Download Blake Bengtson Senior Seminar Avansare de Puști Historical

Blake Bengtson
Senior Seminar
Avansare de Puști
Historical artifacts make up an important part of history, and illustrate perfectly a time or
place, often times better than any written account can. The focus on material culture is a good
way to begin to understand certain things about the past otherwise not completely apparent.
Warfare has left a lasting imprint on history, and many objects made for war can be studied and
are of great value to historians when trying to better understand key points in history. Often
times, these weapons of war demonstrate not only the technological capabilities, but the
economic, and political climate of any given time. In the 20th century no man portable piece of
equipment has had a greater impact on history than the sniper rifle. This tool has the ability to
change the outcome of a battle in a single calculated shot. This means an individual rifle could
carry vast significance, and in some cases museums have acquired certain rifles because of this
important fact. The sniper rifle has advanced throughout history, originally being a simple bolt
action rifle with a telescopic site, and culminating in highly accurate semi-automatics with
advanced optics capable of shots at very long distance. The sniper rifle and the soldiers who
used them have a great impact on history. Battle tactics have changed because of and to
accommodate snipers in every country. As tactics change, so do the weapons used to better fit
the type of war being fought. This is true for most things, as time change, certain qualities are
needed and some fall into disuse. Looking at objects and why they were required to be this way
can show how needs changed overtime in a particular place or setting.
Sniper tactics have evolved as the types of war fought have. During the First World War,
snipers using actual long range rifles and optics were first truly fielded. There were
“sharpshooters” before utilizing similar tactics, but the limited range available with their
technology limited them from being considered modern snipers. Modern snipers for the
purpose of this paper must be able to use long range accurate rifles, utilizing smokeless powder.
This would mean early “snipers” using muskets up to large bore black powder marksmen using
rifles such as the sharps will be omitted. The snipers deployed in World War I fought very
differently than those that fought in World War II. Snipers would sit in one position, often times
behind steel cover scanning the enemy trenches for anyone foolish to stick their head up.
Though that was the main tactic employed, there were some other trailblazing developments in
sniping. A specialized British group known as “Lovat's Scouts” deployed hunting tactics into
sniping for the first time. Instead of wearing a normal uniform, they would strap foliage to
themselves, and wear burlap sacks to get rid of their outlines. The were used heavily for
reconnaissance and saw action throughout
the war.1 These tactics changed the sniper
from a soldier with an accurate rifle to a
hunter of men. The psychological effect here
is obvious, as it is one thing to know
someone is trying to kill you, and another
thing entirely to know they are stalking and
fig. 1
available.
1 http://www.qohldrs.co.uk/html/lovat_scouts.htm
watching you picking the best target
The scout's use of camouflage was also a n advancement that would become common
place for a long time. Early World War I armies were still wearing flashy outfits with bright
colors. This quickly changed, but the use of camouflage by snipers allowed them to infiltrate
“no mans land”, get information and leave without ever being seen. This also demonstrates the
usefulness of snipers in a role of scout and recon. The Second World War would see the
expansion of the principles developed by the British scouts, and would be taken to the next
level by the Russian snipers set upon the Germans by the Soviet Union.
World War Two saw much more fluid and mobile warfare than the First World War did,
with the advancement of air power and mechanized armor. This meant an expansion of the type
of tactics used by Lovat's Scouts for snipers. Snipers proved their usefulness on the battlefield
time and time again, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics took advantage of snipers
more than most other countries as was seen in Stalingrad and the snipers trained and used there.
Late in the war there was a step towards the PSL (Puşcă Semiautomată cu Lunetă). A sniper
weapon was developed using not a single shot bolt action, but a semiautomatic action. This
allowed one sniper to rapidly engage multiple targets, as well as take faster follow up shots.
The name of this weapon was the Samozaryadnaya Vintovka Tokareva or Tokarev's Selfloading rifle. The SVT-40 had a clear advantage over the earlier Mosin-Nagant rifle. This rifle
was first fielded in 1938, and an updated version was produced by 1940. by the end of the war
more than one million were produced for use by special soldiers and snipers. 2 As a weapon
used by snipers, the SVT was far beyond those of other nations. It did have a trade off for faster
firing though. It lost slightly in accuracy when compared to bolt action sniper rifles. The
thinking of Soviet weapon designers was that most engagements don't need one very accurate
2 http://world.guns.ru/rifle/autoloading-rifles/rus/tokarev-svt-3-svt-40-e.html
shot at 800 yards, but more often required several passably accurate shots at 600 yards. This
thinking would heavily influence the development and design of the PSL. Another advantage,
was the ten round capacity featured. Most bolt actions, with few exceptions had a capacity of
five shots. This means not only did the rifle shoot faster, but it could also hold more
ammunition, thus allowing more consecutive shots before the operator needed to reload. It's
apparent how this would be beneficial.
