JPRS ID: 10194 USSR REPORT MILITARY AFFAIRS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: JPRS
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
• Release Decision: RIF
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 100
• Document Creation Date: November 1, 2016
• Sequence Number: 49
• Content Type: REPORTS

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007102/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- JPRS L/ 10194
16 December 1981
USSR Re ort
p
M~l!?ARY AFFAIFtS
cFOUO ~ 2>a 1 ~
LOKAL'NYYE V~YNY: ISTORIYA I ~SOVREMENNOST'
FBIS FOREIGN ~ROADCAST INFORMATION SERVICE
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000404080049-6
NOTE
JPRS publications contain information primarily from foreign
newspapers, periodicals and books, but also from news agency
transmissions and broadcasts. Mat~rials fram foreign-language
sources are translated; those from English-language sources
are transcribed or reprinted, with the original phrasing and
other characteristics retained.
Headlines, editorial reports, and material enclosed in brackets
are supplied by JPRS. Processing indicators such as [Text]
or [Excerpt] in the first line of each item, or following the
last line of a brief, indicate how the original information was
processed. Where no processing indicator is given, the infor-
mation was summarixed or extracted.
Unfamiliar names rendered phonetically or transliterated are
enclosed in parentheses. Words or names preceded by a ques-
tion mark and enclosed in parentheses were not clear in the
original but have been supplied as appropriate in context.
Other unattributed parenthetical notes within the body of an
item originate with the source. Times within ltems are as
given by source.
The contents of this nublication in no way represent the poli-
cies, views or attitudes of the U.S. Government.
COPYRIGHT LAWS AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING OWNERSHIP OF
MATERIALS REPRODUCED HEREIN REQUIRE THAT DISSEMINATION
OF THIS PUBLICATION BE RESTRICTED FOR OFFICIAL USE ONJ.~.
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000404080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
JPRS L/10194
16 Decemb~r 19~1
USSR REPORT
MILITARY AF~AIRS
(FOUO i2/8i)
LOKAL'NYYE VOYNY: ISTORIYA I SOVREMENNOST'
Moscow LOKAL'NYYE VOYNY: ISTORIXA I SOVREMENNOST' in Russian 19g1 (signed to press
13 ,Tun 80) pp 1-42, 92-95, 126-129, 166-168, 200-203, 227-290, 303
[Annotation, introduction, chapter 1, headings and conclusions of chapters 2-6,
chapter 7, conclueion, and table of contents from book "Local War History and
the Present Day", edited by Army Gen I. Ye. Shavrov, Voyenizdat, 30,000 copies,
304 pages]
CONTENTS
Annotation 1
Table of Contenta 1
Introduction
(11apt~r 1. Esaence of Local Wars 10
Chapter 2. Historical Patterns of Interrelationship Between Local
and World Wars (Excerpts) 37
C1~apter 3. Local Wars in Asia (Excerpts) 39
Chapter 4. I,ocal Wars in the Near East (Excerpts) 41
Chapter 5. Local Wars in Africa (Excerpts) 42
Chapter 6. Local Wars in Latin America (Excerpts) 43
Chapter 7. Les:sc~ns of I,ocal Wars 44
Conclusion 91
- a - [iII - USSR - 4 FOUO]
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2047/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000404080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Annotation
[Excerpts] This book synthesizes the experience of local wars and ma~or military
con�licts from the end of the 19th century to the later half of the 1970's.
The authors comprehensively investigate, from a Marxist-Leniniet position, the
- theory and history of local wars, their place in the global strategy of imperialism,
as well as their character and specific features. The suthors devote considerable
attention to development of the art of warfare taking into account the experience
of local military conflicts, as well as exposure of contemporary military concepts
and doctrines of the imperialist nations.
This book is intended for sciEntific workers, teachers, propagandists, and all those
who are interested in military problems.
Table of Contents Page
Introduction 3
Part I. Local Wars of Imperialfsm: Eeaence, History, Theory 11
Chapter One. Essence of Local Wars 11
1. Marxism-Leninism on the Sociopolitical Esaence of Local Wars 11
2. On the Classification and System of Local Ware and Military Conflicts 19
3. Concept of Local Wars: Past and Present 27
Chapter 1~ao. Historical Patterns of Interrelationahip Between Local and
World Wars 42
1. The World Is Divided 42
2. Local Wars for Division of the World 46
3. On the Road to World War II 60
1
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
N(1R ()MFI('IAI, IISM: QNLY
4. Local Wars in th: Postwar World 79
Part II. Local Wars of the Contemporary Era: Practical Experience and
Lessons 95
Chapter Three. Local ~Jars in Asia 95
1. Survey of Military-Political Events in Asia 95
2. The War in Korea (195u-1953) 108
3. The War in Vietnam (1964-1975) 116
Chapter Four. Local Wars in the Near East 129
1. Survey of Military-Political Events in the Near East 129
2. The 1967 Arab-Israeli War 142
3. The 1973 Arab-Israeli War 152
Chapter Five. Local Wars in Africa 168
_ 1. Survey of Military-Political ~vents in Africa 168
2. The War in Algeria (1954-�1962) 177
3. The War in Aroola (1961-1976) 189
Chapter Six. Local Wars in Latin America 203
1. Survey of Military-Political Events in Latin America 203
2. U.S. Aggression Against Cuba (1961-1962) 213
3. U.S. Aggression Against the Dominican Republic (1965) 221
Chapter Seven. Lessons of Local Wars 229
1. Military-Political and Strategic Lessons of Local Wars 229
2. Experience in Combat Employment of Ground Forces 239
3. Experience in Combat Employment of Air Forces and Air Defense 248
4. Experience in Combat Employment of Naval Forces 263
5. Some Problems of Troop Control 275
Conclusion 2g4
Appendix 1. Chronology of Local Wars and Military Conflicts from 1898
to November 1917 291
Appendix 2. Chronology of Local Wars and Milita~y Conflicts from November
1917 to September 1945 293
Appendix 3. Chronology of Loca1 Wars and Military Conflicts from Sep-
. tember 1945 to 1975 296
2
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
INTRODUCTION
At the end of the 19tr. and beginning of the 20th century the attention of the entire
world was focused ~n Central America and Southern Africa, where the Spanish-American
and Boer wars had erupted. Although small in spatial scale, they played an im-
portant political role, since they were the first landmarks indicating capitalism's
entry i-~to its final stage of development imperialism.
Imperialism had furnished practical proof that of all the exploiter systems it was
distinguished, as V. I. Lenin wrote, "by the least love of peace," "by the greatest
tendency toward violence," and therefore "by the greatest tendency toward conflict."
The two world wars as well as hundreds of local wars and military conflicts were
born precisely in the womb of imperialism.
"Capitalism has become reactionary from progressive," commented V. I. Lenin, charac-
� terizing its transition to the monopolist ~~tage. "It has developed productive
resources to such an extent that mankind must either ~ange o~r to socialism or
- for a period of years and even decadea experience armed struggle by the,~reat'
powers for the artificia~ preservation of capitaliam by means qf coloniea,
monopolies, privileges, and all types of national oppreasion."
Lenin's analysis of capitalism at the imperialist stage of development served ar~
- the foundation for the struggle by the working peopie of Russia, under the guidance
of the Communist Party, to overthrow the rule of the exploiters amd for socialism.
It arms Communists of all countries with a developed program of action, directed
_ against the domination of the monopoliea, colonialism and national oppression,
and for social progress.
The Communist Party of the Soviet Union has consistently advocated and continues
to advocate ~eace and international security, harnessing the forces of war and
aggression. The 24th and 25th CPSU congresses confirmed the immutability of the
party's p~licy line of doing everything possible to easure conditions of peaceful
construction in our country, for the cause of peace and security of all peoples.
