Federation-Cardassian War(s)

[Herbert1]

Has anyone explored the Federation-Cardassian War(s)?

We know that the Setlik III massacre occurred in 2347. The period from 2355 until 2359 was considered to be the height of the conflict according to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual. A cease fire was agreed to in 2366 and a peace treaty was signed in 2370. Star Trek: The Next Generation begins in 2364. It didn't seem like the Federation was at war when the series started.

USS Enterprise NCC-1701-C was lost in 2344.

So what do you believe that the nature of the conflict was? Thoughts?

 

[Herbert1]

Postscript:

Or did the Setlik III massacre occur in 2362 as established in DS9 "Tribunal"?

 

[T'Girl]

Memory Alpha says 2347, so 2347 is probably the wrong year.

The United Federation of Planets and the Cardassian Union are two expansionist interstellar realms that were growing towards each other. the nature of the conflict between them is likely no more complex than that.

They both tried to grow into the same area of the galaxy, resulting in a war that lasted decades. And killed millions of their people.

 

[Sandoval]

Memory Alpha says 2347, so 2347 is probably the wrong year.

 

[Eckauskas]

I was wondering this.

If they were at war with each other for decades, it doesn't make sense to me that they weren't mentioned in TNG til later seasons (4 or 5?)

 

[Timo]

Why not? Neither Klingons nor Romulans were mentioned until they, well, were... One was the Federation's fiercest enemy and went into war with them during the teaser of the introductory episode, while the other was the Federation's old nemesis. Presumably, others in Starfleet employ dealt with these enemies before Kirk's introductory encounters with them. Similarly, skippers other than Picard took care of the Cardassian problem.

Or did the Setlik III massacre occur in 2362 as established in DS9 "Tribunal"?

Actually, the event mentioned in "Tribunal" was never considered a "massacre". It was merely a combat action at Setlik III. "Empok Nor" returns to a combat action at Setlik III where O'Brien served with distinction - an action involving regimentfuls of regular Cardassian troops whereas the massacre of '47 was the work of a small militia group. Also, O'Brien's force retreated from the '47 encounter, beaten, while O'Brien's force triumphed in the '62 clash, without any mention of retreat.

So what we probably have here (thanks to writer confusion) is a '47 act of small-scale terrorism, for which Cardassia officially apologizes, gradually leading into a more intense war that in '62 features infantry action at Setlik III.

Beyond this, all we know of the war is that Picard was sent to make overtures for truce with the Stargazer, thus in 2354 or earlier; this was probably in the early stages of the actual "hot" war, back when the Feds still thought the Cardassians would simply realize they were out of their league, while in fact they would continue a "bush war" well into the 2360s despite their grossly inferior starships.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Yevetha]

Was it a full-blown war or just some small border conflicts?

 

[Dukhat]

Why not? Neither Klingons nor Romulans were mentioned until they, well, were... One was the Federation's fiercest enemy and went into war with them during the teaser of the introductory episode, while the other was the Federation's old nemesis. Presumably, others in Starfleet employ dealt with these enemies before Kirk's introductory encounters with them. Similarly, skippers other than Picard took care of the Cardassian problem.

But the difference between the TOS Klingons/Romulans and the Cardassians is that the Klingons/Romulans were introduced fairly early in TOS season one, so there were only a few episodes before them. In contrast, the Cardassians weren't introduced until halfway through the fourth season of TNG. That's three-and-a-half years of an active conflict going on, and in all that time nobody even uttered the word "Cardassian."

Basically it just comes down to bad writing for a retcon. They should have said that the Cardassian peace treaty had been signed many years ago and no one heard a peep out of them since until Maxwell started firing on their ships.

Actually, the event mentioned in "Tribunal" was never considered a "massacre". It was merely a combat action at Setlik III. "Empok Nor" returns to a combat action at Setlik III where O'Brien served with distinction - an action involving regimentfuls of regular Cardassian troops whereas the massacre of '47 was the work of a small militia group. Also, O'Brien's force retreated from the '47 encounter, beaten, while O'Brien's force triumphed in the '62 clash, without any mention of retreat.

So what we probably have here (thanks to writer confusion) is a '47 act of small-scale terrorism, for which Cardassia officially apologizes, gradually leading into a more intense war that in '62 features infantry action at Setlik III.

Beyond this, all we know of the war is that Picard was sent to make overtures for truce with the Stargazer, thus in 2354 or earlier; this was probably in the early stages of the actual "hot" war, back when the Feds still thought the Cardassians would simply realize they were out of their league, while in fact they would continue a "bush war" well into the 2360s despite their grossly inferior starships.

Do you by chance have the relevant script quotes to back up the possibility that there were two Setlik engagements and not one? I'm only asking because I had 2347 for the time the Rutledge was at Setlik, and I need to amend my starship construction timeline if that wasn't the case.

 

[Saito S]

Was it a full-blown war or just some small border conflicts?

A bit of both. Timo's summary, above, lines up well with what I've always thought happened.

