delivered to base camps established within Afghanistan. From
1985 until their withdrawal, the Soviet offensive effort centred on finding and
destroying these bases and interdicting the hundreds of routes from Pakistan
into Afghanistan over which the $4 billion worth of US and others' military aid
flowed to the guerrillas.
Mujahideen Tactics
Offensive Actions
Ambushes
The ambush is a traditional and key feature of Afghan warfare, whether fighting the
government, other tribes or foreign occupiers. Ambushes were used to great effect
to interdict Soviet/DRA lines of communication, thus both limiting the size of force
the Soviets could sustain, tying down the bulk of that force in security tasks and,
an important factor, providing much needed supplies for the Mujahideen. Most
ambushes were used to interfere with general logistic effort, both from the USSR
and within country. However, they were sometimes deployed in support of other
operations, as, for instance, when an ammunition resupply convoy for a 70
Separate Motor Rifle Brigade's search and destroy mission was hit.
Many, perhaps most ambushes were based on good intelligence as to the route,
timing and composition of columns. Sites were selected where terrain offered good
fire positions and withdrawal routes and where enemy manoeuvre or escape would
be difficult. They would generally be occupied at the last minute, eg after a recce
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
7
helicopter sweeping ahead of the convoy had passed by. The ideal time for an
ambush was late afternoon as failing light would hamper Soviet/DRA reactions,
especially by aviation and artillery.
The size of ambushes varied from a few dozen men up to 350 or more on stretches
of road up to 10km or so. Determining factors were: the number of men available;
the amount of cover available; the length of the column to be hit; and the
importance of the target. The duration of actions varied from quick fire-andwithdraw
harassing actions up to fire-fights of 1-2 hours, followed where possible
by the looting of the damaged vehicles and weapons collection.
The most successful larger ambushes were characterized by: good intelligence;
secrecy; surprise; detailed planning; good co-ordination (often difficult as the
Mujahideen usually lacked radios); well-prepared, concealed fighting positions with
overhead cover to give protection from artillery fire; and sound organization into
indirect and direct fire support groups with heavy weapons, 1-2 assault groups, a
resupply and casevac group and flank security groups (ideally with air defence
weapons).
The success of Mujahideen ambushes often owed much to Soviet/DRA adherence to
stereotyped organization and tactics, incompetence and excessive passivity. Route
opening detachments were not deployed in advance or counter-ambushes set.
Neither were choke points or dominating terrain to the flanks occupied beforehand
(the need to picket the heights, a lesson learned painfully by the British in
Afghanistan, was never really grasped). There were rarely even pre-planned artillery
concentrations on likely ambush sites. Recce to the front and flanks was often
deficient. Even previously employed ambush sites were not reconnoitred by
dismounted infantry (motor rifle troops were always loath to leave their armoured
protection) and the guerrillas used favourable sites (and field works) time and
again. When ambushes were sprung, often after the strong forward security
element had passed through, the armoured vehicles deployed throughout the
convoy would stop and return fire while trucks endeavoured to motor out of the
killing zone. Attempts to counter attack, especially by infantry on foot, were rare,
thus ceding the initiative to the enemy. Command and control was sometimes lost,
the Mujahideen being adept at taking out command vehicles early as they knew that
junior leaders were often unable to take over effectively. Artillery, and especially air
support, was often disgracefully tardy. There were rarely rapid reaction forces,
particularly air assault troops, to come to the rescue of beleaguered columns or
pursue withdrawing enemy forces.
Blocking Enemy Lines of Communication & Sieges
While the hit and run ambush was the normal means of interdicting Soviet/DRA
LoCs, there were occasions when the Mujahideen established road blocks at river
crossings or in mountain passes which were intended to hold for days or even
weeks. This was done in support of other operations, to deny access to Mujahideen
bases, to prove a point or, on occasion, simply because an ambush developed into a
prolonged battle, with supporters streaming in (the British in the 19th Century
noted the magnetic attraction of a good fight for Afghans). Indeed, towards the
border with Pakistan, where the ground was as favourable to the guerrillas as it
was vital, some roads were blocked for months, even years. Several isolated DRA
garrisons were besieged for years. The town of Khost, for instance, was
permanently sealed off from the rest of the country and besieged, and the DRA
garrison had to be supplied by air; in Operation Magistral (November 1987), the
A102
C J ****
8
Soviets demonstrated that there were no "no-go" areas by opening land
communications to it – but they were able to keep the road open for only 12 days.