Since each country has it's own historical chain of rifles fielded over time, the focus will
be on those used by the Soviet Union, with the main object to be examined, the Romanian PSL
54-C. This is an important historical piece, not only because of it's significance as the most
advanced rifle, technologically, ever used by the Soviet Union, but because of what it meant on
a far deeper level, as a tool of war, and a definition of the communist state. In many ways, the
rifle mimics the Soviet mindset, as that was used in its design. Simultaneously. it is a marvel of
engineering and design and many ways even beautiful countering the utilitarian functions
through it's merit of design. It can be argued that this rifle is the pinnacle of sniper technology,
due to several factors. There are more accurate, more powerful rifles currently fielded, but none
have the reliability, ease of use, and widespread role on the battlefield to date. Since it's
development, this weapon has stood as the sniper weapon of soviets, their allies, rogue states
and terrorists. In contrast to American weapons, the PSL is cheap, cheaply made, and inferior in
accuracy. That is the current opinion of certain American “experts.”3 it is noted however that
the rifle wasn't intended to be used as westerners view snipers. It is a marksmen rifle, meant to
be deployed to take out several long range targets in rapid succession. This differs from the
American mindset of snipers, where a high precision bolt action rifle is preferred. The soviets
3 http://www.tactical-life.com/exclusives/the-psl-from-romania/
chose rate of fire and passable accuracy to better meet their tactics, and this need shows in the
rifle's design.
The PSL is in many ways unique and similar to other weapon systems. It features a ten
round detachable box magazine, gas piston semi automatic operation, and a range of over 1000
yards. PSL officially stands for Puşcă Semiautomată cu Lunetă meaning semi-automatic rifle
with scope and is designated PSL M-74 in Romania where it was designed and built. In the
United States and elsewhere it is known by many different names, including PSL-54c,
ROMAK III (ROManian Avtomat Kalashnikov) , SSG-97 (Scharfschützengewehr - 1997) , and
FPK Dragunov. Many times it is mistakenly called an SVD by importers, and it does share
many features with the Russian version marksman rifle, but it is also very different in the gas
system and receiver. Where a true SVD rifle is its own design independently, the PSL is an
adaptation of the simpler long stroke gas piston system designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov for
the RPK machine gun. The rifle fires the powerful 7.62x54r cartridge, which has been in use
longer than any other military cartridge. The rifle is capable of achieving good enough
accuracy to hit man sized targets at 800 yards with minimal operator training, and in every way
was designed to fit the needs of sniper tactics when it was first fielded. The role a marksmen
rifle took in battle was to act as a counter measure to engage long range enemies the weaker
AK-47s could not. Every squad was equipped with a marksmen rifle to combat enemy machine
guns, snipers, and other targets difficult to deal with by ordinary men. The PSL was patterned
after the AK family of weapons in part for their reliability and ease of maintenance, but also
because the men trained on AK-47s would be able to use and disassemble them without
additional training. This shows how the Soviets and their allies viewed their soldiers really. The
less training they required, the cheaper they are to field, as well as if one man in the squad dies,
the next can pick up and use his rifle because he's familiar with it's mechanism. They are
interchangeable, cogs in a machine working for the Communist state. The rifle mimics qualities
the Communists would idealize. Simple, efficient, reliable, and replaceable.
To truly understand what makes the PSL an important part of history, we must first
examine where it came from and why. The first Russian weapon fielded as a sniper rifle was
the M1891 Mosin-Nagant which saw limited use as a sniper in World War I and prolific use in
the Second World War. This rifle, considered simplistic by many, features a standard bolt action
mechanism, and has a magazine capacity of five, and a reasonably effective range of 800
meters. The sniper version of the rifle is simply the standard rifle fitted with a basic telescopic
sight. This allowed the sniper to out range men using iron sights and pick out officers and other
targets specifically rather than shooting upon a basic human shape. Though simple when
compared to today’s rifles, skilled marksmen were able to utilize them to eliminate their
enemies at extreme distances. Two of the most famed snipers in history used these workhorse
Russian bolt actions to write themselves into the history books for all time.