"...We shall continue this policy," stated CPSu Central Committee General Sec-
retary L. I. Brezhnev at the 25th CPSU Congresa, "~aith redoubled energy, seeking
to curb the forces of war and aggression, to strengthen world peace, aad to
guarantee the rights of peoples to freedom, independence, and ~ocial progress."2
CPSU foreign policy, aimed at restraining the forces of war and aggression, is ~
grounded on a Marxist-Leninist appraisal of the correlation of forces in the world
_ at each given moment in history. Taken into coneideration is the eacperience
of numerous wars unleashed by imperialism, including local wars.
What does this experience tell us?
Having perpetrated such a monstrous crime against mankind as a world war, im-
perialism had by no means given up local wars.
As forerunners of a world conflagration, local wars fostered its initiation and
the formation of hostile coalitions, and became proving grounds for testing the
3
FOR OF'F'[CiAL U3E ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
~ latest weapona, new modes and forms of conduct of military operations. As
regards local wars as a legacy of the world wara, the experience of history demon-
strates that they, just as world wars, do not and caanot resolve the conflicts
which are organically inherent in imperialism. The resutts of the world wars,
favorable for one group of monopolists and imperialiat powers, proved unfavarable
to the other, and this merely aggravated the conflict. Local wars and military
conflicts arose on this soil, aimed at "adjusting" the results of the world wars
to some degree.
Imperialism has extensively utilized and continues.to utilize local wars and con-
flicts to crush the revolutionary movement of the proletariat and the liberation
movement of oppressed peoples which, as is indicated by the experience of history,
become intensified in connection with world wars.
As we know, World War I fostered maturation of a revolutionary situation in a.
number of countries. This led to socialist and democratic revolutions, and par-
ticularly to the Great October Socialist Fevolution in Russia.
As a result of the collapse of German fsscism and Japanese militarism in World War
II, reactionary regimes fell in a number of countries of Europe and AsYa, and the
national liberation movement acquired great strength, which led to the collapse
of the colonial system.
It is characteristic that imperialism resorted to the force of arms time and
again, endeavoring to hold back the growth of the revolutionary movement of the
proletariat and the national liberation struggle. We know that since 1945 wars
and military conflicts have erupted more than 100 times in various parts of the 3
world through the fault of the forces of imperialiam and international reaction,
while the number of domestic counterrevolutionary insurrections and military coups
is so great that it is difficult to make a count.
S'.udy of the experience of local wars and military conflicts which have taken
Flace since World War II sheds light on the military policy and atrategy of world
imperialism in the new, changed conditions, which are characterized primarily
by strengtnening of the influence of the Soviet Union and the other socialist
countries on the course of world events, by increase in the class struggle by the
working people of the capitalist countries against the oppression of the monopolies,
and by victory of t~?e national liberation movement. This experience helps under-
stand why, having created a colossal war machine and stockpiling enormous quantities
of nuclear weapons, imperialism resorts to local wars, in which these weapons are
not directly utilized.
A5 we know, in the principal capitalist countries military expenditures are in-
creasing year after year, and the arms race is escalating. At the same time im-
perialist circles cannot ignore the military might of the Soviet Union and all of
the socialist nations as well as the consequences of another wor'ld war. This com-
pels the ruling elite in the imperialist nations to seek modes of utilization of
military force which would not threaten to undermine the foundations of imperialism
and at the same time would forestall development of world events disadvantageous
to imperialism. Local wars constitute an effective and, in the opinion of militar-
ist circles, quite acceptable means of achieving these ob~ectives.
4
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ~
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R000440080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
"...~mperialism...;' noted the 1969 International Conference of Communist and Worker
Parties, "iU forced to take into consideration the present correlation of ferces in
the international arena, the nuclear potential of the Soviet Union and the possible
cons~~quences of a nuclear missile war. It is becoming increasingly more difficult
and dang;~rous for imperialism to place its bets on unleashing another world war. In
these c~,nditions... the ruling circles, while aot refraining from preparations for
such a war, place special emphasis on local wars."4
Adapting to changes in the world balance of power and encountering such a factor as '
~ the unified military might of the socialist nations, the aggressive forcea of im-
perialism ar~ directing their "local" attacks against individual socialist countries,
the revolutionary movement of the proletariat, the na~ional liberation movement, and
against developing countries in which progressive regimes have been established.
They understand full well that the outcome of the struggle between socialism and
capitalism depends in large measure on how the world revoluti.onary process develops,
what path will be taken by peoples which have become liberated from the colonial
yoke.
It is extremely important to expose the true sims and intentions of the forces of
imperialist reaction, which are carefully concealed by various theories, and partic-
ularly by the claim that various forms of local aggression present no danger to the
world. Western military ideologues ;lttempt to convince people that local wars are
easy to limit or even to extinguish, and that the eacpe.rience of such wars allegedly
provides nothing in the sense of preparations for a nuclear world war. It is quite
obvious that behind all this stands the sinister desire spiritually to disarm
peoples in the fac~~ of military danger.
This is indicated in particular by a persistent effort on the part of U.S. militar-
- ist circles to claim that such an inhuman weapon as the neutron bomb is a tactical,
almost completely safe weapon. This is nothing other than an attempt to "Efface
the boundary" between conventi.onal and nuclear weapons and to make the transition
to nuclear war externally imperceptible.
The facts show that the imperialists have extensively utilized in local wars all
types of modern weapons, including strategic bombers, carrier task forces, chemical,
bacteriological and incendiary agents. And in a number of instances aggressive
circles have pushed local military conflicta toward a point beyond which nuclear
weapons could be employed. Accor.ding to materials recently published by the
Brookings Institution (USA), since World War II in at least 33 of the 215 instances
of employment of U.S. troops and naval forces the question of possible employment
of nuclear weapons was discussed. The possibility of initiation of a world nuclear
conflict was thus allowed. This once again confirms the falsenesa of the
bourgeoi~ propaganda thesis that local aggression presents no danger to the world
as a whole.
Any military conflict, including a local conflict, is a two-sided process. There-
fore study of. the experience of local wars is important not only to understand the
military policy and strategy of world imperialism but also for understanding the
capabilieies and modes of action of opposing forces, and national ].iberation armies
in particular. The experience of local wars enables one to 3udge the effective-
ness of the strategy and tactics of opposing forces as well as the effectiveness of
their employment of weapons and combat equipment.
5
FOR OF'FICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAI. [1SE ONLY
The experience of local wars is investigated at two levels.
First of all, it is examined with observance of the principle of historicism in
approach to societal phenomena, which requires that they be studied in movement, in
de~elopment from one historical stage to the next. Military history is not only
a chronicle of events but also an active instrument in people's hands, which
enables one correctly to assess facts and phenomena of the contemporary era.
"...The most important thing in approaching this question from a scientific stand-
point," wrote V. I. Lenin, "is not to forget the basic historical linkage, to
examine each question from the standpoint of how a given phenomenon... took place,
and from the standpoint of its development to determine what a given thing has now
become."5
Secondly, local wars are investigated from the position of a logical approach to
study of tre events and facts of history, which makes it possible to appraise in-
dividual tocal wars and conflicts not as isolated phenomena but as links in a
single chain of. expansionist desires characterizing the strategy of the struggle
of imperialism with the progressive forces of our planet. All this made it pos-
sible to apply a systems analysis in atudying the experience of local wars and
military conflicts.
V. I. Lenin taught that when investigating complex and repeating social phenomena
"one must endeavor to establish... a foundaticn of accurate and indisputable facts
on whic:h to rely.... In order that this genuinely be a foundation, it is necessary
to take not separate facts but an entire aggregate of facts applying to the matter
in question, without a single exception...."6
If one traces change in the role and place of local wars in the strategy of world
imperialism in the last 80 years, one cannot help but aee the principal landmarks
of [his evolution.
