Soviet Presence in Germany/Poland after OpOmega

[kalos72]

So my topic bout the price of vehicles in Germany got me to thinking...

What is your take on the Soviet presence in Germany/Poland now that the US has pulled out? They are in worse shape then the Allies were and the fighting has stopped for months now.

[Legbreaker]

I see everyone in an equally bad state. Most units are hanging on by a thread, moments, or at least just a meal or two away from disintegration.
Both sides though have been stationary, or near to it for a while, up to two years in many cases. Most of these will have put down roots, become part of the community.
Supplies from the rear have been near non-existant for a number of years (you could say since late 1997 and not be far wrong) so most, if not all units have been living off the land for all that time (and probably doing better at it than a lot of their families back home). There are probably more reasons for units to stay together than disband and head for home - at least the soldiers are eating....

[Adm.Lee]

I think once word gets out, and is verified however, that the Americans and British have gone home, a lot of the Soviets are going to desert, probably in small-to-middling groups. Keeping that information away from them is obviously in the KGB's interest, but it won't last forever. Especially if the local Poles/Czechs spread the information.

It would then be in the Germans' interest to NOT do anything aggressive, as that would only encourage the Soviets to stay. Letting it be known that they don't want to come east should work. Digging in would be a good signal?

[Legbreaker]

I tend to disagree with that view. With the Americans gone, there's less pressure on the Soviets and their allies. They have established themselves over the prior several years in their cantoments and developed support networks.
Yes, there will be individual soldiers, even the odd small unit which will up and leave, but it's a looooooong way home with no suppport over potentially hostile ground (which is widely known to have been nuked heavily). The idea of such a hard and dangerous journey doesn't seem all that attractive when compared to the life of relative comfort they have where they are.
Yes family will be a concern, but one easily countered by their own propaganda units - distribution of newspapers, etc detailing just how bad it is back home, how many of their cities have been flattened by NATO nukes, how many millions dead, etc - basically take away the desire to go home by painting a picture of absolute death and destruction.

[HorseSoldier]

I don't think the departure of the US and Canadian forces makes much difference to the Soviet troops still west of their national borders, and don't think the KGB would much care (and certainly not be able) to keep that information under wraps.

The Soviet forces are pretty much wrecked by the last round of fighting in 2000, they've got little or no national logistical network behind them to help them along, and trying to go home is a real dicey proposition for everything from the individual up to division level movements. The most likely courses of action are organized attempts to repatriate large units, digging in and trying to work out some sort of understanding with the local populace, or disintegrating into marauder bands.

[Abbott Shaull]

By the end of 2000, the only two things that are keeping Soviet troops in Poland and Germany in general are that the Commanders of various Divisions and their sub-unit are hold control by a bare-thread.

What keeping them still in command is that they have been able to keep their troops fed and sheltered. Some have it better off than others, and while others for all practical purposes have absorb or been absorbed into local militia depending on the size of the unit. Especially since in the 2000 many of the most forward units didn't take action, one can assumed the commanders took stock of what they had and thought better of making any moves. With the outcome of the 22nd Cavalry Army, 4th Guards Tanks Army, and those Polish units that pursued the 5th US Mechanized Division. I would tend to think those commanders made the right choice of staying put, beside many by this point or shortly there after had one of two goals. To get their units back to home, wherever in the Soviet Union that may be, or they were staying put to carve out their own little kingdom as hinted at by the module Going Home. Some would stay put, because the Divisional Commander doesn't want to leave a trail of marauders that he/she may have to fight as they attempt to make it home...

Just some thoughts.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I see everyone in an equally bad state. Most units are hanging on by a thread, moments, or at least just a meal or two away from disintegration.
Both sides though have been stationary, or near to it for a while, up to two years in many cases. Most of these will have put down roots, become part of the community.
Supplies from the rear have been near non-existant for a number of years (you could say since late 1997 and not be far wrong) so most, if not all units have been living off the land for all that time (and probably doing better at it than a lot of their families back home). There are probably more reasons for units to stay together than disband and head for home - at least the soldiers are eating....

I think that's a fairly good summary of the situation...

[Webstral]

I also think the Soviets in Germany and Poland pretty much have had it by the end of 2000. The Soviet Union has nearly completely unraveled by this time. The breakdown of order and the high casualty rate probably means that the hard-core commissars in the fighting units have gone to whatever reward good Communists receive. Granted, there may be a few dedicated commissars left, but it's just so easy for shell fragments, a raid by the Westerners or bandits, or a disgruntled private to send a KGB man to the afterlife that it's hard to imagine what a poor commanding officer can do to keep his political deputy safe...