I don't think there was ever any real possibility that the Cardassians would actually overwhelm Starfleet and force a UFP surrender or anything. Yet at the same time, the UFP had to feel as if they needed to talk this enemy down. My take has always been that the Cardassians initiated hostilities at just the right time. Technology moves in phases, and during that phase (the late 2340's), Starfleet's ships were sort of in transition. Starfleet was still relying on older classes for the most part, with few modern designs available (we see a repeat of this twenty years later, with Wolf 359). Even though older classes can clearly be upgraded to stand up to modern ships to a certain degree, Starfleet may have fallen behind even on that front, since (and this is the biggest reason for the war) they had been enjoying relative peace for quite some time. They had become lax, confident in their ability to talk their way out of conflicts (after all, the Klingons had been all but intractable a century earlier, and now we have an alliance with em!), and thus had let their military capabilities slip. This allowed the Cardassians to establish decent foothold into UFP territory, something that should never have been allowed to happen. That set the tone for the later conflict; despite being "brush wars" in scope, the UFP had to fight back from a position of having been invaded, while at the same time, hurrying to shore up their lackluster tactical capabilities. Their ships were likely still a match (or better) against Cardassian ships, one-on-one, but given their technology, they could have (and perhaps should have) had ships that could easily best Cardassians, one-on-one. In addition, with all that peace time, the continued success of negotiation for every problem, and just a bit of overconfidence, the tactical skill of Starfleet as a whole was likely rusty as well.

By the end of the 2350's, they had made improvements (at least enough to beat back the Cardies). However, the Cardassians, being extremely stubborn and having initially caught the UFP with their pants down, didn't back off, leaving the Feds with an enemy that - despite not being a major threat - was completely determined to press on no matter what. Not quite sure what to do with the awkward position they had been placed in, they continued to fight back against the Cardassians as necessary (this is when the conflicts were truly just "border wars", and explains why the "war" was still going, despite the relative calm - and lack of tactical missions - seen on early TNG: Starfleet did not feel the need to use their new flagship for what remained of this conflict), until finally, they were able to hammer out an agreement that officially ended all hostilities.

 

[Timo]

Do you by chance have the relevant script quotes to back up the possibility that there were two Setlik engagements and not one? I'm only asking because I had 2347 for the time the Rutledge was at Setlik, and I need to amend my starship construction timeline if that wasn't the case.

Do you need verification that the ship was at Setlik III in 2347 already, or that she wasn't there again in 2362?

It's a somewhat ambiguous affair.

In "The Wounded", we learn that the Setlik III massacre where O'Brien killed a single Cardassian militiaman took place when O'Brien served under Captain Maxwell. We also know that at some point, O'Brien served under Maxwell aboard the Rutledge specifically (Maxwell says: "This was my Tactical Officer on the Rutledge."). Nowhere in "The Wounded" is it made crystal clear, though, that Maxwell and O'Brien would have gone to Setlik III aboard the Rutledge specifically, and not aboard some other starship that Maxwell would have commanded. We don't have solid proof that the Rutledge would have been at Setlik during the old massacre, then. But we can speculate with reasonable credibility, because O'Brien was said to have served with Maxwell on the Rutledge specifically - no other ship was mentioned, so speculating on the existence of one is not mandatory.

"The Wounded" gives no cues as to when the Setlik III massacre took place. The later DS9 episode "Paradise" does make the claim, though, that this was the first time O'Brien operated a transporter. When we combine this with TNG "Realm of Fear" where O'Brien says he has operated the devices for 22 years, and assume that those are consecutive years, we get 2347 for the massacre. Complicated but so far completely consistent.

Now enter DS9 "Tribunal". Our heroes interrogate the agent pretending to be Raymond Boone, Rutledge veteran.

Sisko: "You left your wife about eight years ago. You'd been married a long time. Almost fifteen years, wasn't it?"
Cardassian masquerading as Boone: "Look, this is none of your business."
Sisko: "And about the same time you were discharged from Starfleet after failing several crew performance reviews."
Bashir: "All of it seemed to happen shortly after Setlik III."

Unless Bashir has weird ideas about "shortly after", this nails this particular Setlik III incident as having happened in 2362. On the other hand, nothing in this episode indicates that this Setlik III would have been a massacre of civilians, nor are there references to O'Brien first operating transporters or anything like that. Again, nothing directly confirms that the Rutledge would have been present at this "Second Setlik", but again we are told O'Brien and Boone served on that very ship (no others being mentioned) and also served together at Setlik, the incident that Boone specifically says caused him to leave Starfleet.

"Empok Nor" features Garak giving details of a Setlik III fight that looks and sounds quite dissimilar from the "The Wounded" incident. O'Brien is said to have ousted a whole regiment of regular Cardassian troops and killed dozens if not hundreds. Even if we put some of this to hyperbole, it's very different from an incident where O'Brien accidentally kills one Cardassian and is disgusted ("The Wounded"), then helps a besieged landing party evacuate via transporter ("Paradise").