On the threshold of the 20th century, local wars comprised an important element in
the predatory policy of the imperialist countries. But for a number of reasons,
in particular by virtue of the effect of such a factor as interimperialist con-
flicts, they were not yet subordinated to a single goal. On the.eve of World War I
local wars essentially constituted a test of forces of different, but homogeneous
in their social essence, national detachments of the world bourgeoisie.
Following the victory of the G:ea*_ October Socialist Revolution imperialism, as
V. I. Lenin noted, sought to elaborate "an opt~al international strategy" of class
struggle against revo].utionary forces and to incorporate in a practical manner the
idea of "counterrevolutionary holy alliances." Apparent in these alliances, along-
side a community of interests, were confli~te in the struggle f~r world domination
which tended to tear them apart.
Both these trends were in evidence on the threshold of World War II. On the one
hand two hostile groups of imperialist powers were endeavoring to improve their
strategic position with the aid of local military clashes initiated at that time,
and were endeavoring to test the gtrength of one another's position on the eve of
a new major armed conflict. In addition, the very pr.ocess of formation of these
6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFFIC[AL USE ONLY
' grour~ was determined in large measure by the outcome of local wars in the 1930's.
On the other hand, imperialists of every hue and shade were united by hatred of
the Soviet Union and the desire to destroy or at the very least to weaken it.
Therefore a number of local wars also pursued concealed aims of anticom~unism, at-
tempts to test the military strength of the USSR. But in the final analysis con-
flicts within the camp of the enemies of socialism, which had become more acute in
, the struggle for world domination, for a certain period of time gained the upper
hand over the desire to crush revolutionary forces.
The victory over iascism created favorable conditions for development of the world
revolutionary process. As a result of succeasful revolutions in a number of
European and Asian countries, a world socialist system arose, the general crisis of
capitalism deepened, the Communist and worker movement in the capitalist countries
experienced further development, and the foundations of the coloniaZ system became
seriously undermined.
The new period of international relations is characterized by aggravation and a
complex interweaving of various forms of struggle between the two social systems on
the political, economic and ideological fronts, in conditions of a dynamically
changing disposition of forces in the world arena and further deepening of the
general crisis of capitalism. There is taking place, ae L. I. Brezhnev noted,
"a certain shifting of the center of gravity of the strategy of imperialism in the
world arena. The policies of imperialism are determined to an ever increasing
degree by the class aims of the general struggle against world socialism, national
liberation revolutions and the worker movement."~
The European and Far Eastern centers of inperialism (Germany and Japan) were
toppled as a result of World War II. Tl:e United States advanced to the: front lines
of struggle against communism and all the revolutionary forces of our planet, as-
suming the role of "guarantor and protector" of the capitalist system. The strategy
of world imperialism, dictated in fact from a single center, assumed from the very
outset a clearly marked reactionary, anti-Soviet thrust. A coa~on front of '
struggle by imperialism against the forces of socialism, the revolutionary and
national liberation movement was forming. Each military action by imperialism,
each local war or military conflict, initiated or provoked by imperialism, now
proved to be linked to one degr~e or another with the etruggle between the two sys-
tems in the world arena and became links of a common chain of aggresaive actions
by imperialism in the struggle against the revolutionary and progresaiv~ forces of
- the contemporary era.
All this had a substantial effect on changing the role and place of local wars in
the strategy of imperialism. Analysis of these changes essentially comprised the
principal task of investigation.
The authors of this volume have pror_eeded from the position that a local war is
in its sociopolitical essence a continuation of the politics of classes and
nations by means of armed violence. In contrast to a world war, a local war is
characterized by a relatively limited political ob~ective, which determines a
certain limitedness of the scale of military operations, a specific strategy and
tactics, and limited use of weaponry.
7
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/49: CIA-RDP82-00850R040400080049-6
FOR OFF'ItIA[. USE ONLY
l.ucal wars are ini~iated or provoked by imperialism with the aim of seizing or
Strengthening economic or strategic positions in various countries and regions,
in ~rder in the final analysis to undermine or push back the forces of socialism
and to crush the revolutionary and national liberation movement. For the countries
and peoples which have become the victims of imperialist aggression or the targets
of acts of political provocation, a local war becomes a general, ~ust war of
liberation for social and national independence.
ln its sociopolitical essence a military conflict is also.a continuation of the
polirics of classes and always possesses a speciiic political significance. Even a
battle, as V. I. Lenin noted, "which possesses no political significance is not a
battle but simply a fight."8
A military conflict is an armed clash which is characterized, in contrast to a l~cal
war, by a significantly smaller scale and smaller quantity of forces involved in
the actions. As is indicated by military-historical experience, sometimes it is
difficult to draw a line between local w~ar and military conflict. But such a line
exists, and it can be found by employing the criteria of quantitative analysis
(spatial scope of military operations, quantity of forcea involved in the armed
clash, numerical strength of forces, etc). The root difference between a local
war and a military conflict lies in the fact that a war usually characterizes a
specific state of a country, while in most cases a canflict characterizes the state
of the armed forces and even a portion of the armed forces.
Military conflicts in our time possess similar or identical causes as local wars.
Frequently military conflicts precede wars, develop into or accompany wars. This
also determines the necessity of examining chem within a systemic ~1nitS�, as adjacent
links of the common chain of military actions of capitalism.
War is an expression of extreme aggravation of political conflicts between nations
or classes, at the same time constituting a epecific form of manifestation ~f these
conflicts and their resolution. A necessary attribute of war is armed violence.
Since it is present in such phenomena of history as, for example, popular armed
uprisings, these phenomena can be studied from the standpoint of employment of
means of armed violence by the warring parties. But nevert~heleas war and such an
event of history as a popular uprising are far from identical phenom~na, since the
causes of war and popular armed rebellions are different. War a product of an
exploiter society is not necessarily always directly linked to a conflict be-
tween productive forces ancl producti~n relations, while this conflic: is the prin-
cipal cause nf popular armed uprisings.
The authors' subject of investigation is local wars and military conflicts proper,
and the most significant of these and, in addition, studied in a correlation with
- ttie entire course of international relations in each historical segment o.f time.
Investigation of local wars and military conflicte is one of the most important
tasks of Soviet military-historical science, proceeding from the resolutions of
the 24th and 25th CPSU congresses. It expands our knowledge of the general crisis
of the world capitalist system and provides concrete knowledge of the military
policy and strategy of world capitalism. And this serves as a genuine thea:etical
aid in tt~e carapaign to implement the program points advanced at party congresses
8
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
dealing with securing peace and intern~tional cooperation, the freedom and in-
dependence of peoples, and expands possibilities of counteracting the forces of
aggression and reaction.
The theses of Marxism-Leninism contained in the works of K. I~larx, F. Engels, and
V. I. Lenin, as well as in the documents of the world Communist movement serve as
the ideological-theoretical and methodological foundation of this volume. "':lis
has made it possible to perform a comprehensive analysis of the policies of the
capitalist powers in relation to colon~al and dependent countries, the political
essence oi local wars, the character and motive forces of the national liberation
movement and its rela~ionship to socialism and the international worker movement.
Of exceptional importance for this investigation were tlie articles and speeches of
CPSU Central Committee General Secretary L. I. Brezhnev, chairman of the Presidium
of the USSR Supreme Soviet, published in the multivolua:e work "Leninskim kursom"
[Following a Leninist Course] (1970-1979).
Fairly extensive Soviet and foreign literature de~iing to one degree or another
wit~h the problem of local wars and military ~.,nflicts was employed as sources.
The authors would like to express their thanks to all persons and organizations
which assisted them with counsel and advice at various etages of this project.
FOOTNOTES
1. V. I. Lenin, "Poln. Sobr. Soch." [Complete Works], Vol 26, page 314.
2. "Materialy XXV s"yezda KPSS" [Proceedings of the 25th CPSU CongressJ, Moscow,
1976, page 4.
