Mark Galeotti

This was very interesting book covering air warfare during the Afghanistan war 1979-1988.

It covers some main points on Soviet Air Force involvement, aircraft and helicopter types utilized, attack tactics used (from all aspects, fighter-bombers, assault, gunship helicopters, intelligence and logistics) and challenges faced (mostly form Pakistani Air Force but also from Iran side (which was revealing to me at least). Very interesting are comments on the effectiveness of MANPADs used by Aghani tribes and how propaganda is something that is always present in every conflict.

While actual use of combat flying machines was done by Soviets, Mujahideen troops also developed their own tactics (helped also by myriad of western backed military consultants and fighters) to deal with the assault craft, at least those flying at the very low level. Not so much is said here - air defense of dispersed clan forces is not something that would occupy many pages unlike ground war , because it comes to use of high speed automatic guns and shoulder launched missiles so beside listing of weapons used only option is to list every possible air ambush executed (which would be a phone book size set of data) - but what is covered describes the challenges and approaches used in a clear and understandable way.

As one of the reviewers said, lots of things are put into this book and due to the available book length (below hundred pages) not that many details are made available that could be of interest to aficionados of air warfare. But again Osprey was never in the field of providing full information (like Harpia or Helion publishers for example) but more of a short digest view of the battlefield with as much details as 60-100 pages allow for, weapons used and people involved.

With that in mind book is very good, 4 stars. Would it be great to have more details, of course but it is as it is.

Two things stand out here to me:
- Author's comment that Afghanistan war was never analyzed by Soviet/Russian army - this was a little bit awkward because books involving Lester Grau as an editor were actually compilations of writings from Soviet army on the war, lessons learned and applied. Author's statement is more weird considering these books are referenced in the bibliography section.
- It is obvious that author can write a very good military analysis, only problem is that he can do it with things from the past (as in lets-honor-our-enemies-now-they-are-dead approach). As soon as author enters the arena of contemporary Russian military, all objectivity goes out of the window, and pretty rude and insulting comments start to appear. Hopefully this will change at some point, especially since author is one of the very few English speaking sources on the subject, which just makes author's approach more strange and disappointing.

If you are looking for a detailed albeit brief overview of air war during Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, this book is highly recommended.… (more)

Very good overview of the Russo-Georgian war of 2008, with very good comments on qualities and errors that were found on both sides during this short conflict.

As is case with this author and contemporary Russian military, bias is so strong that I can envision the author with clenched teeth and shaking hand while trying to write down that this was actually provoked by Georgian side. That being said, I can commend that basics are given. Again, those pesky South Ossetian's are baddies because they feel more politically linked to Russia than to Georgia (how dare they!) and Abkhazians are also rebellious holdout for the same reason- but actual explanations of inter-ethnic relations is of course missing, except in form of all that inter ethnic tension is just product of Russian interference, its not like Georgian's were so aggressive in the early 1990s, no, never! Of course this makes author's comment in the very beginning that Adjarans were easily subdued by Georgians sound a little bit off, but I put this to author's very strange (but again, when talking about contemporary Russia, also very consistent) way of thinking where anyone who even looks at Russia for help is outcast. And maybe in author's home country subduing means inviting for tea and biscuits, not use of force. Who knows, you know, different cultures.

Georgia turned to the West very early and received a lots of training from Western armies (UK, US and if one looks at some of the information, Israelis) and armament (US, UK, Greece, Turkey and again Israel). This brought back old hatred for the north of the country and decision was made to finally return the territories of these two breakaway republics. I have to say author manages to walk a straight line and explains how Georgian government's decision was foolish but he cannot resist the temptation to say how, you know, it was not even decision of Georgia to attack, they were pushed because Russians provoked them (I mean, of course!). It is not that in 15 years after last great conflict there were no border skirmishes, attacks on civilian settlements from all sides and exchange of artillery fire. No, according to the author this entire area was as peaceful as Biblical Paradise until tensions got heated up in 2007/2008 and Georgian authorities decided to finally end this sudden (and I guess unexpected) violence outbreak!

Now, author constantly makes clear how Georgia in 2008 was a country that aimed for Western block acceptance by doing things that are on acceptance list of Western block apparently - restructuring military in a way that western only weapons are procured (can you be an ally of West without HK MP5 and M4 carbines or Barrett rifles - if you ask the author no, you cannot, without these you are not even a modern army!) and joining US led military campaigns in far away countries like Iraq and Afghanistan (after being trained by NATO instructors to be able to fight in these countries under Western command structures). This is what makes progressive country it seems.

So, as said above, as a side effect rapid militarization, Georgia's government decided to take the country on the path to militarily retake northern republics. Taking into account that army commander in chief was trained in US, army was trained by various US/NATO programs (and Israelis) it is very likely that same structures were involved in planning and execution of the attack, especially considering that everyone though Georgian army would run over the rebels in a matter of days.