The effectiveness of snipers on a battlefield cannot be questioned. The psychological
damage as well as damage to morale caused by the thought of men hunting you as a hunter
stalks a rabbit is unmatched. The vast amount of Soviet snipers in WWII demonstrated what the
sniper was capable of doing to an enemy force who seemed to have had the upper hand. The
snipers were used to take out certain targets, as can be seen in this excerpt from a Soviet
military document:
“The principal task of the sniper is the destruction of the most important enemy targets
he can find. Officers, observers, scouts, liaison officers, enemy snipers, gun crews,
trench mortars and machine guns, anti-tank rifleman and motorcycle skirmishers are to
be his primary targets. He shall “blind” enemy armored car and tank drivers by firing at
their vision visors. He is capable of independent action under the most difficult
conditions of battle.” 4
Where the average soldier was meant to hold a position or skirmish against the enemy, the
snipers task was to eliminate their ability and will to fight. The practice of targeting officers in
cities like Stalingrad no doubt had an affect on their ability to lead effectively. If commanding
men, it would not be a stretch to assume the fact that three others in their position were hunted
and eliminated like animals the day before would unsettle the German officers, and weaken
their resolve to put themselves into that type of danger. The body count alone was not what
made the sniper an effective weapon, but the fear they introduced into the enemy. This doesn't
mean they lacked in sheer number of kills however, with ace snipers killing hundreds by
themselves.
Arguably the greatest Soviet sniper was a man called Vassili Zeitsev, and his fame rose
to near legendary status due to his participation in the battle of Stalingrad. Day and night he
stalked the ruins, hunting high value targets and killing them without quarter until he was
injured in combat. While injured, he continued to train new snipers to wreak havoc on the
Nazis. There is no question that Zeitsev played an important role in the battle, eliminating
officers and training other snipers in his craft. The snipers he trained went on to kill thousands
of Germans in the battle of Stalingrad, and his tactics are still used today by armies around the
world. Using an M91/30 Mosin-Nagant rifle with low power optics, Zeitsev greatly damaged
the German war effort. It should be noted that the psychological effect was the greatest attribute
4
http://www.mosinnagant.net/sniper%20section/snipertext1.asp
to his sniper tactics, and it becomes hard to separate soviet propaganda from the events that
actually occurred, including those recorded in Zeitsev's own memoir of his experience in
WWII. He was essentially the poster boy of the Soviet's Red army, demonstrating, according to
the soviets, the efficiency and patriotism of soviet citizens. This gave a morale boost to the
soviets and allies, as well as damaging the German war effort through a campaign of fear. It's
possible the effort caused the Germans to lose Stalingrad in the end. This effect propaganda can
have when combined with the actual threat of teams of snipers in a campaign can greatly
change the outcome of wars, and therefore how history played out. Using fear to their
advantage, Zeitsev's soldiers would run the ground as red as the soviet flag with German blood.
The snipers would move in teams of two, one with a rifle the other with a machine gun acting
as a spotter and devastate the enemy forces.
Zeitsev's expertise, no matter how propagandized by the Soviets remains an impressive
feat. How much is actually real and false is hard to say at times. Even according to Zeitsev his
feats were exaggerate. In his memoir, the great sniper details a famous sniper duel that has been
adapted to film more than once, the most recent being Enemy at the Gates. The aggrandized
story that infiltrated pop culture is a direct result of propaganda, and the psychological factor
snipers play in war. Much of Zeitsev's tactics, particularly his stalking and camouflage use
could be seen employed earlier by Lovat's scouts. The movie account shows a long sniper duel
in the shelled out backdrop of Stalingrad. Zeitsev does say he had a duel with the head of a
German sniper school, but it was very different than what was shown in theaters. 5According to
his memoirs, Zeitsev fought the German over three days after he began targeting Nazi troops
around a watering hole. The German sniper was sent from Berlin to kill Zeitsev, and Zeitsev
5 Zeitsev's memoirs
did emerge victorious. This was not in a shelled out city however, it was in grassy scrub lands
outside the city, but that would have made a much less interesting background for a sniper duel.