Light infantry operations might continue for some time, but the intent will be derived from purely local concerns, not a bigger war-making picture. Reconnaissance will have to continue so that each side can keep their intelligence fresh; counter-reconnaissance will be necessary so that each side can conceal its dispositions. Each side may see raids as a necessary evil to keep the local balance of power tolerable and the troops sharp. However, in any given location a truce may make the most sense to everyone involved.

This goes to a phenomenon I see becoming increasingly prevalent as 2001 matures. The organized and (somewhat) disciplined forces of the world will come to see themselves as having more in common with each other than with the bandits and marauders that plague the countryside. At some point, operations against the common enemy may become more important than prosecuting a war that everybody has lost.

Webstral

[Legbreaker]

I rather agree with you Web. The reasons behind fighting have changed dramatically from political to pure survival. Sure there will be some who want to go home, but the majority of soldiers (and many civilians) will see the phrase "safety in numbers" really does hold significant meaning.
Units are likely to stay together, even grow as they absorb the surrounding population into their sphere of influence and become very much like feudal kingdoms with the military forming the ruling class and the camp followers and civilians acting as the peasants.

[Raellus]

Going Home has several status blurbs for Soviet units listed as being located in Poland. I don't have the module in front of me but the gist of one of them is "loyal but not responding to orders from higher HQ". Others are listed simply as "not responding to higher HQ". Still others have gone rogue and are setting up shop as the local government in whatever town or village near where they happened to start the Polish winter. And, of course, you have your mutinous units that simply splinter into various marauder bands.

So, in my view, a lot of it comes down to the unit commander. It boils down to two essential questions: Is he effective enough to maintain unit morale and cohesion? And, is he loyal to the remaining Soviet hierarchy? Some of them would probably try to carve out their own little fiefdom on Polish soil. Others might simply try to get their men home. Others may continue to follow the directives of the government/military hierarchy. In many cases, mutinies or unit coups would have rendered unit commanders either spectators or corpses.

At a higher level, I think the Soviet government would try to maintain a military presence in Poland until they could be relatively certain that the German military was in no position to mount offensive operations outside of its own borders. With German non-aggression likely, the Soviets would probably recall units to put down the rebellions in its break-away western "republics".

[Targan]

In my campaign as the PC party travelled west through Poland to get to Bremerhaven for Op Omega they encountered several stand-offs and even battles between Soviet units who had been grabbed by the KGB and the GRU. The tensions between the two services finally got too much. Different KGB and GRU commanders had varying agendas but broadly speaking the GRU wanted to keep prosecuting the war against NATO and the KGB wanted to consolidate Soviet forces in preparation for putting down rebellions in WarPac and western Soviet territories. Of course most Soviet units were not controlled by either the KGB or the GRU and their commanders also had a variety of agendas. Some kept following their last orders or sought orders from higher command, others settled down in more or les permanent cantonments, still others went completely rogue and started marauding or carving out feudal satrapies.

[Legbreaker]

What a lot of people tend to forget is that it's not just the soviets and their allies who are in disarray - NATO forces, that is, Germans, British, Canadian, Norwegian AND American units aren't exactly in good shape, and in fact some may well be in conflict with technical allies.
There are hints throughout the published material that raids on neighbouring units are commonplace although these are primarily aimed at the enemy, it's not unknown for them to be aimed at "friendlies" if said friendly units have items that are needed.
Although the units involved escape me at the moment (away from books) I believe there is at least one German unit which has turned maurauder, and I think Going Home refers to an American unit or two which has gone the same way.

One of the only advantages the Nato unit commanders have in keeping their units together is proximity to friendly countries - they're almost all within or close to Germany. Another advantage for the British, Canadian and US is they're overseas - the troops have no hope of returning home on their own, any chance of repatriation relies on the military.

[HorseSoldier]

Circa 2000 the dividing line between marauders and military units is probably defined, at least in part, by how predatory they are, not whether they are or are not predatory. Depending on the command environment and such, I'd think that some units loyal to higher headquarters are just as bad when they roll into town as marauders -- worse, probably, since most marauder bands aren't as big and well armed as military units.

There's probably a pretty good suspense/conspiracy/action sort of gaming scenario in there with something like some mostly independent brigade or division commander on the NATO side running his own marauder outfit on the side and knocking off the occasional supply convoy for other NATO units, trader convoys, robbing refugees, etc.

[Legbreaker]

It could well be that the Divisional commander has no idea where the supplies are really coming from. His supply unit might actually be the local maurauders his troops have been so desperately trying to find. Of course the "maurauders" know every move in advance of the troops who have been tasked to stop them. The pursuit force may even be in on it as tehy're the ones who stand to gain in the long run.