Caribbean crisis - a look from the present day
The Ukrainian crisis has placed on the agenda an important question - does the new world order that has developed since the end of the Cold War allow to ensure equal and indivisible security? In this context, it makes sense to recall once again the lessons that humanity received as a result of the Caribbean crisis, which has become one of the most acute confrontations between two opposing social systems and two nuclear powers.
In the period from 14 to 27 in October 1962, the Soviet and American armed forces, the armies of the states that were part of the NATO bloc and the Warsaw Pact Organization were brought to a state of alert. In such a situation, an erroneous decision made by the leadership of the USSR or the US administration could lead to a full-scale nuclear war.
FIRST CAUSES OF SETTING AGREEMENT
First of all, it is necessary to uncover the root causes that led to this dangerous confrontation in October 1962 of the year - the crisis that the Americans called “black October”. Cuba pursued an anti-American policy and was an example for other Latin American countries, where the Americans were dominating. A crushing blow to the prestige of the United States was inflicted on 1 in January on 1959, when revolutionaries under the leadership of Fidel Castro overthrew the pro-American Cuban dictator Batista.
In 1959, Americans owned more than 80% of Cuban mines, cattle farms, utilities and refineries, 50% of railroads and 40% of sugar production. The Cuban leadership chose the socialist path of development of the country and, when the US tried to strangle the new government economically, turned to the USSR for help. The unshakable determination of US President John Kennedy to overthrow the Castro government only heightened tensions with the USSR.
OPERATION "MANGUST"
At the behest of John Kennedy, a plan was developed for Operation Mongoose, which was aimed at continuing the efforts made by Dwight Eisenhower to overthrow the government of Fidel Castro. CIA Director Alain Dulles, with the help of his instructors, armed and secretly sent to Cuba trained mercenaries from Cuban refugees, trying to provoke riots on the island. The “Party” and “Limoria” operations were developed and carried out, during which Castro and his brother Raul were to be liquidated, as well as to establish a pro-American government in the country. However, a coup in the spring of 1961 was not possible.
In November 1961, the Kennedy signed a directive on the preparation and conduct of a new covert operation against Cuba, which was again commissioned to organize the CIA. Edward Lansdale was appointed responsible for the operation of the Mongoose, and Robert Kennedy was appointed as the direct curator. In January 1962, the latter told CIA Director John McCone that the overthrow of Castro was "the primary task of the US government."
The CIA analyzed its mistakes made in the previous operation. In April 1961, the mercenaries did not have the support of the population in Cuba. In the course of the new operation, it was planned to cause discontent with Fidel Castro’s power among the Cubans. One of the important conditions for success was the creation by the CIA agents in Cuba of underground organizations that should initiate an armed uprising on the island, and then appeal to the US government for help in the fight against the Castro regime.
The plan of the operation “Mangust” consisted of two phases. The first, in August-September 1962, is the preparation and initiation of the “rebel” movement in Cuba. Second, in October, the organization of the uprising in Cuba, its support by the United States and the overthrow of the Castro government. After the occupation of the island, an interim American administration would be established, from which power was gradually transferred to the leaders of counter-revolution.
According to the plans of the Pentagon, the military operation against Cuba was also carried out in two stages. At the first stage - it was provided for air strikes by the forces of the Air Force and Navy. The second - assumed a five-day fire defeat of the territory of Cuba with the subsequent landing of sea and airborne assault forces. To this end, six elite units of the United States Armed Forces were assigned to the 81 and 101 airborne divisions, the 1 armor division, the 1 and 2 infantry divisions, and the 2 marines division.
ANADYR PLAN
The Soviet leadership at the beginning of 1962 had reliable information that the United States would try to overthrow the Castro government. This is evidenced by the speech of Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev at the Cuban embassy in Moscow with congratulations on the next anniversary of the Cuban revolution. They were told: “The disturbing news is coming today from Cuba, the news that the most aggressive American monopolists are preparing a direct invasion of Cuba. Moreover, they are trying to present the situation in such a way as if the Soviet Union plans to establish or has already deployed its missile bases in Cuba ... ” Some sources believe that the idea of creating a group of Soviet troops in Cuba was suggested to Khrushchev by the Americans themselves, and he took advantage of it in 1962. According to others, the intention to create an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" off the coast of America arose in the 1960 year after the visit of Anastas Mikoyan to Cuba.
