How the Iraqi Republican Guard serves as a good proxy for how the East German Army could have performed in a hypothetical '89 module.

[Bobjack1240]

Both forces would have used similar equipment:

The Republican Guard's performance in the Iran-Iraq War and Desert Storm are the closet proxies we have of how the Nationalvolksarmee would have actually performed in combat during. Both would have used a mixture of T-72A/72M1s (the only serious difference between the 72M1 and the 72A is the lack of an anti-radiation liner for the 72M1), T-72 Urals, and T-55s.  Both would have used pretty much the same APCs and IFVs. The Republican Guard was a professional force with more combat experience than the NVA. Both would have used similar atgms. The '89 NVA would have used the Spandrel, Spigot, and Sagger for their infantry, while the Republican Guard would have had the Milan, Spigot, and Sagger. Both would have used pretty much the same AA weapons with the exception of the Iraqis also having Roland SAMs. Both would also have had used pretty much the same attack helicopters and ground-attack aircraft.

 

However, according to Swedish accounts of tests conducted with second-hand East German 72M1s in the 1990s, the East Germans might have also had BM-22 instead of the BM-15 the Iraqis used.

 

Both would have had similar manpower strengths with the Guard being of better quality:

By the time of the Invasion of Kuwait, the Republican Guard would have been a professional force around 100,000 strong with 8 year's worth of combat experience. The NVA's Landstreikrafte would have been around 105,000 strong in 1989/1990 (although only 50% of these would have been professional troops).

[Combatintman]

Disagree entirely - as we're seeing in the current Ukraine unpleasantness, analysts who focus on quantitative data come up short.  The NVA would have brought a better ability to command and coordinate high tempo manoeuvre operations to the party.  The Iraqis certainly never did much of that in the mainly positional conflict with Iran or in any other conflict since then.

[chuckdyke]

It will always be hypothetical of how enthusiastically the East Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, and Poles would have performed under Soviet leadership. 

 

[BeondTheGrave]

IMO the 1989 timeframe isn't a really good one for a hypothetical Cold War gone hot. I disagree with @Combatintman not in theory, I think hes right RE the skill and capabilities of the NVA. East Germany would also be reuniting the two Germanys. I dont think we can know obviously, but I would suspect that in the heady first day or two of combat in, say, 1982, many NVA troops would have a high morale and the benefits that come from believing what youre doing is right. But by 1989 I do not think the NVA would have fought well, if it fought at all. The political situation in West Germany was bordering on revolution until October, when a peaceful revolution actually broke out. In Leipzig alone there were something like 300k demonstrators in the streets in a city that had just over half a mil population. The peace demonstrations quickly spread to other cities as well. IMO the NVA simply couldn't have gone on the offensive in this period. Either the army would have defected or the people would have, either it would never cross the border or the SED would pull it back to save their own skin. 

Personally I think the time frame for CMCW is just about right. Its really the last point at which the Soviets and NATO have rough tactical parity (though many will debate even this). Looking forward to the 1985 timeframe the US begins to employ Abrams en masse as well as a whole selection of high technology weapons. Probably its the case that both tactically and operationally the Soviet's goose was cooked. They even recognize this in, I think, 1987 when their own doctrine shifts from operationally offensive to operationally defensive. Politics in the Pact at this point begins to seriously push against Pact unity in ways that would make an all out offensive pretty unreasonable to me. Before 1978 the USSR enjoys some major advantages over the US, but really the problem is technology. The kit you have in CMCW's first year is pretty representative of the kit the US would have had, just in fewer numbers. The real killer for the US was in soldier quality, the soft factors. Historian Beth Bailey estimates that in 1976 around 1/3rd of all US enlistedmen were functionally illiterate, to cite just one example. IMO there are some cool scenarios to be made in, say, the immediate post-Vietnam timeframe. But of course you can do that in engine already. The desire to get the best US toys in CMCW is understandable I guess, but I think it would just end up turning the game in to Shock Force 2 rather than the true CW slugfest. In 1989 I'm not sure how much of a ball game there is left to play. 

[sawomi]

On 3/9/2022 at 1:46 PM, BeondTheGrave said:

...The political situation in West Germany was bordering on revolution until October, when a peaceful revolution actually broke out.

GDR was 'East' Germany. -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany

The main reasons that the revolution remained peaceful where probably

a) SED leadership had not the backing of the Kreml anymore

b) SED had no real controll over KdA anymore -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Groups_of_the_Working_Class

 

[BeondTheGrave]

8 hours ago, sawomi said:

GDR was 'East' Germany. -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany

The main reasons that the revolution remained peaceful where probably

a) SED leadership had not the backing of the Kreml anymore

b) SED had no real controll over KdA anymore -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Groups_of_the_Working_Class

 

Oh yeah youre right. I meant east not west. Silly mistake.