Though Zeitsev's feats were great, he was predated by another man using the MosinNagant who far surpassed him, and is by far the greatest sniper to ever live. During the Winter
War (1939-1940) between Finland and Russia, Simo Häyhä eliminated more than 500 Soviet
soldiers with his stolen Russian rifle. This amazing feat by one man truly did change the course
of the battle. Single handed, he killed 0.4% of all Soviet troops lost in the war, proving how
effective one man trained with a rifle can be. Like Zeitsev, Häyhä's greatest contribution was
the psychological effect upon the enemies forces. Simo Häyhä was so feared by the soviet
troops he gained the moniker “The White Death.” Häyhä's tactics differed greatly from
Zeitsev's, due in part to the much different theater of war. Where Zeitsev went into battle
supported by a spotter as well as other teams of snipers, the white death entered the woods
alone to stalk his intelligent quarry. He employed white camouflage, much as Zeitsev would do
later on with his drab city colored camouflage. One main tactic employed was to wait at a tree
line at the edge of open ground where the Russians were likely to cross. Häyhä would pack
down the snow to avoid it kicking up when his rifle fired, as well as keep snow in his mouth to
help conceal his breath. From this concealed position, the sniper would eliminate as many men
as possible before slipping away and disappearing into the trackless wilderness he knew so
well. In many ways Häyhä literally hunted men in the Finnish wilderness, the same way he
would hunt any other prey. These legendary snipers would pave the way for the advancement
of sniping weapons through advanced tactics and a need for a rifle to best fit the task at hand.
World War II would see the end of many things, and change the methods and dynamics
of warfare forever. One notable thing learned from the second world war was that most combat
took place at shorter ranges. This is the reason the soviets moved away from full sized rifle
rounds, to intermediate rounds as seen in the AK-47. This revelation also affected the
progression of sniper rifle development. Designs were moving away from precision slow firing
rifles, to accurate semi-automatics capable of rapidly engaging targets accurately at a few
hundred yards. This would see the advent of the idea of a “marksmen” rifle. Not considered a
true “sniper” rifle, the marksmen rifle is the evolution of the sniper weapon. The PSL fits into
this category. Before it was designed in Romania however, another rifle was developed and saw
even more widespread use then that variant. Drawing upon lessons learned from the SVT, and
the second world war Evgeniy Dragunov, a Soviet weapons engineer, first developed the SVD
in 1963 to try and meet the new needs of Soviet sniper tactics. SVD translates to snayperskaya
vintovka dragunova, meaning Dragunov's sniper rifle. This designation as a sniper rifle is only
half correct. As is true with the PSL, the SVD is actually a marksman’s rifle and is meant to
play a different role than a true sniper rifle. Many times people who mention a rifle's accuracy
will describe a highly accurate rifle as having the capability to leave one ragged hole in the
target. The marksmen rifle concept threw this idea away entirely. Accuracy was traded for the
ability to fire faster, meant for closer ranges, and would be supported by AK-47 wielding
soldiers. The idea was that each squad of men would have a marksmen capable of dealing with
certain targets that were out of the Kalashnikov's range. This was first introduced in a major
conflict during the Soviet war in Afghanistan in 1979, and is still being used by Russian forces
today.
The importance of an artifact in the broader sense includes why it exists, when it is from
and how it was developed. More narrowly is information regarding a specific artifact and
where that particular object came from, and why. It is difficult to discern when a specific PSL
was made, as many were put together from parts kits, or re-arseneled after military service. It's
easy to imagine where the rifles journey has led it over the years. It's possible it was used in the
Soviet's war in Afghanistan by the Romanian military. It's possible it was used by the
mujaheddin there as well against the soviets. First inspections of the rifle have several definite
factors to consider that can aid in tracing the rifle. First of
all is where it was manufactured. Many rifles of this type
found in America are parts kits attached to receivers made
in the United States, as it's much easier for importation that
way due to the laws put forth by the federal government.
The piece in my collection, was imported as a rifle, as it is
stamped “Made in Rumania, Cugir” meaning it is made at
the Cugir Arms Factory in Romania. This factory first
opened in 1799 and over the years was used by the British
to make Vickers machine guns, Germany in WWII with
Fig. 2
Herman Goering owning the shares in the factory, the Soviets during the cold war, and
eventually free to produce for themselves.6 There was a large issue with early models of this
rifle imported, as they had a sear safety the ATF deemed too close to a full-automatic fire
selector. This led to the recall of most early PSL's with ex-military receivers. The ones
imported later have custom made receivers lacking this extra safety feature the ATF foolishly
6 http://www.umcugir.ro/
misidentified. Even later models where built on U.S. Receivers and quality varies wildly. The
example from my collection was in the middle group, assembled in Romania with military
parts on a receiver built for export to the United States. The rifle was built in 1976 according to
the receiver.