The political leadership of the USSR took 18 on May 1962, the decision to provide military assistance to the government of Castro. The deployment plan for a group of Soviet troops in Cuba provided for the concentration of up to 44 thousand troops (the actual number of Soviet military contingent by the end of September was 41 thousand people). A separate rocket division consisting of five missile regiments having 51 launchers of medium-range ballistic missiles (MRSD) P-40 and P-12 was also deployed. The division also included two regiments of front-line cruise missiles with eight launchers each and 14 missiles for them in the nuclear version. In addition, it was planned to deploy three divisions of Luna tactical missiles in Cuba, as well as Il-80 bombers and the corresponding number of atomic bombs for them. At the end of May 28, the Anadyr plan was approved by the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU. The commander of the GVSK was appointed General Issa Pliev. The creation of a group of troops approved the Cuban government, was signed by the relevant secret bilateral agreement.
The decision was extraordinary and responsible. In contrast to the American medium-range ballistic missiles "Jupiter" and "Thor" deployed in Turkey, Italy and the UK, the Soviet MRBM P-12 and P-14 in Cuba increased the strategic potential of the USSR. At the same time, of course, they were a deterrent to aggression.
This can be judged by the significant imbalance in military power between the USSR and the USA, which Kennedy decided to explicitly state in October 1961 of the year. US Deputy Secretary of Defense Roswell Gilpatrick publicly announced US military superiority in an address to the Business Council, gathered in Hot Springs City. He said that the US "possesses the forces of nuclear deterrence of such murderous power, that any hostile actions against us are an act of self-destruction ... The total number of our means of delivering nuclear charges, both strategic and tactical, reaches several tens of thousands of units." Robert McNamara publicly confirmed that American nuclear power surpasses Soviet one by several times. The US had 45 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), and the USSR had 4. The US submarines and bombers had 3400 warheads. Americans had 1500 heavy bombers against 192 Soviet aircraft. 120 MRSDs were deployed in Turkey, England and Italy. In addition, 1 thousand tactical fighter-bombers were able to reach the territory of the USSR from bases in the countries adjacent to the Soviet borders. In general, the US had 25 thsd nuclear charges; USSR - ten times less.
Khrushchev equated Soviet missiles in Cuba with American missiles along the borders of the USSR in Turkey and Western Europe. It is noteworthy that Kennedy, reflecting on October 16 1962 of the year over the reasons for the action of the USSR, asked advisers: “What is the point of deploying ballistic missiles in Cuba? It looks as if we started to place a large number of MRBD in Turkey. I would call it a dangerous step. ” After the silence in the office, he received the answer: "So we placed them there, Mr. President."
The operation "Anadyr" was conducted secretly. Loading in the ports was at night. In September, 1962, CIA Director John McCone, presented the report to the US President: “After extensive discussion and research, American intelligence came to the conclusion that the Soviet Union did not intend to turn Cuba into a strategic base ... As he knows that the risk of repressive measures from the US is too great” .
HAZARDOUS VOLTAGE
In early October, the Soviet leadership was satisfied that American intelligence did not detect the transfer of medium-range missiles to the island. However, October 13 1962, the reconnaissance aircraft U-2 made a flight over Cuba. After the film was developed and deciphered, specialists made unequivocal conclusions that there are two missiles in the San Cristobal area, each in 25 and m long. The report on the presence of Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles in Cuba caused confusion in the White House.
By order of the president, an executive committee was urgently formed in Washington. It includes Vice President Lyndon Johnson, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, CIA Director John McCone, and Secretary of Justice Robert Kennedy. During the first meeting of the executive committee, some of the participants in the meeting offered to launch immediate bombing attacks on the identified launch positions of Soviet missiles in Cuba.
In such a situation, dangerous tensions arose in Soviet-American relations. The situation around Cuba was complicated by the fact that the leaders of world powers misunderstood each other. In particular, this applied to the definition of the concepts of "offensive" and "defensive" weapon.
Khrushchev said that “the weapon sent to Cuba is defensive in nature,” since it is intended only for the defense of the island, the defense of its territory from external aggression.