Such reversions to semi-conventional warfare required extremely favourable terrain
and elaborate fortifications to withstand overwhelming enemy artillery and air
power. Of course, these battles required large numbers of men and posed a
considerable, often insuperable, challenge to the Mujahideen's limited logistical and
command and control systems. They were most successful where only, or largely,
local Mujahideen were involved as mobile groups lacked the necessary supplies and
commitment and inter-factional co-operation was not always forthcoming. Towards
the end, as the Soviets were winding down their involvement, they did, however
become more frequent.
Raids
Raids served several purposes. Such high profile attacks as those on the Soviet
embassy and the DRA KHAD (secret police) headquarters and MoD in Kabul, and
on district HQs demonstrated the ability of the Mujahideen to strike anywhere, with
consequent effects on the morale of both sides. They were used to destroy enemy
facilities and/or to draw government or Soviet troops into ambush. Raids on
security outposts undermined enemy morale. Above all they were a primary source
of arms and ammunition for the guerrillas.
Like ambushes, raids depended for success on good intelligence (often coming from
within DRA/militia ranks), careful recce, covert deployment and concentration,
flank and rear security, surprise and careful co-ordination. Fire suppression of
supporting posts, quick execution and withdrawal were usually important to negate
enemy reactions. The Mujahideen generally preferred quite large raiding parties,
from scores to a few hundreds of fighters, rather than the dozen or so used by
special forces. In part, this was due to the need for manpower to carry off spoils
and casualties. Late afternoon and, more commonly, night were the times of choice
for raids as darkness generally inhibited enemy reactions and rendered artillery and
air support ineffectual.
Two major problems beset raiders. Protective minefields were effective against
fighters lacking mine detection and clearance means more effective than a nearby
flock of sheep to drive into the obstacle or the use of boulders as stepping-stones.
And lack of radio communications often hindered co-ordination of fire support,
assault, logistic support and security groups.
Night fire raids were also a popular tactic. The bombardment of outposts, bases,
airfields and city targets with rockets, mortars, recoilless anti-tank weapons and
sometimes howitzers was a daily event. The aim was to destroy materiel, harass the
enemy, deprive him of sleep and demonstrate the depressing ubiquity of the
Mujahideen. Multiple, pre-surveyed fire positions would be established to enable
weapons to "shoot and scoot", avoiding retaliatory counter-bombardment.
Soviet and DRA failings usually contributed to the success of raids. DRA and
militia posts were always preferred targets as the defenders would usually run away
or give up after token resistance. Both government and Soviet troops were
operating blind as they lacked intelligence, and both, partly for this reason, suffered
from a "bunker mentality", preferring to hole up in their field works rather than
dominate the surrounding countryside. The Mujahideen owned the night, a
precondition for successful approach marches and withdrawals. Often, fearing
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
9
ambush if they sallied forth, Soviet/DRA forces near enough to intervene actually
confined themselves to speculative artillery fire. Counter-attacks were rare and
never appeared to be pre-planned, and withdrawals were not followed up
immediately.
Attacking Strongpoints
Attacks on strongpoints were similar in execution to raids, though they usually
employed greater numbers of fighters – sometimes over 1,000. The main difference
rested in the purpose. Government administrative centres were occupied for a
period of days for the propaganda value of the act. However, the Mujahideen
leaders found it difficult to co-operate with each other, to organize, control and resupply
large numbers in conventional combat and to keep their forces together.
The resultant counter-attacks were usually successful and inflicted heavy
casualties on the guerrillas, who had forfeited their greatest advantage, their
mobility. Thus such actions were undertaken in only two phases of the war: at the
start when the DRA was losing control and the Soviet intervention was in its early
days; and towards the end when the Soviets had abandoned offensive operations
and were withdrawing, the DRA morale was at rock bottom and the Mujahideen
could sense victory.
Urban Combat
The Mujahideen's main interest and base of support lay in the countryside and the
refugees, not, by and large, in the towns. Indeed, often indiscriminate shelling of
urban areas may have demonstrated the inability of the government to protect its
citizens, but it also antagonized many town dwellers. Even so, there was enough
popular support, especially from IDPs, to ensure good intelligence and freedom of
movement and action, especially in the suburbs. The DRA was never in full control
of Herat or Kandahar, and, while things were better in Kabul, it was unable to
prevent attacks.
Urban guerrilla groups were usually small, not least through fear of KHAD
informers. They lacked the same level of organization, command and control,
equipment, training and cohesiveness as their rural counterparts. For these
reasons, actions tended to be small-scale and of short duration. They sought
political and psychological rather than military impact. Ambushes and raids (for
example on the Soviet embassy and the DRA's MoD) were practised. The favourite
tactic, however, was the bomb attack. The aim was usually the elimination of
selected individuals or targets and the consequent inculcation of fear amongst
government servants and supporters.
