Klingon-Cardassian War

[jmampilly]

In DS9, we saw a Klingon-Cardassian war play out. Regardless of how it started, it was an interesting concept.

I got the impression that the Klingon-Cardassian war was of similar scale to the Klingons as was the second US-Iraq war in 2008. It seemed to be a relatively easily operation for the Klingons, one which they completed with minimal casaulties. However, Worf gave a different impression, when he told Chancellor Gowron that the Empire was not strong enough to wage war against both the Cardassians and the Federation.

What do you think? Speculate on the scope of a Klingon-Cardassian war, and how it might have played out.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

I believe that you are conflating two phases of the same war. Worf's comment referenced the first, in which Gowron wanted to take over Cardassia entirely, but also was fighting against the Federation protection of Cardassia. Once that passed, Gowron refused to give up already annexed territory--colonies of Cardassia. The remained of the war was over those colonies without being directly concerned with the takeover of Cardassia. Essentially, the conflict devolved into a smaller war.

 

[Timo]

We might argue that space warfare heavily favors the fortified defender (as we see how easily orbital fortresses cut to pieces a mighty fleet of hundreds of starships), and therefore the decision to attack is a grave one, but once a successful capturing of enemy turf is completed, there's virtually zero fear of any counterstrikes from the weakened enemy tying down one's starships, and the armada can move on to further conquests.

Or then this type of fighting favors the attacker, who has all the universe to surprise the opponent with, and therefore a daring offensive can be undertaken relatively lightly but any commitment to a war in which the enemy has a chance to strike back has to be pondered with utmost care.

The Klingon attack against Cardassia alone seemed to proceed nicely as long as there was an element of surprise, but the warning Sisko gave to Garak seemed to completely derail Klingon plans of conquering the entire Union and capturing the homeworld. That doesn't fit either of the above models as such, but it does suggest that the war proceeded much like the German offensive against France in WWI: a plan developed over decades and honed down to the last detail achieves almost complete success against a well-prepared enemy, until stumbling at the last mile, after which there's no point in pressing on. Except the Klingons realized they needed to quit while ahead, whereas neither the Germans nor the French did...

The "Second Gulf War" thing rings true in that this is indeed Round Two, apparently: there was that older nastiness at the Betreka Nebula 18 years prior.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Bashir Trikona]

The Cardies probably put up more of a fight than Saddam's minions.

 

[Timo]

They'd be motivated, I guess. It's their home turf they would be defending, as far as we know, and not some worthless desert or recently conquered foreign lands. (Funnily enough, while we know Cardassians conquer and subjugate and are proud of it, Bajor is the only "foreign" planet known to have fallen under the rule of the Union, and Bajorans the only known subjugated species.)

We might again refer to the history of the conflicts, and consider that the war between CU and UFP took place between the last Klingon nastiness at Betreka and this one. Of the old Federation war, we know that Cardassian starship weaponry was completely impotent (see "The Wounded") and that everything down to Bajor, Cardassia Prime's immediate next-door neighbor, was apparently "liberated" because in early DS9 it is neutral space, not Cardassian space. Perhaps the defensive strategies of the Union were blasted to pieces by these huge territorial losses, affecting the second Klingon war? It is rather scary to think that the entire Klingon armada struck without a warning from a star system right next to the homeworld!

Which incidentally means that the dialogue about "stiffening resistance" can be interpreted in two ways.

a) The Klingons did not dare attack the heavily fortified home system directly, but grabbed outlying systems one after another until Cardassian resistance put a halt to that.
b) The Klingons fought inside the home system for several days, at first making good progress and then having to slow down and finally stopping.

The latter sounds odd. Why would the capture of two or three outer planets in a single star system be considered "good progress"? And if this is what the Klingons did achieve, wouldn't it follow that at the conclusion of the fighting, they would still be holding planets in the Cardassian home system, and fortifying those?

But the former sounds odd, too. If the intent or at least excuse was to remove Founders from Cardassia, why not strike at the home system with full force? Why snipe at incidental systems left and right?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The beginning of World War One is a better analogy. The German offensive worked so long as its progress was unimpeded. Once the soldiers were entrenched, it made more sense to shift resources to the eastern front, even though they were geographically close to Paris.