Washington clearly believed that since Soviet missiles deployed in Cuba can hit targets in the United States, they are offensive weapons. After discussing the situation with Secretary of State Rask and Secretary of Defense McNamara, the US president decided to give his assessment of the situation and publicly state what they mean by offensive arms.
October 20 in the White House held a regular meeting of the executive committee. It was decided to declare a blockade of Cuba. Such decisive actions should halt the transfer of Soviet weapons, and also should have shown rejection of any spread of the presence of the USSR in the Western Hemisphere, which the Americans considered only as their sphere of influence.
Pentagon throws large forces to block Cuba aviation и fleet. Photo of the National Air Force Museum of the United States Navy
BLOCKADE CUBA
October 22 John Kennedy addressed a message to the American people. He stated: "We do not intend to risk without extreme necessity and plunge the world into the abyss of nuclear war, in which the ashes will be the fruits of victory, but we have the spirit to take this risk any time it becomes necessary." In addition, he identified measures to be taken, including:
- The United States establishes strict quarantine around Cuba in order to stop the supply of offensive weapons;
- The situation in Cuba is established by constant and careful observation. If US intelligence finds that missile launch pads are being prepared in Cuba, then other steps will be justified.
Addressing the Soviet leadership, the US president called for an end to "secret reckless and provocative policies, a threat to peace and stability of relations between our countries."
In response, 23 of October published a statement by the Soviet government, in which the establishment of a naval blockade of Cuba was rated as "unprecedented aggressive actions." It said: "The peoples of all countries must clearly imagine that, by going on such an adventure, the United States of America is taking a step towards unleashing a third world war." It also contained a serious warning: ... If the aggressors unleash a war, the Soviet Union will strike the most powerful retaliatory strike. ” The Soviet leadership urged US President Kennedy to dismantle US military bases located in various parts of the world.
23 October, the US president signed a decree "On the prohibition of the delivery of offensive weapons to Cuba." For the first time, it defined what the American government meant by “offensive weapons”. These included: ground-to-ground missiles, bombers, bombs, air-to-ground missiles and guided missiles, mechanical and electronic equipment for the types of weapons listed; any other weapons designated by the Secretary of Defense as offensive.
The decree entered into force on October 24 in 14.00. According to him, any ship or aircraft that could be sent to Cuba will be intercepted and inspected. The decree said: "All ships or aircraft arrested will be sent to the appropriate port of the United States or destroyed."
Just at that time, the Soviet ship Alexandrovsk was approaching the shores of Cuba, which was four hours late. In its holds were 24 nuclear warheads for medium-range missiles and 44 nuclear warheads for land-based cruise missiles. The vessel was urgently redirected to another port on the island so that it could break through the American "quarantine".
ESCALATION OF TENSION
Subsequently, several incidents occurred that could lead to a decision to launch a nuclear strike, which Khrushchev and Kennedy sought to avoid. October 24 in 10.30 for the first time in stories Strategic Aviation Command (SAC) of the US Air Force announced readiness number 2, and SAC prepared to attack targets on the territory of the USSR. The decision was taken by General Power independently, without the sanction of the president. In addition, Power sent its order in clear text. The SAC air fleet, part of which was constantly in the air with regular refueling, was ready to strike approximately 3 thousand nuclear bombs. On 23 in October, 85 was a strategic aviation aircraft. Of these, the 22 B-52 bomber, the 57 B-47 aircraft were sent to Europe. In addition, 30 tankers were in the air. The situation became even more tense when the GRU technical means intercepted the order with the following content: “Follow the course even in case of failure of one engine”.
There was a further escalation of tension. October 27 incident occurred, which Arthur Schlesenger, while the special assistant to the President of the United States, called the "most dangerous moment." The strike team, led by the Randolph aircraft carrier, began to drop depth charges in the immediate vicinity of the B-59 submarine, whose task was to guard Soviet ships sailing to Cuba. The submarine commander, Captain 2, rank Valentin Savitsky unsuccessfully tried to contact the command. The submarine has a critical situation. The temperature in the compartments grew, the boat plunged into darkness, only emergency lighting was burning. The concentration of carbon dioxide reached almost the limit, and the crew lost consciousness. The commander ordered the CU-3 commander to bring the nuclear torpedo into alert. But common sense prevailed.