3. See L. I. Brezhnev, "Sovetskiye profsoyuzy vliyatel'naya sila nashego
obshchestva" [Soviet Trade Unions Influential Force in Our Society], M~oscow,
1977, page 29.
4. "Mezhdunarodnoye Soveshchaniye kom~?unisticheskikh i rabochikh partiy.
Dokumenty i materialy" [International Conference of Communist and Worker
Parties. Documents and Materials], Moacow, 1969, page 288.
5. Lenin, oF. cit., Vol 39, page 67.
6. Ibid., Vol 30, pp 350-351.
- 7. L. I. Brezhnev, "Leninskim kursom. Rechi i:tat'i" [Following a Leninist
Course. Speecties and Articles], Vol 2, Moscow, 1973, page 369.
8. Lenin, op. cit., Vol 14, page 113.
9
FOR ORF1CiAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Part I. LOCAL WARS OF IMPERIALISM: ESSENCE, HISTORY, THEORY
Chapter One. Essence of Local Wars
1. Marxism-Leninism on the Sociopolitical Essence of Local Wars
K. Marx and F. Engels, the founders of scientif ic communism, demonstrated that wars,
a product of a class-antagonistic society, are initiated and waged in the name of
the economic and political goals of specific classes. Whatever the motive behind a
war, its roots lie in economics. "...Violence is only a means, while economic ad-
vantage is an end,"1 noted F. Engels. At the same time he emphasized that military
violence is a poli~ical act.
The ideologica?. leaders of the proletariat deeply and comprehensively investigated
the origin and r.haracter of the wars of their time, employing methods of dialectical-
materialist analysis and closely linking it with the general tasks of the liberation
movement of the oppressed masses, and particularly with the struggle of the worker
class, whereby they determined thp relationship to the concrete wars of their era
from the standpoint of the prospects of this struggle. The founders of Marxism s~ib-
divided wars into wars between bourgeois states, colonial wars, general wars, and
minor wars. The theses they formulated served as a basis for a genuinely scientific
understanding of the essence of local wars.
Addressing the question of "minor" wars, K. Marx and F. Engels called them "local-
ized," viewing them as such in relation botr. to a European war and a general
world war. In a letter to W. Liebknecht dated February 1878, for example, K. Marx
initially speaks of "Localized" wars, and later of "general" wars.2 In March 1887
F. Engels, in a letter to A. Bebel, points to the efforts of Czarist Russian
diplomacy to cause a"localized" war and to avo id a European war. F. Engels com-
ments, however, that "localized" wars in Europ e contain the danger of escalation
into a"general" war. He "who would act first, would provoke a general world war."3
~ Thus K. Marx and F. Engels distinguished "mino r", "localized" wars in their cor-
r,lation with European and general world wars, the possibility of occurrence of
w;,lch they f.oresaw. They defined "localized" wars as wars with the participation
of two or three countries in a limited area, the course of which could be controlled.4
They wrote that these wars are waged by numerically small armies and are not accom-
panied by disastro�:; consequences for the vanquished.

~
K. Marx anc! F. Engels also called coalition wara fought by European countries in
Africa, Asia, and America "minor" wars. They devoted coneiderable attention to
disclosing ttieir socia.l content and pointed to their aggressive, unjust~character
on the part of [he European countries.
Condemning colonial wars, the founders of Marxism at the same time justified wars
in defense of national independence and struggle by the peoples of colonies for
liberation from the colonial yoke. They viewed colonial peoples as an ally of the
worker class in the revolutionary struggle against the bourgeoisie. In particular,
assessing the significance of the struggle of the peoples of India for a
10
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
' FnR OF FICIAI. USE ONLY
revolutionary movement in the home country, F. Engele noted that "India, with that
_ drain of manpower and money which it wi11 cost England, is presently our best ally."5
At .*.he same time the leaders of the proletariat pointed to the fact that defeat of
the bourgeoisie in the home country can ease the fate of enslaved peoples in the
colonies, since it undermines the might of the world'$ colonial empires.
Being realists, K. Marx and F. Engels of course could not help but see the total
domination of capitalism and the overwhelming super3,ority of its colonial armies
over the practically unarmed, disorgani2ed masses in the countries of Asia and
Af rica. In that historical period in which K. Marx a~d F. Engels lived, the na-
tional liberation movem~nt in the colonies was only just gaining strength and was
not unified.
Realistically appraising the immense inequality of for~es in colonial wars, the
founders of Marxism saw the enormous difficulties which blocked the road to suc-
cess for the enslaved peoples in their struggle with the colonialists. At the same
time they were firmly confident in the victory of forces pursuing just aims in war..
Of great theoretical and practical significance were Lhe conclusions of the
founders of Marxism on armed rebellion, and in particular the conclusion that under
certain con~'itions a rebellion can develop into a war, and a war can be attended
by an uprising. The basis for this concluaion was furnished by the experience of
revolutionary uprisings by the worker class in the hoa~e countries, and the ex-
perience of the Paris Co~nune in particular, whieh was a consequence of the Franco-
Prussian War of 1870-1871. This was also indicated by the experience of the armed
struggle of insurgent military detachments in the colonies (the Sepoy Revolt in
India in 1857-1859) .
V. I. Lenin, great successor of Marxiat teachings, began his revolutionary career
in the period of transition by capitaliam to its highest etage imperia.lism. He
called the new era an era of wars and revolutions. Based on a dialectical-
materialist analysis of the era, V. I. Lenin revealed the interrelationship between
the politics of imperialism and armed violence, demonstrating that violence is an
instrument for strengthening and broadening the class domination of the monopoly
bourgeoisie. Applied to wars, the principal thesis of dialectics, noted V. I.
Lenin, "is that 'war is simply a continuation of politics by other'(namely violent)
'means' ...Precisely this was always the view of MarX and Engels, who viewed every
war as a continuation of the politics of given, interested powers and different
classes within them at a given time."6
Further developing the ideas of K. Marx and F. Engels, V. I. Lenin revealed the
essence, character and place of "minor," local wara in the new era. The collapse of
the capitalist system, wrote V. I. Lenin, "will be a world-historic period, an en-
tire era of the most diversified wars imperialiat wars, civil wars within a
country, an interweave of both, national wars, wara oF liberation of nationalities
crushed by the imperialists in various combinations of imperialist powers...."~
The wars of capitalist nations were directed against Forces of social and national
liberation and were of a clearly marked expansionisti, un3ust character. They led to
completion of territorial division of the world. At the same time, the first wars
11
FJR OFF[CIAI. USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OF'FtCiAL USE ONLY
for r~~divLsion of tt~e world broke out at the end of the 19th and beginning of the
2Uth century. These wars were mutually aggressive and unjust. The warring sides
pur~ued predatory aims in these wars.
Coloni~.l wars were occurring more frequently in the new, 20th century. "The history
of the 20th century," wrote V. I. Lenin, "this century of 'unbridled imperialism,'
is filled with colonial wars."8 Lenin named imperialism as the sole culprit of
these wars, for imperialism "accelerates the develogaaent of capitalism in the most
backward countries and thus broadens and aggravates the struggle against national
oppression.... From this it inevitably follows that imperialism should frequently
engender national wars."9
Any just (national) war arises only in response to reactionary violence, in response
to an unjust military action, which the exploiting, dominating and oppressing
classes themselves always begin. In his "Notebooks on Imperislism," V. I. Lenin
demonstrated the true essence of colonial ware and those, aa he put it, "small" wars
which the imperialist powers were waging on the European continent, in the Near and
Far East, and in Africa. The objective of both types of war, V. I. Lenin noted,
is to maintain the system of violence and extraeconomic coercion, the struggle for
redivision of the colonies and for preserving the system of colonial rule.