There is more to this particular rifle that sets it apart from others built at the same time.
Many times the scopes were put on out of a crate, and none were matched to the rifles. The rifle
was tagged with a small piece of paper tied on with coarse thread, stating it had been sighted in
and tested for accuracy at the factory. The scope was also unique and retained some defining
features. The rear rubber eye cup meant to prevent the operator from hitting themselves in the
head or eye when firing had been removed. There was also a fair amount of dirt on the scopes
front optic covering. It appeared as a light high clay content soil. Where the rifle picked up this
dirt would need further analysis, but as it was received out of storage and had no previous
owner since the importer and Cugir factory, it can only mean the dirt was simply not cleaned
off when the scope was matched to the rifle. The scope has fairly low magnification compared
to more modern optics, at a mere 4.5x enhancement. This is more than adequate for it's
designated role as a marksmen rifle, however
today the Russian and Romanian militaries attach
variable scopes capable of greater magnification
to easier engage long range threats. At the time of
it's original design and production in the 70's it
was not feasible for the Soviets to mass produce
advanced optics for their rifles, so this scope is a
Fig 3.
result of limited manufacturing capabilities that plagued them at the time. Interestingly, to save
money on batteries the scope was illuminated with radioactive tritium. This caused the reticle
to glow. Today, the tritium has half-lifed to the point it is no longer glowing. The rifles
effectiveness was limited by these factors slightly by this as it is very difficult to see targets, let
alone hit them at the scopes furthest calibrated range of 1000 meters. With only 4.5x
magnification this would make the reticle completely cover a man sized target, making a shot
more guess work than anything else.7 The use of an inferior yet functional scope shows the
Soviet's lack of technical capabilities and how it affected them. In many ways the way the PSL
was designed reflects Soviet thinking.
The main concepts behind the PSL are functionality and simplicity. It's made to do a
specific task, and is only built using the minimal materials required. The Russian Dragunov
was built using a milled receiver, and there were several notable differences to the updated
design. A milled receiver means a solid forged block of steel was tooled in a large metal milling
machine to hollow out the inside. The PSL sought to change this, deeming it unnecessary and a
waste of valuable resources. The remedy that was introduced was the use of a flat piece of
metal being bent into the receiver shape, eliminating the need for machining. To combat the
weaker receiver, reinforcement pieces were added as well to the front and back of the stamped
piece of metal to deal with the 7.62x54r rifle's heavy recoil. Also as a means to reduce recoil, a
compensator was added, as well as a spring loaded mechanism on the stock to help absorb any
recoil away from the shooter. These adaptations made the weapon feel similar to an AK-47
when shot, even though the rifle is much more powerful.8 There were drawbacks to the cheaper
7 Field experience
8 Field experience
design. The stamped receivers can only handle light ball ammunition, and can't handle
extended use of heavier hunting rounds. This makes sense, as the light ball full metal jacket
ammunition was what was used by the military, not the hunting rounds, so really only affects
the surplus civilian aftermarket. The Soviet Union made things cheap, and practical, especially
in the military field. Elsewhere things were more on the cheap side, as the standards of living
under the Soviets was quite low. Again, the soviets only did what they needed, ever the
pragmatists. It did not matter that the average Soviet citizen was unhappy, as long as they had
the firepower to control them. Military goods are, as a rule much higher quality than the things
produced for civilians under the U.S.S.R.'s leadership.
The advent and expansion of the Soviet state changed many things in Russia. Private
property was no more. The state controlled everything, from the manufacturing process to what
is manufactured. This led to a drastic drop in the quality and amount of goods made, as instead
of allowing supply and demand to decide prices and amounts of goods, there were simply
bureaucrats deciding what would be made and how much of it to make. This system clearly did
not work. This demonstrates another way the Soviet Union differed in every way from the
West. This East-West struggle would shape the world in many other ways as well.