Unwinding
The first compromise proposal to resolve the crisis, according to Anatoly Dobrynin’s book of memoirs of the Soviet ambassador in Washington, “Especially in confidence,” was announced on October 27 during his meeting with Robert Kennedy. On his proposal to withdraw American missiles from the territory of Turkey in exchange for the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba, Kennedy agreed. He said: "The president is ready to tacitly agree on this issue with Khrushchev."
The idea of exchanging “base on base” was repeatedly discussed at meetings of the executive committee. After the next meeting of the Executive Committee of 27 in October, a message was sent to the Kremlin from the US President with the following transaction terms:
“1. You agree to dismantle all nuclear systems in Cuba under the control of the UN and undertake, with certain guarantees, not to place such systems in Cuba in the future.
2. For our part, we agree with the relevant UN guarantees and compliance with the commitments made:
a) remove the currently existing blockade;
b) to give guarantees of non-aggression in Cuba. ”
On October 28, Khrushchev sent a response message to Kennedy, which said: “In order to complete the elimination of the dangerous conflict for the world as soon as possible ... The Soviet government, in addition to the earlier instructions on the termination of further construction works on the weapon deployment sites, issued a new order to dismantle the weapons you call offensive, pack it and return to the Soviet Union. " In addition, Khrushchev sent two personal letters to the US President in Washington. The first one said that “the views that Robert Kennedy expressed at the request of the president at his meeting with Dobrynin in the evening on October 27 in Moscow are known. Today, the answer to the president will be broadcast on the radio, and the answer will be positive, namely, the dismantling of the missile bases in Cuba under international control does not cause objections and will be announced in detail in the message of N.S. Khrushchev. The second reported that the government of the Soviet Union "expects the United States to fulfill its promise to dismantle the American Jupiter missiles in Turkey." In Moscow on October 28, the text of Khrushchev’s statement was broadcast on the radio and presented to the American ambassador.
In response, the American president welcomed the message of the Soviet government, calling these decisions an important contribution to the cause of peace. The Caribbean crisis is over.
MODERN SAFETY
The causes of the Caribbean crisis were dealt with at various conferences. According to Colonel-General Fedor Ivanovich Ladigin, Head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces in 1992 – 1997, expressed in the book “GRU and the Caribbean Crisis”, “the US’s aggressive policy towards the USSR was extremely dangerous military-strategic situation, accompanied by the desire of the United States to achieve unquestionable military superiority, provocative actions near the borders of the Soviet Union and even in the airspace of the country. The extreme aggravation of this confrontation, aggravated by the aggressive policy of the United States against Cuba, should once have matured. And it happened in October 1962 of the year. ”
The XXI century has come. The cold war has ended, but, as recent events in Ukraine show, the military-strategic situation around Russia remains turbulent. The United States, supported by the NATO countries, continues to pursue an aggressive foreign policy towards Russia and is making a reckless attempt to reduce it to the status of a world power of “second-class”.
The United States, despite the promise made by Bush Sr. regarding NATO’s non-expansion eastward, began to surround Russia with American and NATO bases, some of which were located on the territory of the former Soviet republics. The second wave of expansion began at the end of 2002 of the year and ended with the admission of Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Lithuania and Estonia to the alliance in March of 2004. Then, in the 2008 year, he was joined by Croatia and Albania. The US government has also made it clear that it intends to push for Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO, despite sounding warnings from some NATO countries, that this will cause serious damage to relations between Russia and the West. Naturally, the advancement of the armed forces of the NATO countries to the borders of Russia significantly changes the balance of forces in the European space and does not ensure equal security.
In these conditions, on March 11, 2015, Russia decided to completely stop the operation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. Recall that the CFE Treaty was concluded in 1990 and was based on a block confrontation. The agreement established limits on the size of conventional armed forces and determined the limiting numbers of conventional weapons deployed by the parties in Europe for five categories of offensive weapons: tanks, armored vehicles, combat aircraft, attack helicopters and artillery systems of caliber 100 mm and above. After the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact in 1999, an adapted treaty was signed in Istanbul, but most European states have not ratified it.