 

[Timo]

Basically, once the taking of Paris failed, Germany should have vied for peace - everything was already completely lost.

The reason Germany invaded France in the first place was to make it possible to send all German troops to Russia ASAP. A quick crushing of Paris would accomplish that, removing the danger of French troops from what Germany considered an unimportant sideshow front, so that redeployment of all forces to Russia could be accomplished before the Czar got his act together.

Of course, France would have been too stubborn to agree to peace, even if Germany decided to surrender all its territorial gains and throw in a hefty bribe (say, some German cities in the west that the Kaiser could do without).

In a related matter, France probably wouldn't have been defeated in WWI so badly had the nation surrendered to the Germans immediately. A brief German occupation would have been of little practical significance to either of the nations! In geopolitical terms, it would have cost France prestige, and France's allies would have suffered physically, but France would not have been bled white. (And Russia wouldn't have been bled red - it would have been forced to quit the war and leave the Balkans to Germany long before any leftist revolution!)

Hindsight is easy, but it seems military and national leaders in the 1910s were blind as bats...

In contrast, the Klingon offensive against Cardassia comes off as a masterpiece of planning. Win or lose, it made Gowron an undisputed military leader; it raised the stocks of the Empire in the eyes of everybody else but the UFP; and the only folks antagonized by it were known to be way too wussy to carry grudges. Digging in afterwards was strategically advantageous and easy, too - no fear of trench warfare there.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Basically, once the taking of Paris failed, Germany should have vied for peace - everything was already completely lost.

The reason Germany invaded France in the first place was to make it possible to send all German troops to Russia ASAP. A quick crushing of Paris would accomplish that, removing the danger of French troops from what Germany considered an unimportant sideshow front, so that redeployment of all forces to Russia could be accomplished before the Czar got his act together.

Yes, and what happened when the German forces lost mobility in France? They became entrenched, and shifted to a largely defensive war. The point is not whether or not the initial instincts of the German (really, Prussian) general staff were correct, but what to do once the character of the war shifted against the Schlieffen Plan.

I'll ignore the other historical errors as they are off topic, but there are plenty of books that explain what the German public and German industrialists would have done to France in defeat.

 

[jmampilly]

It seems clear that the Cardassians are somewhat more powerful than the impression we got from TNG. Worf said the Klingon Empire wasn't strong enough to fight both the Cardassians and the Federation, and since the Federation is certainly able to take the Klingons by itself, the fact that Cardassia was even worth mentioning indicates that the Union is in fact a significant power within Star Trek.

Based on what we know from TNG/DS9, it seems that the Cardassians would be a moderately powerful species naturally. Since they dump so much resources into military interests, they become a disproportionately powerful entity.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Here's a theory I have, based on what I've see on the shows.

The Klingons must have had a pretty massive military. They stockpile their weapons and ships for decades and the result is a military that can fight the Federation for 20 years until Starfleet lost half their fleet to them.

Their territory is a relatively smaller size, but with a large military.

The Cardassians seemed like a limited power that carved out their own empire in a particular region.

What kept them so limited was the poor resources that made them lag behind the other 'big three'.

It was their potential that set them apart. They seem to have a good head for things like order, organization and logistics. They have scientific, trading and industrial bases.

If they had the resources the other powers had, and a technological head-start like the Federation had, they would be a dangerous first world power.

I think this is why on the show, some Cardassians believed they were destined to be the leaders of the Alpha Quadrant.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Speculation aside, we have been shown in both TNG and DS9 that the Cardassian military apparatus was heavily involved in the administration and protection of colonies and annexed territory. It's reasonable that shifting to a total war against a major power would take time--not easy when faced with a surprise attack. It was a situation Britain faced several times. The withdrawal of Klingon resources to capture the Detapa council gave them that time to mobilize.

 

[Bashir Trikona]

Bajor is the only "foreign" planet known to have fallen under the rule of the Union, and Bajorans the only known subjugated species.)

Never conquered anything during the Talarian Wars?

 

[Timo]

The point is not whether or not the initial instincts of the German (really, Prussian) general staff were correct, but what to do once the character of the war shifted against the Schlieffen Plan.

And? The two options were to keep on fighting France, and to stop fighting France. Neither option had been studied in advance, but both could have made tactical or political sense as per precedent.