V. I. Lenin pointed out that a world war presented an enormous danger to the
peoples of the colonies. "It is a war (World War I-- Auth.), first of all, to
strengthen the slavery of the colonies by means uf a more 'just' division and sub-
sequently a more 'amicable' exploitation of the colonies; secondly,for strengthening
oppression of other nationalities within the 'great' powers themselves...; thirdly,
to strengthen and prolong hired slavery...."10
- At the same time V. I. Lenin also saw another aspect of the interrelationship be-
tween the imperialist world war and the struggle of the peoples of colonies for
their liberation. Initiating a world war, he commented, imperialism impels the
masses to resist, aggravating on an enormous scale class conflicts at home and in
dependent countries. At the same time, forming of t~he indigenous population colonial
troons for defense of their own interests, the imperialists are unwittingly teaching
the inhabitants of the colonies military organization and "the extremely useful
skill" of using arms. .
- V. I. Lenin viewed wars between imperialist nations and crisis situations in.the
home country as conditions favoring the victory of national liberation forces.
Armed intervention by imperialist powers in the affairs of the colonies, he taught,
can be paralyzed by a war erupting between them and by aggravation of imperialist
conflicts. Oppressed peoples will definitely take advantage of crisis situations
' occurring in this manner in the home country.
'The national liberation movement, developing and growing, deals a blow to the rear
areas of world imperialism its colonial system, and thus the peoples of the
colony become allies and a reserve force of the proletarian revolution. Lenin's
idea of alliance between the proletariat and oppressed peoples in the struggle
against imperialism atid the idea of supporting national liberation wars and in-
surgencies is grounded on this.
12
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONGY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAI. USE ONLY
V. I. Lenin stressed that "there is no ma~or difference... in a political respect"
- between a national insurgency and a national war fought by oppressed peoples.
"Military war historians are entirely correct in also placing revolts in the same
category a~ wars."11
While supporting national wars, V. I. Lenin at the same time warned of the harmful-
ness of a non-class approach to their assessment, as was done by the leaders of
the Second International. He emphasized that a non-class appraisal of a"national
war" helps the national bourgeoisie fool the masses and conceal their private-
ownership interests behind ideas of national unification. But as soon as the
prospects of victory in a"national war" become apparent, most frequently the
national bourgeoisie betrays the interests of its people and makes a deal with the
colonial powers.
The ideas of this eminent strategist of prolet~rian revolution pertaining to the
nature of imperialism, its politics and varioua forms of antiimperialist armed
struggle formed the basis of the policies of Marxist parties regarding imperialist,
civil and national liberation wars. Totally condemning predatory imperialiet wars
and exposing the predatory policy of the bourgeoisie in these wars, Marxists ia-
alterably supported civil wars of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, national
liberation wars and insurgencies in dependent countries and colonies. "Socialistis
always take t?.ie side of the oppressed, and consequently they cannot be opponents of
wars the objective of which is a democratic or socialist struggle against oppres-
sion. "12
Developing the legacy of the founders of Marxism-Leninism, Marxist-Leninist
parties made a creative contribution both to the teaching of Marxism-Leninism on
wars and to the practical matter of struggle againat imperialism and its policies
of colonialism and neocolonialism.
Much was done to determine the paths and forms of the anticolonial struggle of
peoples by the Comintern, the program of which proclaimed the right of the peoples
of colonies and semicolonies to armed defense against imperialism. The Camintern
proceeded thereby from the Lenin thesis of the interrelationship between the na-
tional liberation struggle and the proletarian revolutionary movement.
Of great importance for the struggle againat local wars of imperialism on the eve of
World War II was the point contained in the resolution of the Seventh Enlarged
Plenum of the Comintern Executive Committee on the importance of the military
factor in national revolutions. The resolution noted that intervention by imperial-
ist powers was assuming a flexible, camouflaged character, that initially civil war
breaks out in the country, support is given to the counterrevolutionary forces,
subsequently followed by armed intervention.13
Adopting this resolution, the Comintern Executive Committee based its decision on
actual facts and events. In 1924, for example, the imperialista unleashed a civil
war in China, and subsequently invaded that cauntry. Later the Comintern's predic-
tion was emphatically reconfirmed. The imperialists ignited the flame of civil war
in Spain, supporting the counterrevolutionary forces with armed intervention. The
interventiouist policy of the imperialist powers in the 1930's was fraught with the
danger of escalation of "minor" wars into major ware. "...The new phase of
13
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400084449-6
FOR OF'FICIAI. USE ONLY
imperialist policy," stated the Comintern at that time, "is characterized by the
fact that capitalism is preparing to transition fram 'minor' wars to major wars."14
The subsequent course of world events fully confirmed this conclusion. The ag-
gressive policies of German and Italian fascism in Europe and Japanese imperialism
in the Far East led, as we know, to the forma.tion of two focal areas of war.
World War II, initiated by the imperialists, constituted a most profound social
shock for the entire capitalist world. One of its consequences was a powerful up-
surge of the national liberation movement, which encompassed all the world's con-
tinents. World imperialism, endeavoring to preserve its colonial rule and to hinder
the processes of national liberation, embarked upon a course of local acts of ag-
gression against the peoples of the colonies and dependent countries. The Con-
ference of Representatives of Communist and Worker Parties in 1957, exposing the im-
perialist, aggressive character of local wars against the peoples ~of Indochina,
Indonesia, Malaya, Kenya, and Egypt, Algeria, Oman, and Yemen, stressed that the
imperialists are endeavoring to prolong their colonial supremacy in new forms, are
uniting efforts in the struggle against peoples seeking to throw off the colonial
yoke and independently to determine their own destiny, but they are unable to im-
pede the collapse of the colonial system.
Representatives of Communist and worker parties once again, at their Conference in
1960, devoted considerable attention to the struggle of the peoples of colonies and
dependent countries for their liberation. They thoroughly analyzed the situation in
the countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America and appealed for all-out support for
peoples fighting against imperialist colonial oppression and armed aggression. The
conference pointed out that imperialism is seeking to preserve colonial exploitation,
resorting to utilization of an entire system of military instruments and methods
(military blocs, bases, military-dictator regimes, local wars).
The documents of the 1969 Conference of Communist and Worker Parties contained a
comprehensive description of imperialism and its aggressive nature. Defining the
methods with the aid of which the imperialists are attempting to hold back the
development of the national liberation struggle of peopl~s and the process of
revolutionary reforms, the Conference stated: "Armed interventions and cruel acts
of repression especially where the struggle is assuming the most acute forms and
where revolutionary forces are fighting with weapon in hand everything has been
thrown into the fray by imperialism counterrevolutionary plots, reactionary and
fascist coups, acts of provocation and blackmail."15
Examining the question of the correlation between the policy of peaceful coexistence
and the national liberation struggle, the Conference emphasized that "a policy of
peaceful coexistence is not in contradiction to the right of oppressed peoples to
utilize in the struggle for their liberation that path which they consider neces-
sary armed or unarmed...."16 This thesis was also reflected in the final
document of the .;une 1976 Conference of European Communist and Worker Parties.
At its 24th Congress, the Communist Party thoroughly analyzed the world situation,
the policies and strategy of the imperialiet nations, proceeding from a most im-
portant factor of contemporary history collapse of the colonial system of im-
perialism under the onslaught of the national liberation struggle of peoples. As
14
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFMICIAI. USF ON1.Y
the coagress noted, imperialism ig not repudiating local wars against liberated
peoples, and in the zone of the national liberation movement imperialist aggression
is focused primarily against countries which have chosen the path of noncapitalist
development. The congress pointed out that those who are fighting colonial regi~ies
which still remain in some countries can count on the full support of the Soviet
Union.
Analysis of the military policy and strategy of imperialism occupied.a significant
place in the proceedings of the 25th CPSU Congress. The congress noted that,
although the capabilities of imperialism to undertake aggressive actions have been
significantly diminished, its nature is unchanged and there remains a real danger
of aocurrence of mititary conflicts.