The issue of Foreign Affairs, the herald of the American Council on Foreign Relations, published an article The Rise of US Nuclear Primacy for March-April 2006. In this publication, Keir Lieber of the University of Notre Dame and Daryl Press of the University of Pennsylvania analyzed the relative strengths and vulnerabilities of the American, Russian and Chinese nuclear forces. Their conclusions were that after the end of the Cold War, American nuclear capabilities increased significantly, and the Russian nuclear arsenal "declined sharply, while the development of Chinese technologies in this area was completely zero." This created a situation in which neither the Russians nor the Chinese could respond effectively in the event of a possible first American strike. At the same time, they spoke in favor of the present and in the future US nuclear forces having the advantage to deliver a disarming strike against Russia and China, since this fully corresponds to the US declared policy of global dominance.
The authors also talked about the true reasons for the US desire to create a missile defense shield. Such a shield would not be, as most people think, “valuable in defense terms by itself,” since it could not protect against a massive nuclear strike from Russia. It was developed in the context of an attack, to repel a retaliatory strike by a small number of Russian or Chinese missiles that survived the American first strike.
The article made a splash. The assistant secretary of defense for international security issues, Peter Flory, in Foreign Affairs for September-October 2006 of the year even published a statement in which he questioned both the accuracy of the data in the article and its interpretation.
In this regard, it is worth recalling that the United States is persistently implementing the program to create the so-called impenetrable strategic missile defense system, the objects of which are planned to be located in the territories of European countries neighboring Russia. December 13 2001, the United States announced its unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, signed by Moscow and Washington in the 1972 year. According to the Americans, the agreement does not meet the realities of today.
8 On April 2010, in Prague, the Treaty was signed between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on measures to further reduce and limit strategic offensive arms (START-3). According to the provisions of the treaty, Russia and the United States are reducing warheads by a third and more than twice the strategic carriers. The new agreement was developed on a parity basis in accordance with the principles of equal and indivisible security. The preamble of the document records the existence of a relationship between strategic offensive weapons and strategic defensive weapons and the growing importance of this relationship in the process of reducing strategic nuclear weapons. The influence of ICBMs and SLBMs in conventional equipment on strategic stability is highlighted.
The US Senate in December 2010 approved the ratification of START-3. At the same time, unilateral interpretations of some sensitive provisions are included in the Senate ratification resolution. Reservations were also made in the instrument of ratification. They are primarily aimed at removing any restrictions that hinder the implementation of the US plans to create a global missile defense system. In addition, attempts have been made to remove promising strategic offensive weapons in non-nuclear equipment from under the treaty.
It is significant that immediately after the signing of START-3, 11 on April 2010, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced the ability of the United States today to deliver a quick global strike (BSU). Work to create the forces and means of BSU was intensified after the administration of Barack Obama entered the White House. The concept of BSU provides for the United States to strike with high-precision offensive weapons in non-nuclear equipment up to 60 minutes at targets anywhere in the world. It is expected that the creation of effective BSU systems will significantly reduce the role of nuclear weapons in the structure of the deterrent forces and move into the era of non-nuclear deterrence in the future. In fact, the basis of BSU is the time factor - it is the application of a preventive disarming destructive strike by non-nuclear offensive arms as soon as possible in the event of a threat being detected. And the role of the “impenetrable” global missile defense system to neutralize the retaliatory strike is quite obvious.
The creation of new highly efficient weapons is intended to ensure the US global military dominance and comprehensive supremacy in the world. For example, David J. Betz, a lecturer at the Department of Military Studies in Kings College in London, writes: “The West is almost inaccessible to the rest of the world. Only the West has high-tech strategies in which speed of maneuver becomes more important than numerical superiority, reconnaissance sensory devices are able to timely and accurately detect key objects in the enemy’s camp, and the weapon has high enough accuracy to attack these objects from a long distance. ”
In general, it can be stated that the modern concept of a fast global strike, like the strategy of massive nuclear retribution that dominated the 1960-ies, is based on the alleged superiority of the United States over Russia in military, economic and scientific-technical potential.
The patriarch of American diplomacy, Henry Kissinger, writes in his book “The World Order,” “that the meaning of history is a subject for study, not for loud statements.” Unfortunately, his advice is not heard by the administration of US President Barack Obama and the US Congress, whose representatives speak out with bellicose rhetoric against Russia.
Information