Defence
General
Like all successful guerrilla movements, the Mujahideen preferred to keep the
initiative through offensive action. There were circumstances, however, when they
were forced onto the defensive. This happened during the course of blocking
actions and sieges, as mentioned above. Even more important was the defence of
bases. As Soviet denial operations took their toll of the rural population and local
food sources, the Mujahideen were forced to bring in food and medical supplies,
mainly from Pakistan, as well as the weapons and ammunition being provided in
A102
C J ****
10
increasing quantities from abroad. These had to be stockpiled in a series of
dispersed base depots, sited in inaccessible areas. Such bases were also needed for
training and rest and the treatment of wounded. Still valuable, but less critical
because they were smaller, were forward supply points established to support
current operations. The latter could be moved relatively quickly and frequently to
avoid attack. The former, on the other hand, required defending
In defence, the guerrillas exploited rugged or otherwise difficult terrain and their
detailed knowledge of it. They also put immense efforts into preparing their bases
for defence, as for instance in the Zhawar cave and tunnel complex in Paktia
province or the green zone of Baraki Barak district between Kabul and Gardez. All
other advantages lay with the Soviet/DRA forces. Where the Mujahideen were
compelled to hold ground, their enemy could make full use of his immensely
superior artillery and air supremacy and could concentrate superior numbers of
motor rifle troops and back them with ample armour. From the mid '80s, the
Soviets also started to use airmobile forces more aggressively in combination with
strong ground elements; vertical envelopment made hitherto secure bases more
vulnerable and posed threats to the guerrillas' ability to withdraw if defeated. In
fact, the Mujahideen found it increasingly impossible to hold onto large bases and
staging areas and these were pulled back over the Pakistani border.
Cordon & Search Operations
Rather than seeking to defeat the guerrillas through the cumulative effect of a
myriad of successful tactical actions, defensive and offensive, the Soviets preferred
large-scale cordon and search operations, involving as many as 20,000 men, to deal
with large areas of Mujahideen-dominated territory and bases. Often, particularly
latterly, Soviet troops would establish the cordon and provide the artillery and DRA
forces would be left to sweep the area and root out the guerrillas from the local
population. This arrangement suited 40th Army as it gave the most dangerous role,
with likely attendant casualties, to the Afghans. It also suited the Kabul
government as it enabled the DRA to extort taxes and press-gang conscripts for the
army. It did not suit the Afghan soldiers, who were reluctant to run the risks
required to push home attacks.
In the early days, the Mujahideen were vulnerable to search and destroy operations.
However, they quickly learned through experience to prepare their heartland areas
for defence. Capitalising on their intimate knowledge of the terrain, they created
large numbers of well-camouflaged field fortifications with deep, artillery-proof
shelters and communications trenches;2 redundancy was an important feature as
the intention was to conduct an active, area, manoeuvre defence which exploited
interior lines. Their forces would be organized in small groups for manoeuvre
between fortifications and the launching of small counter-attacks from many
directions. A central reserve was kept to reinforce critical sectors at critical times.
The search force would precede its sweep with heavy artillery and air attack,
usually of minimal effectiveness. When it advanced, however, it would find that the
Mujahideen defence and local counter-attacks slowed and fragmented its efforts and
that the intermingling of forces and the poor nature of the targets provided by the
guerrillas reduced the effectiveness of supporting artillery and aviation. The
problem of fighting through was further compounded by generally poor tankinfantry
co-operation. Each element was often used separately and neither wished
2 The typical two-man fighting position was a 2x3m pit with a log roof topped with
1.5m of earth and rocks.
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
11
to risk close-in combat with a determined and effective opponent, especially at
night. At the end of the day, the Mujahideen were prepared to die for their cause,
taking as many of the enemy with them as possible. The Soviet troops, and still
less the DRA men, were not so prepared. Attacks tended to founder as soon as
casualties were taken.
Neither the DRA nor Soviet forces tried to break cordoned areas down into more
manageable sub-sectors, clearing each systematically and thoroughly in turn.
Rather, if the offensive made progress at all, the sweep tended to be perfunctory,
missing many guerrilla groups. Moreover, large cordons, even when established on
favourable ground, tended to be porous and large numbers of Mujahideen (expert in
the role) would exfiltrate at night as individuals or in small groups. There was
seldom any pursuit.