What happened is that Russians intervened and in a series of short but intensive battles (and long range strikes into the Georgian territory) Georgian army was pushed back, losing infrastructure, combat equipment and giving Russians excuse to deploy their troops to stay in the South Ossetia and Abkhazia regions for years to come.

Day by day descriptions of battles, very good analysis and identifications of errors on both sides (especially Russian since in this war they were the heavy hitters) are truly good (comments from the Russian military side that author quotes truly showed the functional gaps in the Russian military at the time). For this book would be 4 stars.

What takes one star is Russians-did-it (although they were taken by complete surprise at the beginning - again author's reasoning is very interesting) and constant, unnecessary and really disappointing jabs at rebel republics (I mean imagine situation where Ossetian professional Alania battalion, part of peace keeping forces in South Ossetia, decided to take arms when Georgian troops came to the South Ossetia capital! I mean can you imagine that type of behavior - they threw off their pose of neutrality as author says :) I mean, you gotta laugh).

For military analysis and profiling of the parties involved this is excellent read. For political information, as is case with any author's book about contemporary Russia, this is not a source to learn anything from.… (more)

I think that author's bias towards modern Russia and especially Putin is slowly starting to affect his work to a degree that his works start to feel a little bit forced and rant-like.

If tomorrow Russia would deliver I do not know, cure for all diseases, author would still treat it as a underworld cesspit. In other words, no matter the situation if author is writing about Russia you can expect that he thinks so lowly about it that he would end up on other side of the world.

So, Crimea takeover. Of course, author states that it was all done using gangsters, underground lowlifes and mercenaries that paved the way for Russian special forces and later armor coming in and taking over the Crimea. Somewhere, somewhere in there you might hear something named Right Sector mentioned - but since these are Ukrainians, it is just myth. Yes, majority of Crimea decided to stay in Russia - this is something author shyly mentions at the very last pages - but it was under the threat of violence (which does not make sense if as author says Crimea would make the same decision, but this is think-tank thinking I guess). No free will, no free decision..... But hey, Ukraine government abolished Russian language as an official language, what about that? Well, that was unfortunate decision (never reverted mind you, but OK) that Russians just used as a pretext.

So, it was actions of goons and gangsters then backed up by elite special operations forces and armor units. Police went over to Russians almost immediately (bought up, must be! all of them!), parts of the army went over (bloody traitors, all bought up!) and [for the author] weirdly enough civil population went over (remember the comment that Crimea would decide to join Russia in any event? Why then such a surprise that population went over? Right?).

Use of IL76 transport planes is "hangover from soviet times"? I am still trying to figure this one out. I guess C130, Spartan or any of the Airbus military transports were supposed to be used (although C130 is as old as IL76, but never mind, author's logic).

Does the author discuss the internal national conflicts in Ukraine? Well, he mentions Tatars, because they were severely punished by Soviet government for collaboration with Germans and their allies in WW2 (as author says only small part of the population was involved - interestingly it is always the case of small number of silly naughty people when allies-of-the-moment are in play), Cossacks are mentioned (as Russian thugs of course - also heavily dispersed by Soviet government for same actions as Tatars, but since they remained with Russians these guys are The Thugs)..... and that's it. Is there any mention of enmity between Western and Eastern Ukraine? No. Is there any mention of clashes and atrocities in Odessa and other cities in Ukraine when pro-Russian and pro-Western columns clashed? No, you see this is all a myth and perception used by Russians. If you read all the text you will see how Ukraine army was training with western/NATO forces at the time (picture even says 2014) but is there anything more on this? No, except the mention how installing coastal artillery systems after takeover was done to prevent western intervention - very interesting statement dont you think, but alas no further information is provided.

Was there mention of Ukrainian oligarchs and local chiefs and their personal armies roaming the land on both sides? No. Why? I guess because it is complicated and would mess up with the context here.
Role of Strelkov and his troops - for the author they are war criminals for actions in Crimea, but for what exactly is not disclosed. Strelkov is a weird character, I agree but even his actions in Slavyansk were time limited (80 something days if I am not wrong) so question remains what atrocities were done in Crimea since everyone agrees that level of aggression used was minimal.

So in short when you look at what is expected to get from the book - description of the operation, when all the usual author's comments on Russian gangsters, thugs, traitorous Ukrainian troops, etc - is taken out, is pretty well given. Russian troops are even shown as competent (author's slip I am sure, he was just being generous to the Russians).

Everything else - context of the operation (you know, strategic location, very close to home unlike, I do not know, Falklands, more like case of Panama), political situation in the country, complete confusion when it comes to various militias and paramilitaries and so on and so forth - is as expected from the author, very single-sided. Which is a shame. I still think that author will one day publish a really good and objective work on the subject of Russian military. Question remains when..... sometime in a far far future. In the meantime his books will definitely not age well.

From the operation perspective highly recommended. From the point of everything else, there are better books out there that give lots of political and social context, dont use this one as starting point.… (more)