The Klingon operation doesn't seem to have any of the characteristics of the Schlieffen plan, really: it's not a means of eliminating a player so that one can move on, it's not time-critical or resources-stretching, it isn't part of a broader scheduled campaign. There isn't even a von Moltke to mess it up, just some timely counterintelligence.

Worf said the Klingon Empire wasn't strong enough to fight both the Cardassians and the Federation, and since the Federation is certainly able to take the Klingons by itself, the fact that Cardassia was even worth mentioning indicates that the Union is in fact a significant power within Star Trek.

How so? Cardassia gets a mention because it's right there, the focus of the events. It doesn't need justification beyond that.

Cardassia is significant as the de facto guardian of the wormhole region (at least until the Federation really moves in), and as an old foe of the Empire. These are reasons enough for the attack, and apparently the only reasons. Cardassia being a significant military force is not a prerequisite.

Speculation aside, we have been shown in both TNG and DS9 that the Cardassian military apparatus was heavily involved in the administration and protection of colonies and annexed territory.

Only insofar as the colonies and territories were of interest to our heroes. Cardassians were involved at Bajor, but it doesn't follow that they would have been similarly involved anywhere else, and even Bajor was dropped like a soft and smelly tomato right before the wormhole was discovered. Cardassians were involved at the Demilitarized Zone, but it doesn't follow that they would not have had any forces left over for other projects - indeed, "Chain of Command" sort of proves the opposite.

As long as we hear of no other subject species besides Bajorans, we don't have to assume any need for colonial patrolling, British Empire style, either. All the other Cardassian Union worlds we saw or heard of were either inhabited by Cardassians, uninhabited save for Cardassian outposts, or left undescribed in terms of population and significance.

We might rather say the Klingons were the ones facing the problem of shifting their forces from full-time subjugation ("Mind's Eye" style) and proxy wars masquerading as civil unrest ("Redemption") to conquest. And the Klingon-Cardassian war need not have been part of the problem, but rather its solution: invade a weak enemy to regain the impetus of conquest and solidify the position of the leadership (and to cull the weak and the politically inconvenient).

Never conquered anything during the Talarian Wars?

Hmh? I'm sure the Union could have been conquering planets left and right during the Talarian, Erselrope and Punic wars. It's just that we never explicitly heard of any such thing (besides Bajor) in TNG or DS9 or VOY or the movies. Or ENT, for that matter.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ethros]

The "Second Gulf War" thing rings true in that this is indeed Round Two, apparently: there was that older nastiness at the Betreka Nebula 18 years prior.

Just to clarify, the Betreka Nebula Incident wasn't 18 years prior to when it was mentioned (2372- Way of the Warrior) it was said to have lasted 18 years.
The actual date was just said to be "ages ago" by Garak.


Although the (brilliant) Trek novel The Art of the Impossible has it from 2328-2346.

As the author noted there were 18 years between key events in 24th Century Klingon & Cardassian histories.
2328- when the Cardassians conquer Bajor
2346- construction of Terok Nor, and the attack on Khitomer

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The point is not whether or not the initial instincts of the German (really, Prussian) general staff were correct, but what to do once the character of the war shifted against the Schlieffen Plan.

And? The two options were to keep on fighting France, and to stop fighting France. Neither option had been studied in advance, but both could have made tactical or political sense as per precedent.

The Klingon operation doesn't seem to have any of the characteristics of the Schlieffen plan, really: it's not a means of eliminating a player so that one can move on, it's not time-critical or resources-stretching, it isn't part of a broader scheduled campaign. There isn't even a von Moltke to mess it up, just some timely counterintelligence.

It is but one example--one I believe many will be familiar with--in which the character of the war changed as one side or other lost mobility. The stalling of the offensive in France produced a situation in which the originally successful advance was impossible to recapture. Obviously, no wars, historical or fictional are the same, but many provide similar examples. There are few wars that have one phase, that begin and end with the same thrust. Even the Iraq War could be described in phases despite the fact that the territory was captured in weeks. Obviously, the answer to the guerilla/terror phase was not putting more effort into invasion.