The cold war was a very complex and destructive time in the history of mankind. It
was a time of conflict between the two most powerful empires to blight the earth thus far. Upon
the close of WWII, with the Nazis defeated the allied powers turned their attention to the everlooming threat of the communist Soviet Union, however the cold war really started in WWI
with the allied attempt to overthrow the fledgling state. The bitter animosity felt between the
eastern and western nations would never completely recede from that point on and continues
today. The Cold War started over this feeling of ill will, and a fear that communism would
swallow the world into a thousand years of darkness, matched with a drive to bring about an
idealistic pipe-dream that culminated in the elliptical service of malnourished slaves working
towards this perceived higher form of human existence. This idea of a classless society
proposed originally by a German named Marx brought staggering death and destruction down
upon those who strove for this unreachable utopia. The western world feared the soviets would
succeed in drawing the entire world under the yoke of communism. Of the many ways of
combating the rising tide of communism, the use of Proxy wars was perhaps the most
destructive. It was in these wars, and out of these wars the PSL was born. President Truman
established a doctrine of containment towards the soviets in 19479, which further rattled the
already shaky relations with their former ally. Truman’s doctrine would lead to a policy of
containment at all costs. Although called a cold war because of the lack of war between the two
powers directly, this period did experience the ending of countless lives in dozens of so called
proxy wars. These wars, such as Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan were the battlefields of
power during the cold war. The damning effects of these wars are still reverberating through
the gathered psyche of the populace of both the United States and the former Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics. These series of wars from just post WWII up until the late 80’s were the
superpowers’ way of damaging each other indirectly by backing their rival’s opposition. Both
parties used this method because of a fear that full out war between them would undoubtedly
turn nuclear, and the end of the world as we know it would be upon them.
The entire concept of a cold war is a peculiar invention of man. The idea that you can
even go about the undertaking of such a war is not entirely sound reasoning, because the entire
idea is an oxymoron. War is war, period. However, this gray war where neither party fights
9 Worldbook
each other directly needed another way to flex their military muscle besides open bloody
warfare. The way to take up this fight was through the use of proxy wars. Neither power fought
each other directly; at times they just aided their preferred side and never expended any actual
manpower on location of the theater, besides some covert operatives from the CIA of course. In
this way the technical criteria of a cold war was met. The use of proxy wars was a prolific
factor in the cold war era, and played an important role in the course of history. As horrific as
these wars could be, they were far more appealing to either countries’ leadership than an all-out
total war. The fact remained that both powers had in their arsenal enough nuclear weapons to
annihilate the entire populous of the world several times over. Avoiding mutually assured
destruction was high on the priority list of Soviet and American politicians alike. This gutwrenching phobia of an imminent nuclear holocaust kept the superpowers from ever escalating
into a war with each other, although on a number of occasions we came within two minutes till
midnight on the dooms day clock. These proxy wars fought throughout the globe and
throughout time were some of the most Ill reasoned conflicts in recorded history. Neither side
really ever won a single conflict, and they tended to be just massive sinkholes of wasted
currencies and shortened lives. The utter hatred between the Soviet Union and the United
States, combined with their fear of obliteration fanned the flames of cold war conflicts.
The first proxy war started just at the close of the Second World War. It involved the
rival aiding of the incumbent Greek government and Greek communist revolutionaries. This
war lasted from 1946 until 1949. The United Kingdom and the United States thought it was in
their best interest to prevent a communist takeover of the Greek government. Lined up against
them were the Democratic Army of Greece, the military apparatus of the Greek communist
party. The communists received monetary backing and arms from Albania, Yugoslavia, and
Bulgaria, all Soviet client states. This war marked the beginning of a long and winding path of
cold war proxy conflicts. Much like the other proxy wars, the conflict in Greece was an attempt
to overtly express military power in an attempt to see if the other would flinch. At the wars
close the government troops came out on top, and the dark cloak of communism was pulled off.
This loss was partially because of an ideological disagreement between Stalin and the
Yugoslavian leader Josip Tito. After Yugoslavia cut off aid Albania followed suit, ending the
Greek communists supply train with the soviet satellites. This war would be akin to several
future conflicts such as the various communist revolutions in the South American countries,
and also conflicts in Africa. Without any way of getting supplies the pro-communist
revolutionaries’ war machine came to a grinding halt. Although this early victory prevented the
spread of communism into Greece, it prophesied the many hard fought proxy wars to follow
during the cold war.