World peace is by no means guaranteed at the present time this is one of the
conclusions reached at the congress. The congress emphasized that the Soviet state
will continue with redoubled energy its policy of restraining the forces of war and
aggression, strengthening world peace, and securing the rights of peoples to freedom,
independence, and social progress.
The experience of the world revolutionary movement of recent years has shown that
if there arises a genuine threat to the supremacy of monopoly capital and its
- political henchmen, imperialism will stAp at nothing, including employment of ineans
of armed violence. The policies of a number of imperialist countries, and the
United States in particular, even today continue to contain aspects which threaten
the freedom and independence of peoples, and the actions of these countries frequent-
ly constitute crude meddling in the domestic affairs of developing countries on the
side of the forces of oppression and reaction.
Collapse of the colonial system of imperialism by no means signifies that such a
reactionary phenomQnon in international affairs as colonialicm has come to an end.
In conditions of change in the correlation of forces in the world arena and a
crisis of the imperialist "policy of force," colonialism ia taking on new forms.
The forms of armed expansion, which pursue imperialist policy aims, are also chang-
ing.
Inciting local wars and military conflicts, imperialism is endeavoring to restrain
the aspiration of peoples for freedom, independence, and socialism, and to utilize
them as a means of achieving political objectives. These aims include the following:
weakening of the world socialist system by detaching individual countries from it;
crushing of the national liberation movement in various countries of Asia, Africa
and Latin America, and imposition of reactionary puppet regimes to weaken the front
of the allies of the socialist nations in the struggle againat imperialism; export
of counterrevolution for the auppression of democratic, antiimperialist movements
and preventian of radical revolutionary reforms. At the same time local wars and
military conflicts are being utilized by imperialiat powers as a means of preparing
for a world war, as a convenient excuse for continuing and escalating the arms race,
and as a temporary "lightning rod" against economic decline and a"stimulator" of
production. All this attests to thz extremely reactionary role of local wars and
military conflicts initiated by the imperialists and to the fact that they are sub-
ordinated to the general political aims of imperialism in the struggle against its
class enemies in the world arena.
15
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R000440080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
a
With all the diversity of contemporary local wars, one can~not help but see their
common sociopolitical features.
First of all, with the existence in the world of two opposing sociopolitical sys-
tems azd the struggle between them, which constitutes the principal conflict of the
contemporary era, any local war initiated by the imperialists affects to one degree
or another the class and national interests of the countries of these systems.
Therefore it bears the imprint of a limited armed conflict between capitalism and
socialism.
Secondly, in many instances contemporary local wars are of a coalition nature. In
local wars imperialists seek to unify the efforts of all reactionary forces, since
they do not count on handling on their own the powerful revolutionary and liberation
movement. The imperialists act in concert out of fear over the fate of the capital-
ist system, which is engulfed in a deep general crisis. Local wars i.nitiated by
the imperialists receive in turn, as a rule, a collective rebuff on tr?e part of
the socialist countries and all progressive forces throughout the world.
Thirdly, contemporary local wars have a complex political content, in which are
interwoven the class political objectives of imperialism as a whole and the selfish
interests of the national groups of the monopoly bourgeoisie of the various
countries. On the other hand, elements of civil and national liberation wars are
cambined in the struggle of peoples against imperialist acts of aggression.
Fourthly, indicative of contemporary local wars is an increase in the role of the
masses in the course and outcome of military operatioas and involvement of all
segments of the population in the war. This is characteristic both of aggressor
nations and of the nations against which aggression is directed, for even local
armed conflicts affect the vital interests of the working people. In aggressor
countries they inevitably engender a protest movement and aggravate social con-
flicts. Today the imperialists are less able than ever before to count on the sup-
port of the population of their countries, and therefore they count on an army of
mercenaries, while in those countries which are the victims of aggression the en-
tire people, inspired by an awareness of the ~ust aims of the war, rise up for the
struggle.
2. On the Classification and System of Local Wars and Military Conflicts
The scientific principles of classification of wars were elaborated by K. Marx and
F. Engels and were further developed by V. I. Lenin, applicable to the era of im-
perialism and proletarian revolution~.
- in spite of the fact that the founders of scientific communism based their
theoretical investigations on the experience of preceding wars and wars of which
they were contemporaries, the theses they formulated still serve today as a
reliable method4logical foundation for classifying wars.
What is it important to emphasize in the ideological legacy of the founders of
Marxism-Leninism in this area? First of all we should stress the fundamental
thesis of a class approach to evaluation of a given war.
16
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FnR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
K. Marx and F. Engels viewed all wars, regardless of their sc~ale and military--tech-
nological content, from the standpoint of whether they fostered development oz tne
revolution and victory of the worker class or, on the contra~y, impeded the revolu-
tionary process and complicated the struggle by the proletariat for its liberation.
They taught the proletarian parties to assess various ware precisely from these
class positions.
V. I. Lenin made quite definite statements on thia score. In our time, he wrote,
the legitimacy and justice of a war can be establiehed "only from the standpoint of
the socialist praletariat and its struggle for its liberation; we do not recognize
any other point af view."17
This Marxist-Leninist thesis reflects the objective pattern of man's revolutionary
transition from capitalism to socialism. It possesses enormous mobilizing and or-
ganizing force, expressing the actual attitude of working people toward war, name-
ly: the necessity of a resolute struggle against imperialist predatory wars and
selfless support of revolutionary and national liberation wars.
The founders of Marxism attached prime importance ~.n determining the social
character of wars and the attitude of the worker clase ~oward wars to an analysis
of their political content and the political aims of the warring sides. The politi-
cal content of a war determines its progressive or reactionary role in the af-
fairs of society. On this basis, V. I. Lenin divided wars into just and unjust.
He linked the legitimacy and justice of certain wars and the injustice of others
to their progressiveness or reactionary character. Lenin wrote: "...There are
just wars and unjust wars, progressive and reactionary wars, wars of progressive
classes and wars of backward classes, wars promoting strengthening of class
oppression and wars serving to overthrow class oppression...."18
The concept of just war is applicable in present-day conditions primarily to wars
of socialist nations against imperialist aggression, to revolutionary wars and armed
rebellions of the worker class and the worker masses against the oppressors, for
democra;:y and socialism, and to national liberation wars of oppres~ed peoples
against colonialists and in defense of national independence.
The sociopolitical character of wars of the proletariat and its governmental
systems against oppressors and the aggression of exploiter nations, independent of
the fozm of war (local or world), is always just. Thus the struggle in local
wars is of a,just nature if it is being waged: in defense of the achievements of
- socialism in individual countries; in the interests of victory of a socialist or
democratic revolution; for national liberation or in defense of national in-
dependence.
Imperialist local wars against individual socialist countries, local wars for the
seizure of territory of other countries, for redividing spheres of influence, for
preserving and reestablishing colonial rule, and counterrevolutionary wars by the
bourgeoisie against the proletariat which is carrying out a revolution in an in-
dividual country are un~ust.
V. I. Lenin stressed that there are always two sides operating in war. For
analysis of wars as a bilateral procese, V. I. Lenin introduced the concept of
17
FOR OFF[CIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFF1C[AI. I1SE ONI.Y
type of war. He presented a model of Marxist analysis of types of wars of
premonopoly capitalism and the era of imperialism. In a letter to Inessa Armand,
V. I. Lenin pointed to the existence of three major types of political relations
whict~ are formed between nations, and the types of wars of the era of imperialism
which corr.espond to these types of political relations.
"(I) The three main types: relationship of the oppressed to the oppressing nation
(every war is a continuation of politics; politics is a relationship between na-
tions, classes, etc). As a general rule, war is legitimate on the side of the
oppressed party (regardless of whether it is defensive or offensive in a military
sense).