Only insofar as the colonies and territories were of interest to our heroes. Cardassians were involved at Bajor, but it doesn't follow that they would have been similarly involved anywhere else, and even Bajor was dropped like a soft and smelly tomato right before the wormhole was discovered. Cardassians were involved at the Demilitarized Zone, but it doesn't follow that they would not have had any forces left over for other projects - indeed, "Chain of Command" sort of proves the opposite.

According to Gul Madred: " But we are feeding the people. We acquired territory during the wars. We developed new resources. We initiated a rebuilding programme. We have mandated agricultural programmes. That is what the military has done for Cardassia. And because of that, my daughter will never worry about going hungry. " The writers intended for us to understand Cardassian politics and administration were under the control of the military (albeit with some influence from public and intelligence service). What we see in Journey's End and in DS9 episodes (Cardassians, Destiny, among others) completely reflects that.

 

[jmampilly]

Worf said the Klingon Empire wasn't strong enough to fight both the Cardassians and the Federation, and since the Federation is certainly able to take the Klingons by itself, the fact that Cardassia was even worth mentioning indicates that the Union is in fact a significant power within Star Trek.

How so? Cardassia gets a mention because it's right there, the focus of the events. It doesn't need justification beyond that.

Cardassia is significant as the de facto guardian of the wormhole region (at least until the Federation really moves in), and as an old foe of the Empire. These are reasons enough for the attack, and apparently the only reasons. Cardassia being a significant military force is not a prerequisite.



Timo Saloniemi

What I was discussing is the manner in which Cardassia was introduced. Although Cardassia is certainly at the center of things and worth nothing, how Worf introduces the Klingon enemy is very relevant. If Cardassia were not of military significance, then Worf would have said something like this: "A war between the Klingon Empire and the Federation would be very costly. The Cardassian issue certainly doesn't help." Because he said specifically that the Empire cannot take on both Cardassia and the UFP, rather than simply mentioning them as an aside, it is clear that Cardassia is militarily worth noting.

 

[Timo]

I can see what you mean, but I cannot agree. The context just doesn't bear this out. The war with the Union is a done deal there, the very reason the argument is being voiced out at all, and failing to mention the Cardassian role would be odd.

Sisko to Gowron: "My shields are holding, your boarding parties are contained, and my reinforcements are closer than yours. You're facing a war on two fronts. Is that what you really want?"
Worf to Gowron: "The Empire is not strong enough to fight the Federation and the Cardassians. End this now, Gowron, before you lead the Empire to its worst defeat in history!"

Clearly, the Empire is strong enough to fight the Union. Just as clearly, it isn't strong enough to fight the Federation, under any circumstances. What Worf is suggesting is avoiding a war with the Federation so that the war with the Union can continue, an argument Gowron is likely to buy; a strong Union isn't a factor in such an argument.

Outside "Way of the Warrior", everything suggests Cardassia is an underdog, with impotent technology and little pull in politics. Heck, even the Ferengi are considered more of a factor when our TNG heroes discuss the dangers of various crises escalating! That Gowron could fight the Union at the Union's home field while himself separated from home by such distance that he has to rely on the UFP for rest and resupply (at the staggering cost of strategic surprise) is another sign of the Union being a relative featherweight.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Timo]

Just to clarify, the Betreka Nebula Incident wasn't 18 years prior to when it was mentioned (2372- Way of the Warrior) it was said to have lasted 18 years.
The actual date was just said to be "ages ago" by Garak.

Ah, right. But later on, Bashir refers to this conflict putting an end to "two decades of peace". He must be speaking of peace between Cardassia and the Klingons, as the only other alternative, peace between Klingons and the Federation, does not conform to such an estimate. Ergo, Betreka ended (roughly) 20 years before "Way of the Warrior". Which is why Keith DeCandido might have done better by shifting the dates forward by five years...

(I mean, there could have been conflict beyond Betreka, justifying the 2328-46 dates for that, but the novel has 46 as the end of all open conflict, which doesn't mesh with what Bashir is saying.)

It is but one example--one I believe many will be familiar with--in which the character of the war changed as one side or other lost mobility.

Granted. Although as I already wondered, the loss of mobility at the very last mile is something of a mystery. Would "mobility" really have been a factor if the Empire was already pounding on the very door of the Cardassian home system? Why would the last few astronomical units be a mobility problem, as opposed to a much more fundamental problem with defeating the enemy's fighting units wherever they stood or moved?