The Korean War was a prime example of a proxy war. Due to a failure to
restructure the countries post-world war II adequately the nations convened to split Korea,
among others, into two separate countries. Korea was thus divided at the 38th parallel, with the
soviets influencing the north and supplying them with weapons and consultation.(Russia 558)
The allied powers controlled the southern dictatorship. In June 1950 the communist North
Korea invaded the United Nations backed south starting the first conflict that one of the nations
would be directly involved. Shortly after the invasion United Nations forces comprising mainly
of soldiers from the United States entered the conflict. Within two months the North Korean
forces pushed the United States and South Koreans to the very edge of the peninsula. In a
stunning counter attack the United Nations and the Americans pushed the Koreans past the 38th
parallel and all but annihilated the Korean forces. This spurred the entrance of the communist
Chinese into the picture. With Russian weapons and Chinese manpower numbering close to a
half a million the United States was forced to retreat. In the end the Korean War halted in
armistice officially in July 27, 1953. Although after the formation of the demilitarized zone
around the 38th parallel aggressions ceased between the two countries, the war technically
never ended and a temporary cease-fire is still in effect. The Korean War saw heavy aiding of
the North Korean forces. The soviets and the Chinese supplied untold amounts of weaponry to
the Koreans, from the venerable Avtomat Kalashnikov to T-34-84 heavy tanks. Supplying their
proxies with soviet manufactured armaments would become the norm in future proxy wars as
well.
Perhaps the most famous and controversial of the proxy wars was the conflict in a
seemingly insignificant country called Vietnam. Much like Korea, Vietnam was divided into a
communist north and capitalist south. Vietnam was a French colony until the 50’s when the
communist Viet Cong started a war against the French imperialism. Right from the start the
United States had military advisers on the ground. The official start of the war was on
November 1st 1955 and it lasted until April 30, 1975. After the French were defeated by the
northern communists the involvement of the United States in the war quickly escalated and by
1965 American combat forces were on the ground actively attempting to route the communist
north. This development was a continuation of the policy of containment the United States
issued regarding the communist states. America’s involvement in the war would rock the
American people and anti-war sentiments were abound. The Viet Cong fought the war against
the Americans using guerrilla tactics. The fighting was not what the United States soldiers were
trained for and they experienced heavy casualties at the hands of the Viet Cong. by the end of
the war the United States had lost approximately fifty eight thousand men. The Soviet Union
and the Chinese, never to miss a chance at indirectly slapping the United States heavily aided
the North Vietnamese. The soviets supplied the North Vietnamese with many AK-47s although
another less famous Russian rifle known as the SKS was distributed among the insurgents in a
greater supply. Among other soviet weapons provided were the much feared and prolific RPG7 rocket launcher, along with the RPD, RPK, and left over from the great patriotic war was the
PPSH sub machine gun and the Mosin Nagant sniper rifle. The Chinese not only produced
armaments for the NVA, but also sent limited numbers of troops to fight, although nowhere
near the amount sent during Korea. The Vietnam War would remain fresh in Americas mind for
many years to come, and the senseless nature of the war drew the ire of many Americans
during the years of the war. The fact that soviets aided the North Vietnamese also strained
relations further between the two super powers. The fact that Vietnam joined into a united
country just prior to the end of the war added salt to the fresh wound of American society, and
drove the idiocy of the conflict home for many Americans.
The soviets also found themselves on the wrong side of a proxy war, in December of 1979
during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. In this nine year war the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics fought to keep the socialist government of Afghanistan in power. The troubles that
faced the soviets in this conflict were very similar to the ones facing America in Vietnam. The
roles that were played in Vietnam were essentially flipped with the United States backing the
guerrilla fighters known as the mujahedin. These were the indigenous peoples who lived in the
mountains. The United States provided them with funding, training, and armaments particularly
the stinger missile systems that claimed a number of Soviet helicopters. Without the foreign
intervention in the form of aid, the rural mountain people would have been heavily out manned
and vastly outgunned. Oddly enough due to worsening relations between the Soviet Union and
the People’s Republic of China, the Chinese gave aid to the anti-communist guerrillas. The war
claimed the lives of one hundred and fifteen thousand soviet troops. The aiding by the United
States and others would not necessarily be worth it as they would later discover. The plan to aid
the mujahedin to fight the Russians worked only in the short term. As it turned out the aided
guerillas were not only against their benefactors, they down right abhorred them. One of the
leaders of the guerrillas that we so carelessly provided with advanced weaponry and training
happened to be the now infamous Osama bin laden who would later orchestrate his once
united states backed guerrilla group, to attack the world trade center. The folly of aiding the
likes of Osama bin laden was the principal that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This
harmful assumption is seldom true. Using one force that hates you will only lead them towards
war with you after they defeat their current adversary. The SVD and PSL would become a
permanent part of the region after this conflict, and is still used today by both sides fighting.