"(II) Relationship between two oppressor nations. A struggle for colonies, for
markets, etc (Rome and Carthage; England and Germany, 1914-1917). As a general
rule, a war of this type is robbery on both sides; and the relationship of
democracy (and socialism) toward it falls under the following rule: 'Twa thieves are
fighting, let them both die'....
"(III) Third type. A system of equal nations. An extremely complex question!!!!
Especially if Czarism stands alongside civilized, comparatively democratic nations.
This was the case (approximately) in Europe from 1815 to 1905."19
The era of transition from capitalism to socialism is distinguished by a complex
interweave of different systems ofpolitical relations and social conflicts. The
principal conflict of this era is the conflict between two opposing social systems
imperialism and socialism. Also characteristic of the contemporary era are con-
flicts between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, between imperialism and the
national liberation movement, and between capitalist nations.
As is attested by the experience of history, a corresponding type of war is
determined in relation to the type of conflicts being resolved in that war. Among
the great diversity of wars of the contemporary era the era of transition from ~
capitalism to socialism we can distinguish the following types of wars, according
to sociopolitical attributes: ~
wars between nations (c~alitions) of the two opposing social systems ira-
Ferialism and socialism;
wars betweeii antagonistic classes within a single country;
wars between imperialist nations and peoples (countries) which are defend-
ing tlieir freedom and independence or are waging a national liberation struggle;
was between different capitalist countries.
Rarely can the principal types of wara be isolated in "pure form." For example,
national liberation wars in Indochina (1954-1975) were combined wi~h a struggle
against imperialist aggressors and in defense of the achievements of socialism.
The civil war in the USSR (1918-1920) snd the civil war in Spain (1936-1939) were
interw~ven with a struggle against foreign intervention.
is
FOR OFFICfAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Contemporary wars of colonialista against the national liberation movement frequent-
ly are of a clearly marked antisocialist thrust. And thie is not surprising. In
the course of the national liberation struggle oppressed natioi~b .and small
countries inevitably draw close to the community of socialist nations, which
pramotes these countries' aspiration toward a nvncapitalist path of development, to-
ward socialism, and the imperialists fear this more than all else.
In the ~ast 30 years the imperialists have initiated or incited wars:
against individual socialist countries (the Democratic People's Republic
of Korea, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, and Cuba);
against developing countries which have chosea the path of aoncapitalist
development (Angola, Congo, etc);
against peoples fighting for their national liberation (Algeria, Burma,
Indonesia, etc);
- civil wars (Greece in 1946-1949, China in 1946-1949);
between individual capitalist or developing countries (betwpen Turkey and
Greece, between India and Pakistan).
The collapse of the colonial system led to the formation in Africa, Asia, and Latin
America of a large number of new sovereign and equal developing nations, which
find themselves, however, at different stages of economic, political and culS:ura1
~ development and which have differing relations with one another as well as with the
imperialist and socialist count.~ies. In many developing countries the process of
nation forming has not been completed, while in some of these countries intertribal
strife has not yet been overcome. Various trends are in evidence in the internal
affairs of these countries a trend toward people~ drawing closer together in
the antiimperialist struggle and a trend toward national individualization, isolation,
even hostilit;, a trend which is a legacy of colonialism. Superimposed on relations
betwee~~ developing countries is the imprint of borders which were artif icially
"cut" by the former colonialists, which leads to territorial disputes and military
conflicts. By means of various intrigues and acta of provocation, the imperialists
seek to incite one country against another, to place them in opposition to one
another and to subordinate them to the imperialists' influence. Many of the wars
and conflicts which arise between developing countries cannot be isolated as an
independent type of military clash, since relations between these countries repeat
the principal types of intergovernmental relatione inherent in the contemporary
era.
Of importance for classifying wars and military conflicts is a scaling or quantita-
tive approach to their evaluation. It includes taking into account such ~riteria
as the number of countries participating in a war and military conflict, the size
of the territory involved in military operations and, finally,such an important
criterion as the degree of involvement of armed forces and weapons in military
operations.
19
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OFFIC'IA1. USF. ONI.Y
Local wars and military conflicts can be subdivided according to geographic at-
tribute into the following:
into wars and military conflicts between two or several countries of a single
geographic region; ~
into wars and military conflicts between two or several countries of differern
regions of the world;
into wars and military conflicts within a single country.
All local wars and military conflicts known to history were waged primarily with the
aid of conventional weaponry. In World War I, however, and in a number of local
wars which preceded World War I, incendiary devices were extensively employed. And
in the course of some local wars of recent years, in which Americ.an forces parti-
cipated, U.S. militarist circles entertained plans of employing nuclear weapons.
Local wars and military conflicts can be subdivided, on the basis of degree of em-
ployment of manpower and weapons, into the foliowing:
into wars and military conflicts in which only regular armed forces take
part, with employment of all types of weapons with the exception of nuclear;
into wars and military conflicts in which, alongside regular troops, ir-
regulars also take part, employing conventional weapons, including obsolete
weapons in a good many instances.
Taking account of all the attributes and criteria, both sociopolitical and military-
r.echnical, one can differentiate among local wars and military conflicts as fol-
lows:
1) Local wars and military conflicts initiated by individual capitalist
countries against individual socialist countries. These were unjust wars and con-
flicts on the part of the capitalist countries, aimed at destroying the socialist
achievements of peoples and thus weakening the world socialist system. The social-
ist nations were defending in these wars and conflicts the just aims of protecting
their achievements.
As experience showed, wars of this kind demanded a considerable effort by the
resources and capabilities of the warring sidea. The scale of wars depended on the
specific features of the area of military operations and on the degree of involve-
ment of other nations in the conflict. Such :.ocal wars contained the danger of es-
calation to a world war.
2) Local wars and military conflicts ~~f capitalist nations with peoples
(countries) fighting for or defending their indepa~deilce. These were also un~ust,
. reactionary, predatory wars on the part of the capitalist countries, aimed at using
the force af arms to hold or restore lost supremacy in former colonies and
dependent countries. On the part of peoples (countries) fighting for their in-
dependence, however, these were just wars. Distinctive features of these wars in-
cluded the focal cliaracter of military operations which, however, gradually
20
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6
FOR OF'FICIAL USE ONLY
extended to most or all of the country's territory, as well as the fact that one of
the warring sides was operating on a relatively ~eak material-technological base.
3) Local wars and military conflicts between individual capitalist countries
or groups of capitalist countries. Such wars arose chiefly either due to unresolved
territorial questions or as a consequence of efforts by an aggressive nation to
seize new markets, to expand its territory at the expense of other, weaker n.ations,
or to strengthen its strategic position in a certain part of the world.
4) Civil wars and domestic military conflicts also fall within the local
category, if one applies only criteria of ecale. These are armed clashes of a
special type. We know that the class struggle in a class-antagonistic society ul-
timately becomes a political struggle, a struggle for power. Under certain condi-
tions it assumes the most acute forms and transitions to aa armed uprising by the
oppressed and exploited masses and subsequently to a civil war, in the course of
which reactionary forces endeavor, with the aid of arms, to crush revolutionary
actions by the workers and to preserve their supremacy.
From the standpoint of scaling, quantitative criteria, military actions in civil
wars usually do not go beyond the borders of a aingle coun~ry, and at the same time
they are distinguished by a great diversity of forms of struggle and a changing com-
position of participants.
"...A civil war," wrote V. I. Lenin, "differs from a customary war by an im-
measurably greater complexity, uncertainty and indeterminacy of composition of
fighting forces involved by virtue of transitions from one camp to another... by
virtue of the impossibility of drawing a line b~tween 'combatants' and 'noncombatants,'
that is, between those who are and are not in the ranks of the warring sides."20
Frequently external forces which have a stake in the victory of certain classes
within a country intervene in a civil war. Sometimes this is done under the banner
of bringing peace between the warring sides and defense of so-called "democratic
freedoms." During the civil war in the USSR, for example, interference by external
forces ended up as naked military interventioa by the capitaliet powers under the
pretext of defending the "legitimate" order, but in actual fact was aimed at the
restoration of capitalism. During the civil war in 9pain, the fascist nations
Germany and Italy supported the insurgent reactionary forces, utilizing as a
pretext the phony slogan of defending "democratic freedoms."