The writers intended for us to understand Cardassian politics and administration were under the control of the military (albeit with some influence from public and intelligence service). What we see in Journey's End and in DS9 episodes (Cardassians, Destiny, among others) completely reflects that.

Certainly so. But this evidence appears to support an ongoing campaign of conquest, considering that even the supposedly rich Bajor was already mined out, rather than a "complacent" empire content on patrolling against native uprisings while exploiting colonial wealth. In essence, more like Rome expanding in order to survive than Britain deploying armored cars in order to slowly sap the riches of India.

Heck, the need to conquer more was so desperate that the Union was ready to invade the Federation, the supposed strongest player in the show! Or alternately the Union was so well off that it could spare an invasion fleet for antagonizing the Feds... Whichever way, the evidence of "Chain of Command" seems difficult to dodge: Cardassia did not have difficulty in mobilizing a force of considerable freedom of movement. And while it had to withdraw said force, it wasn't indicated to be forced to disband it; conquest in other directions might still continue, or might be restarted once the Central Command recovered from the humiliation and again gained the upper hand over the Detapa folks.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ethros]

Just to clarify, the Betreka Nebula Incident wasn't 18 years prior to when it was mentioned (2372- Way of the Warrior) it was said to have lasted 18 years.
The actual date was just said to be "ages ago" by Garak.

Ah, right. But later on, Bashir refers to this conflict putting an end to "two decades of peace". He must be speaking of peace between Cardassia and the Klingons, as the only other alternative, peace between Klingons and the Federation, does not conform to such an estimate. Ergo, Betreka ended (roughly) 20 years before "Way of the Warrior". Which is why Keith DeCandido might have done better by shifting the dates forward by five years...

(I mean, there could have been conflict beyond Betreka, justifying the 2328-46 dates for that, but the novel has 46 as the end of all open conflict, which doesn't mesh with what Bashir is saying.)

I'd agree the "two decades" is odd, but it could refer to the UFP and Klingons.
Because as seen with Yesterday's Enterprise, with or without the 2293 Khitomer Accords, without the Enterprise-C Narenda III incident they wouldn't have made any difference anyway.

So maybe he meant real peace. That was in 2344, and then maybe after the Federation helped them with the Khitomer attack in 2346 it was then that real peace and cooperation was established. So I suppose the two decades he meant could have been the 2350's and 60's.


Insurrection did mention the Second Khitomer Accords, but never when they were. Maybe they were sometime around the late 2340s, early 2350's?
And also Castillo says in Yesterday's Enterprise "we were negotiating a peace treaty when I left" so I guess that could possibly have something to do with it.

 

[jmampilly]

I can see what you mean, but I cannot agree. The context just doesn't bear this out. The war with the Union is a done deal there, the very reason the argument is being voiced out at all, and failing to mention the Cardassian role would be odd.

Sisko to Gowron: "My shields are holding, your boarding parties are contained, and my reinforcements are closer than yours. You're facing a war on two fronts. Is that what you really want?"
Worf to Gowron: "The Empire is not strong enough to fight the Federation and the Cardassians. End this now, Gowron, before you lead the Empire to its worst defeat in history!"

Clearly, the Empire is strong enough to fight the Union. Just as clearly, it isn't strong enough to fight the Federation, under any circumstances. What Worf is suggesting is avoiding a war with the Federation so that the war with the Union can continue, an argument Gowron is likely to buy; a strong Union isn't a factor in such an argument.

Outside "Way of the Warrior", everything suggests Cardassia is an underdog, with impotent technology and little pull in politics. Heck, even the Ferengi are considered more of a factor when our TNG heroes discuss the dangers of various crises escalating! That Gowron could fight the Union at the Union's home field while himself separated from home by such distance that he has to rely on the UFP for rest and resupply (at the staggering cost of strategic surprise) is another sign of the Union being a relative featherweight.

Timo Saloniemi

I concede. I believe you are right.

However, I am somewhat confused on the sequence of events in the war. Did the Klingons take Cardassia? Because, if so, it was indeed a brief and somewhat casualty-free war. If not, indeed the Cardassians put up some form of significant resistance.