Sometimes, if a battle was prolonged enough, the beleaguered Mujahideen were
reinforced by other factions, or attacks were mounted against the enemy's lines of
communication to deny him the immense quantities of ammunition without which
nothing was usually attempted.
Defence Against Raids
As well as major cordon and search operations, the Soviets mounted smaller raids
for more limited objectives, eg, the destruction of a small guerrilla band or the
elimination of a commander. These were often successful where KHAD infiltrators
or informers in the local population provided intelligence to government forces
and/or the people failed to give early warning of an enemy approach. This could
happen in war-weary areas where the people wished to be left in peace, where the
Mujahideen had taken reprisals against collaborators or where the locals were of a
different tribe or faction to the guerrillas. Mujahideen security tended to be lax in
areas they controlled or where the enemy had not visited for some time. Security
posts were frequently placed too near the target to give adequate notice of an enemy
approach so that the guerrillas could not deploy or withdraw in time; and sentries
were often inattentive. The problem could be compounded by the lack of fighting
positions, plans (preferably rehearsed) for reaction to attack and standard drills to
cope with emergencies.
Fighting Against Heliborne Insertions & Attack Helicopters
For the most part, superior weapon systems gave the Soviets little tactical
advantage during the war. Strategically, air power played a critical role in
depopulating the countryside and denying it through the scattering of mines. But
tactically, neither fixed wing aircraft (except the Su-25, when it appeared) nor
artillery proved battle winners save to an extent in set-piece engagements. There
were insuperable problems of target acquisition, and when the Mujahideen did
present targets, they tended to be small and often fleeting. Plentiful armoured
vehicles did not give the Soviets much of an edge either. Motor rifle troops tended
to cling to the frequently dubious protection of their BTRs/BMPs and tanks were
reluctant to approach RPG-armed guerrillas too closely. There was a marked
tendency to stand off from the enemy and engage areas with indiscriminate fire
from AFVs rather than to employ manoeuvre and then close with the guerrillas with
tanks and dismounted infantry working together intimately. The tactics used by
the Mujahideen's 19th Century predecessors against the British worked well enough
against the Soviets.
A102
C J ****
12
The exception to this generalisation was the attack and transport helicopter and the
Su-25. The Mujahideen had great difficulty in coping with heliborne assaults
supported by gunships and ground attack aircraft. Soviet/DRA troops inserted by
helicopter could achieve surprise in a way that ground forces could rarely do. They
could also reach places inaccessible to the latter. Attack helicopters could deliver a
high volume of fire accurately against small, point targets that were invisible to
tanks or artillery observers. For this reason, they were feared and their arrival
often silenced heavy weapons and could be the signal for breaking-off an action and
withdrawing
At first, the Soviets seem to have used airmobile troops largely in small-scale raids
to snatch or kill local Mujahideen commanders. They were also used to insert
ambush parties and elements of the cordon in search and destroy operations. As
time went on, however, air assaults went deeper and became more aggressive, even
against more formidable groupings. Several mountain bases that had proved
impervious to purely terrestrial attack fell to a combination of vertical envelopment
and a ground thrust; a link up by ground forces was usually considered essential if
lightly-equipped heliborne troops were to stay for any great time in an area where
the guerrillas were strong (eg, to destroy supplies and facilities in a captured base
depot).
The Mujahideen suffered from inadequate air defence until the war was approaching
its closing stages. Heavy machine guns could be effective when firing from ambush,
eg, from caves against passing aircraft, from mountain tops downwards or from fire
positions sited away from the target on likely approach routes. Sometimes, bait
was offered to attract aircraft into an ambush. However, only the advent of the
Stinger made it unsafe for Soviet low-level flight wherever they wished. Another
favoured Mujahideen tactic was to destroy aircraft at their bases with rocket and
mortar attacks.
The guerrillas learned through experience that certain measures were necessary to
counter heliborne raids, or at least to minimize their impact. Early warning from
outposts and air defence ambushes were important. So too was contingency
planning and the establishment of drills for quick reaction and the creation of a
rapid reaction force. An effective answer was to hit the assault force as it was
landing, helicopters being vulnerable to massed RPG and light machine gun fire,
and then to overrun the LZ before the assault troops could get organized. However,
the Mujahideen often failed to establish in advance air defence and/or minefields on
likely LZs, despite the fact that the Soviets used some mountain ones repeatedly.
Better prior preparation would have prevented the establishment of an effective
cordon in many search and destroy operations.