So, I can't offer you quotes that would unambiguously confirm that the Rutledge was at Setlik III in 2347, or that she was/wasn't there in 2362. But indirect evidence, scattered over dozens of quotes from five separate episodes, points at the two dates for Setlik-related nastiness, and at the Rutledge under Maxwell being present at both.

(Although in theory, we could claim that Maxwell only got the ship several years after 2347, and it was at that point that his old underling O'Brien started serving aboard that ship as Tactical Officer!)

Is that realistic? Would the same ship under the same captain visit the same planet fifteen years apart, first to be defeated, then to partake in victory? Well, we know that Starfleet does keep specific captains associated with specific ships for great lengths of time, even if 15 years is stretching it a bit. We have also seen many underlings serve with the same COs for more than 15 years. And it's quite possible a given starship would have a given patrol area where she would spend most of her active career, some explorers and diplomatic shuttles notwithstanding.

Basically it just comes down to bad writing for a retcon.

I can't really agree. All Trek enemies pop out of nowhere, yet few of them are powerful enough to keep the entire Starfleet and Federation on their toes all the time. And it does seem the UFP is constantly at war with several bit players, be it declared or undeclared. "The Wounded" opens with an excellent scene to show why the Cardassian War would be a forgotten and ignored one: a vicious attack by their best warship goes almost unnoticed by our heroes!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

Thanks for the info, Timo. Basically when I wrote my timeline, I used the 2347 date for the Rutledge being at Setlik because that's what the Encyclopedia gave as the incident's date, but Herbert's addendum about the different 2362 date for the incident threw me off.

I think I'm going to keep the date for the Setlik incident (and the Rutledge being there) at 2347, because it makes the most sense to me with all of O'Brien's other backstory from TNG. The thing is, I really doubt there were two different Setlik incidents. I think that the writers simply didn't do their homework as far as "The Wounded" (and O'Brien's backstory with his history of the transporter) is concerned. So if I were to be the writer's apologists, I'd say that Bashir meant that there was some ruling or judgement about Setlik in 2362, even though the incident happened in 2347, and that's when Boone left Starfleet. And of course how do we even know when Garak is telling the truth, a lie, or an exaggeration?

 

[Timo]

Why would this planet not see military action on more than one occasion? "The Wounded" indicates that Cardassians believed the planet to be a staging point for an assault against them - or at least this was their justification for apparently sponsoring a militia attack against a smallish-sounding, non-military colony. The UFP apparently accepted a Cardassian apology based on this argument. So it seems quite plausible that Setlik III would become a staging point eventually, or that this possibility would motivate the Cardassians to further attacks.

The only thing stretching plausibility is that the same skipper would take his ship to the battle twice on the same location (dragging O'Brien with him both times, but that's not a stretch given known Starfleet practices about crew rotation or retention). But assign the Rutledge to a specific theater of operations because she isn't a wide-ranging explorer like the Enterprise (or assign Maxwell there because he isn't Picard), and you have removed the stretch.

FWIW, the novels feature a third battle at Setlik, this time in the Dominion War.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Nero's Shadow]

I know one thing about the cardassians they like losing wars !!! I sure there was not a full scale war with the Feds because of the many allies of the UFP. The conflict to me was over territory and resources hence the surprise attack on setlik III ?? IMAO

 

[Dukhat]

Why would this planet not see military action on more than one occasion?

I didn't say that the planet couldn't have seen action on more than one occasion. I said that the two references made about the planet's incident were probably referring to the same incident, despite the differences in years, because of bad writing.

 

[Bob Karo]

I always assumed that there were a number of border conflicts the Federation was fighting in the lead up to TNG. It seemed every other alien race of the weak that posed a threat to the Enterprise-D had a history of skirmishes in the last 20 years.

As far as the Massacre/battle/battles of Settlik III? It's possible one of the dates doesn't work out. I like the story in Seven Deadly Sins, personally. But it's not canon so it's really angels dancing on a pinhead.

 

[Timo]

I said that the two references made about the planet's incident were probably referring to the same incident, despite the differences in years, because of bad writing.

...Why does "two different descriptions" equal "bad writing"?

IMHO, that's good writing, giving us two pseudohistorical events for the price of one. Regardless of the details of these five episodes, we have O'Brien the young eloper-from-cello-lessons who has never killed, and we have O'Brien the old infantryman who has killed hundreds. Squeezing those two people into one day of action is possible, I guess, but not dramatically satisfactory.

I always assumed that there were a number of border conflicts the Federation was fighting in the lead up to TNG.

Or even events bigger than World Wars. After all, TOS had those, too: all of its bad guy cultures (as opposed to individual space monsters like Space Amoeba or Apollo or NOMAD, or cultures that ended up not being so bad after all) were "old" enemies, and the Romulans explicitly had a full-blown war with Earth under their belts.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

Why does "two different descriptions" equal "bad writing"?

Because I'm pretty sure the intent was that it was the same conflict, only the facts don't add up.