The period following World War II contains many examples of civil wars accompanied
by intervention by external forces. They include the civil wars in Greece (1946-
1949), China (1946-1949), in Cuba (1959), in Angola (1964-1976), etc.
Bourgeois ideologues, attempting to ~ustify the aggressive actions of imperialism
(or to diminish the negative effect of its interventionist policy), usually deny
or simply remain silent about the existence of an entire system of such actions.
And yet such a system exists and is operating, as a reflection of the general aims
of the struggle of the impexialist states against their opponents in the world
arena. The facts and all the policies of imperialiam in our time attest to this.
21
FOR OFF7CIAL USE O1VLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02109: CIA-RDP82-00850R400440080049-6
FnR OFFICIAL [JSE ONLY
Unification of the efforts of the imperialist nations on a class, counterrevolu-
tionary and anticor~munist hasis and the formation of a co~on-goal strategy of
world imperialism began following the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolu-
tion and the birth of the world's first socialist state. From now on, stressed V.
I. Lenin, "the mutual relations of peoples and the entire world system of nations
will be determined by the struggle of a small group of imperialist nations against
the Soviet movement and Soviet state, at the head of which stands Soviet Russia."Z1
Already at that time the capitalists set for themselves the aim of elaboratiug
"the optimal international strategy" of class struggle. This strategy crystallized
in the process of crushing armed uprisings by the proletariat, organization of
counterrevolutionary campaigns by a number of capitalist countries against the
Soviet Union, and in struggle with the forces of the nationaZ liberation movement.
On this foundation the imperialists were attempting to put together a unified ai~ti-
communist bloc on the eve of World War II.
" Of the two trends in the interrelationships of imperialist states noted by V. I.
Lenin, however unification on a common counterrevolutionary basis and their
separation due to the aggravation of interimpeYialist conflicts the latter ad-
vanced to the forefront for a certain period of time. The imperialists were unable
to create in a practical manner a common anticommunist front, although in an
ideological respect it had nut only existed prior to the outbreak of World War II
but also gave evidence of its presence in the course of the war.
Following World War II the global strategy of imperialism assumed concrete forms,
under the influence of a deepening of the general criais of capitalism, collapse
of the bloc c~f fascist states and a shifting of the center of world imperialist
forces from Europe to the United States, which had assumed the role of "savior" of
the capitalist system.
As was noted at the International Conference of Communist and Worker Parties in
1969, "in a situation of aggravation of struggle between the two world systems, the
capitalist powers... are endeavoring to unify their efforts in order to preserve
and strengthen ttie system of exploitation and oppression and to regain their lost
position."22
'Tlie global strategy of imperialism is a coordin;;ted policy on rhe part of the im-
perialist nations, reflecting their common aspirations, goals and forms of struggle
with progressive forces in the world arena. It unites the efforts of imperialist
countries and regimes as well as those following imperialist policy in the
struggle against socialism, the revolutionary ar..d national liberation movement.
'Ctiis strategy is directed against the nations of socialism. It specifies, in
~~articular, several belts (strategic echelons) of encirclement around the nations of
the socialist community.
A systemic analysis in the area of international relations presupposes study of the
interaction of all elements and forces participating in international affairs, con-
sideration of crisis situations, inc~,~ding local military clashes, and elucidation
of their character and influence on the general process of world development.
In the contemporary era any aggravation of the international situation, especially
when it is accompanied by an armed conflict even on a small scale, signals a warning
22
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R000440080049-6
FnR OFFICIAL U~c, ONLY
to the world as never before, since it affects the interests of the countries not
only of a given region or continent but of a number of regions or even all con-
, tinents. A lacal war or any other conflict on a local scale carries within it the
danger of a chain reaction. As we know, in the postwar 9esi.~ imperialism often
deliberately increased tension in international relations in certain regions in
order to divert world public attention away from a region in which it was preparing
for a military action. One's attention is also dxawn by the fact that the im-
perialist nations immediately increased the state of readiness of their armed
forces as soon as a revolutionary situation developed or revolutionary or democratic
reforms began in a given country. For example, *_his was precisely how NATO leaders
reacted to the overthrow of the military dictatorship in Greece in 1974 and to the
democratic changes in Portugal, which began in April 1976. And in both cases the
NATO countries mobilized powerful political and military forces in order to prevent
revolutionary-democratic reforms.
The place of the system of local wars and military conflicts in world politics can
be correctly determined only if one investigates military conflicts during a speci-
fied pcriod of time in their entire aggregate, while at the same time bearing in
mind that they took place on different continents, aeparated by great distances and
differing from one another in the special conditions of the political and military-
strategic situation.
The speciiic features of regional military eventa in the first place unify them in-
to a subsystem of local wars and conflicts on a given continent or in a given region
and, secondly, point to the diversity of event elements of the overall system.
A systems analysis makes it possib?e to eZucidate the interrelationship and inter-
dependence of local military confl~cts within continents and regions and, in addi-
tion, to determine fairly accurate3.y the place and role of each conflict in the
global strategy of imperialism and, finally, to gain an idea of the general trend
of development of the struggle between two social forces in the world arena: the
forces of war, reaction, and imperialism on the one hand, and the forces of
progress, peace and socialism on the other.
3. Concept of Local Wars: Past and Present
Throughout the course of many decades the ruling circles of capitalist countries
inalterably viewed "minor," local wars as one of the radical forms of influencing
the processes of world development. And while this view remained fairly persistent,
views on the role an3 place of local wars in the policies and strategy of im-
perialism changed w~ ~l~ the passage of time.
Among the many concepts and ideas placed by the bourgeoisie in the service of ex-
pansionist policy, the most persistent and widespread ones include the foiiuw-ing:
the cult.of force and militarism as a leading trend in the development of bourgeois
thought; race theory, closely connected with fascism, geopolitics, Malthusianism,
and with the theory of so-called "manifest destiny" (,if one bears in mind American
traditions of "philosophy of force"), the theory of'balance of power" and, finally,
anticommunism an ideology which foun3 embodiment in the policies of the capital-
ist countries following the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution.
23
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00850R000400080049-6

APPROVED FOR RELEASE: 2007/02/09: CIA-RDP82-00854R004400080049-6
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
American military historian Admiral A. Mahan (1840-1914) provided at an earlier
date than many others, and in a very frank manner, a theoretical foundation for
- the hegemonist, power pretensions of the ruling circles of the capitalist countries.
"Military strength," he wrote at the end of the 19th century, "is one of the
predominant political elements for justification... af policy.... Conflicts in
the international arena toughen nations and foster their maturation."23 There is
nothing other than selfish national interests, argued Mahan, which would move the
development of relations between countries, and there is no reason to conceal this
fact.
This apologia of force and "national interest," which is permeated by a spirit of
militarism, was most appropriate for justifying a policy of expansion, which the
major capitalist powers were vigorously commencing to implement at that time. There-
f.ore it is not surprising that Mahan's ideas were adopted by the ideologues of im-
perialism. For example, the cult of force and militarism was widely adopted in
Imperial Germany, finding expression in the writings of Moltke, Schlieffen, and
later in the fascist literature of Germany and Italy. Today cultivation of force
and an apologia of militarism are being continued in the writings of American
philosopliersand sociologists. In the opinion of American sociologists Morgenthau,
A. Schlesinger and W. Whiteworth, the struggle for power, for hegemony o~ith any
mean5 comprises the basis of societal development.
"Kace th~ory" has for centuries influenced the forming of the bourgeois concept of
lo