Counter-Ambush
The Soviets/DRA did not make much use of ambushes for the local protection of
garrisons. They were, however, a favourite Soviet tactic in the on-going struggle to
interdict guerrilla lines of communication; long columns of pack animals offered
vulnerable targets. These ambushes, often by spetsnaz, were usually well laid with
due attention to security; for instance, parties would be delivered by helicopter to a
LZ distant from the ambush site, with the approach march conducted in the hours
of darkness.
When moving through what they considered safe territory, the Mujahideen often
failed to establish route security outposts in advance. Sometimes they even
A102
Mujahideen Tactics in the Soviet-Afghan War
13
neglected to send out forward and flank security patrols. Not infrequently, they
paid the penalty for over-confidence.
When ambushed, the guerrilla command and control often broke down, leading to
increased casualties. Counter-ambush procedures and drills were often neglected,
leading to costly errors such as fighting back from within the enemy kill zone.
More savvy Mujahideen commanders took tedious, time-consuming precautions
before moving supplies or combat forces. They would check with local guerrillas for
intelligence and to arrange co-ordination, prove the route and establish security
posts on dominant terrain and likely ambush sites. They would vary the routes
they used and times of travel. Columns would move well spread-out and in groups
with an hour or so between each (not least through fear of air attack); forward,
flank and rear security patrols would be formed. Anti-ambush drills would be
established and rehearsed: if the ambushers were outnumbered, efforts would be
made to roll them up from a flank; if the ambush was too strong (they grew up to
company-sized), an attempt would be made to bypass and head for the nearest
cover.
Conclusion
It is to be hoped that British and other western troops will not become embroiled in
conflict with guerrillas in Afghanistan while helping to rebuild that unhappy
country. Were that to happen, however, today's coalition forces would presumably
not make the mistake of alienating virtually the entire population, as did the
Soviets/DRA. They would be operating only at the request of an Afghan
government which enjoyed wide popular legitimacy. The enemy would comprise
fringe factions and would not, it can be expected, succeed in provoking
peacekeepers into the sort of reprisals that proved such good recruiting material for
the Mujahideen. In such circumstances, the advantage in the all-important
intelligence struggle would lie with the government and its allied forces.
Modern western armies have technology that will have more impact on combat in
Afghanistan than did the Soviets'. Contemporary communications and navigation
aids impart a flexibility and firmness of command and control that did not exist in
the eighties. Night combat has no fears for a force well equipped with night vision
and sighting equipments, even on aircraft. Helicopters, both attack and transport,
are not only much more capable but are also available in numbers the 40th Army
could only dream of. Precision weapons can engage point targets effectively without
excessive collateral damage. Above all, perhaps, contemporary surveillance and
target acquisition systems would hinder the guerrilla's ability to manoeuvre,
concentrate and deploy undetected.
Even more important than equipment is the man that uses it. The Soviets
displayed appallingly low skills levels in the minor tactics that characterized most of
the fighting. They also suffered from very low morale. Professional western soldiers
with a sound counter-insurgency doctrine and high levels of training ought to be
able to do much better, even with less – provided always that they are not given an
impossible task and that their determination is not undermined by lack of support
at home.
This paper is largely a paraphrase of two excellent books. These are:
• Lester W Grau (ed): "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" (National
Defence University, Washington, DC, 1996). The book comprises a series
of tactical vignettes translated from a Frunze Military Academy study of
the war, together with perceptive comments by the editor, a one time
American infantry lieutenant colonel with Vietnam experience.
• Ali A Jalali and Lester W Grau: "The Other Side Of The Mountain" (US
Marine Corps Studies and Analysis Division, Quantico, Va, 1998). Ali
Jalali was an Afghan colonel who attended both the British Staff College
and the Frunze and was a member of the resistance in Afghanistan. He,
and an assistant, conducted dozens of interviews of Mujahideen veterans
(several his former students at the Afghan Staff college) to produce
vignettes from the resistance point of view. Again, the authors' comments
are invaluable.
I wish to acknowledge the work of my two friends of over a decade and thank
them for producing such valuable insights into a bygone war that has
suddenly acquired such contemporary relevance.
Disclaimer
The views expressed are those of the
Author and not necessarily those of the
UK Ministry of Defence
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
Published By:
The Conflict Studies Research
Centre
Directorate General Development and Doctrine
Royal Military Academy Sandhurst
Camberley Telephone : (44) 1276 412346
Surrey Or 412375
GU15 4PQ Fax : (44) 1276 686880
England E-mail: csrc@gtnet.gov.uk
http://www.csrc.ac.uk
ISBN 1-903584-59-0
Regards,
Hist2004