Another small scale proxy operation occurred at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. The soviets
had aided a pro communist revolution in Cuba just south of the United States. With so obvious
a threat so close to the mainland the United States was bound to take action. The course of
action was to train exiled Cubans to try and overthrow Cuba’s newly established communist
government. This endeavor was destined to fail miserably. Though the CIA did their best to
train the some fifteen hundred exiles they were far outnumbered by the Cuban governments
combined army, militia and police forces. After three days of fighting the invading forces were
all either killed or captured. Had this mission garnered more success it could have prevented
one of the closest times to full scale nuclear war during the Cold War. If the soviets didn’t
control Cuba there wouldn’t have been a Cuban missile crisis.
The use of proxy wars by both the Soviet Union and the United States and certain allies
could easily be viewed as successful, and equally easily viewed as utter failures. Though these
wars did contribute in some sense to the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on
December 25, 1991, and perhaps the collapse of the United States yet to come, they will
ultimately act as a footnote of factors leading to the demise of either super power. The wars
tended to accomplish nothing but depleting population numbers and fueling hatred from those
around the world exploited as tools of destruction by either power. The damage wrought to
either country ultimately created a stupefied populous, who embrace ideas once considered
unfathomable, because of a sense that those who opposed communism exploited people to fight
them, and in the end fractured it’s youth into anti-capitalist zombies whose only want is to try
out the system of government so demonized by their disenfranchised leaders of the past.
The Cold War had a huge effect on weapons technology due to the manner the two
world powers played off each other to gain the upper hand in any hypothetical hot war, would
result in many new and more deadly weapons of war. Each side had to try to create the better
weapon, the better tactic, the better strategy. This would lead to the creation of the PSL, and the
sniper tactics employed when it was fielded. Over the years many things changed, but in the
end ideology would be what ended the cold war, and not the weapons developed during it. That
isn't to say they still have a place in today's version of proxy wars. The PSL as an object from
history perfectly illustrates the time when it was created. It was created to fight a specific role,
against a specific threat, and could only come about through a specific set of ideas. Sniper rifles
have heavily influenced the battlefield since WWI, and the PSL is by some standards the most
versatile, serviceable weapon produced. It demonstrates perfectly how Material Culture can be
used to glimpse into the past more than text. To read about the armaments developed during the
cold war is one thing. To feel the cold hard steel and run your hand along the stock, and to feel
the concussion from the compensator is taking history to an entire different level. Whatever the
stance on rifles and other weaponry, it cannot be denied that they carry an important weight of
history with them. The fact that a sniper rifle can individually change history makes them
second only to the atom bomb in significance.
Bibliography
1. Westad, O. A. (2005). The global Cold War: third world interventions and the making of our
times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Dragunov dot net - Russian Dragunov, Tigr, Norinco NDM-86, and Romanian PSL Sniper
Rifle Headquarters.. (n.d.). Dragunov dot net - Russian Dragunov, Tigr, Norinco NDM-86, and
Romanian PSL Sniper Rifle Headquarters.. Retrieved March 12, 2014, from
http://dragunov.net/
3. http://www.mosinnagant.net/sniper%20section/snipertext1.asp
4. Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., and Mark D. Steinberg. A History of Russia. Vol. 2. New York: Oxford
UP, 2011. Print.
5. "Historical Maps." The World Book Encyclopedia. Vol. 3. Chicago: World Book, 1998. Print.
6. PSL 54C rifle
Images:
Fig 1. : Afghani soldier being trained by U.S. marines on the use of the PSL,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Afghan_National_Army_and_US_Marine
s_training.jpg
Fig 2. : PSL-54C rifle,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/DCB_Shooting_Romanian_PSL_1.jpg
Fig 3. : Reticle detail of PSO-1 Scope,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/PSO-1_reticle_Romanian_2.JPG