The Fourth Protocol War.

11th June 1988, Troywood, near Anstruther, Scotland.
Leading Observer Craig Archibald looked down at his RADIAC meter, taking the local radiation level. It had dropped to near background levels, which was a good sign; Troywood was regularly the recipient of fall-out from the city of Dundee and RAF Leuchars. A year on from the attack the radiation from the Soviet bombs was at last beginning to subside.

Once his observations had been taken Archibald walked back to the guardhouse, wondering why with all the sensors available a member of the Royal Observer Corps section attached to the Scottish Northern Zone H.Q was regularly sent out to take manual readings. The guardhouse itself was a standard ROTOR bungalow guardhouse; however no addition of local Scottish stone, a pitched roof, chimney and dormer window could really disguise what was in fact a steel-reinforced concrete box.

An hour after descending the seventy-five feet to the upper floor of the bunker Archibald was in his office collating the RADIAC readings from the last few days before he passed them on to the people in Emergency Government. There they would be added to the information coming in from the UK Warning and Monitoring Organisation, which itself gathered information from a large network of posts manned by the ROC, though after a year it was anyone’s guess how many were still manned.
Looking away from the decay curves he looked at the pile of newspapers lying on another desk in the office. Like everybody in the bunker, with the exception of the Northern Zone Commissioner and Deputy Regional Commissioner for Scotland, Ian Lang, MP, Archibald had two jobs. His secondary role was as an archivist; why he had been given this job he didn’t know, possibly it had something to do with his mother having been a librarian.
At the moment he didn’t have much to work with, just the newspapers the bunker staff had brought with them before the attack and a few more that military and police patrols had found and brought back. His ROC work had kept him very busy, but he had at least managed to get them into date order.
He glanced at the headline of The Scotsman from 1st June 1987, a different world now.

USAF Base destroyed by nuclear blast’.
‘The American base at RAF Bentwaters in Suffolk has been devastated by a nuclear explosion. Thousands of service personnel and local civilians are known to be dead and thousands more are being evacuated from the area to avoid the fall-out plume.
‘Emergency services from across the country are responding to this terrible tragedy….The Prime Minister has called for calm and has promised that there will be a full investigation into this ‘tragic accident’.’

Archibald could from memory recall that the next paper was a copy of The Courier; a Dundee based paper from a few days later.

Moscow invites Kinnock to discuss Nuclear Crisis.’
‘The Soviet leadership has invited Neil Kinnock to Moscow to discuss the present crisis which started three days ago when RAF Bentwaters and the surrounding area was devastated by an apparent accidental explosion of an American nuclear weapon.
‘The Soviets and many in Europe have been demanding that all American built nuclear weapons should be withdrawn from Europe to prevent further disasters of this sort from happening again.
‘When asked Kinnock stated that he felt that it would be ‘inappropriate’ for him to negotiate with the Soviets and that any unofficial diplomacy by him at this time could be ‘unhelpful’ to the efforts of the government at a very difficult time.
There is growing speculation that Kinnock and Margaret Thatcher may agree to the forthcoming General Election being postponed until the investigation into the RAF Bentwaters blast is finished.’

The next series of headlines only got worse and worse.

IAEA – RAF Bentwaters Blast was Soviet weapon.’ The Times.
‘An investigative time from the International Atomic Emergency Agency has stated in its report that the nuclear weapon that exploded last month at RAF Bentwaters was of Soviet origin. The plutonium in the weapon did not come from any American reactor, but contained isotopes from known Soviet weapons producing reactors.
‘A separate joint USAF-RAF investigation has determined that the Ground Zero of the explosion was in the village of Tunstall, just beyond the base perimeter, rather than in any area where nuclear weapons were stored. This and the fact that the Americans have managed to recover several nuclear weapons from the badly damaged base lends credence to the suggestion that it was not an American nuclear weapon that exploded.

Government knew of Soviet ‘bomb plot’. The Daily Telegraph.
‘In a surprise statement to the House of Commons the Home Secretary, Douglas Hurd, has revealed that the government was aware of Soviet attempts to smuggle a nuclear weapon into this country. MI5 had identified several couriers and had tracked down the location of bomb, which was being assembled by a KGB deep cover agent in the village of Tunstall, near RAF Bentwaters.
‘Hurd also revealed that just prior to the detonation a team from the SAS had stormed the house containing the bomb but tragically the agent had evidently been able to set off the weapon before he could be killed. The Home Secretary paid tribute to the SAS troopers, MI5 agents and police officers killed in the attempt to stop the explosion and condemned the Soviet Union for murdering thousands of innocent British citizens.’

Soviet government deny British government allegations.’ The Guardian.
‘Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev has denied allegations made in the House of Commons yesterday about the Bentwaters blast, calling them ‘vicious lies’.

*

That last headline especially stuck in Archibald’s memory. At the time the majority of the British media and the population itself had been sceptical in the extreme about Gorbachev’s denials. Ironically they were probably made in good faith as the ‘bomb plot’ had been carried out on the authority of KGB Chairman, General Govershin, who was apparently shot sometime before the final exchange.

Archibald didn’t like to think about the rest of the headlines. They charted the road to all out war and the end of the old world. The reasons behind the nuclear initiation at RAF Bentwaters became irrelevant as NATO and Warsaw Pact forces clashed wherever there was a common border.
Soviet use of nuclear weapons at sea soon lead to NATO retaliation in kind against Soviet warships, surface and submarine, and against Soviet naval bases. As soon as NATO nuclear weapons had initiated over Soviet soil the Soviet leadership had launched a major nuclear attack against NATO military and industrial targets.
Inevitably NATO had retaliated against similar targets in the USSR and Eastern Europe. There were no newspapers to chronicle this final phase of the conflict.

The surviving American and Soviet leadership had finally negotiated a ceasefire on 4th September 1987. Both sides now had the pressing matter of survival, further fighting was seen a futile.


***


Guardhouse entrance to Troywood RGHQ bunker.


bungalow_big.jpg
 
Last edited:
A good start but if the basis of the time-line is that the plot of the book works as per the book, then it needs a couple of minor changes.
The USAF base that was the target was Bentwaters in Suffolk not RAF Alconbury. Following the dates in the novel (NOT THE REAL WORLD) Prime-Minister Thatcher had called a General election for June 18th (a week later than OTL), and the bomb as due to go off a week before on Thursday June 11th.
Gorbachev was NOT the soviet leader in the book which was written in 1984, a year before he came to power.
The plot of the book is different to the film. You have named Govershin as the head of the KGB but he was only that in the film, not the book version.
The plot of the book was to avoid Nuclear war, in that the bomb at USAF base would have broken NATO, I think the idea of the British attempt to blame Russia would not work.
It would be far interesting to look at the effects as the Soviets planned them in the book, that Kinnock wins the election and then is overthrown in a coup and replaced by a hard-left leader (which is suggested to be Ken Livingstone), and the UK gets a communist government.
 
It's loosely based on both book and film. My memory must be faulty because I was sure it was Alconbury (the film had the fictional Baywaters).
IMVHO and from my knowledge of nuclear weapons any investigators would be able to tell that the nuclear material from the bomb was not American. It would also be clear that GZ was not on the base, a strong suggestion that it was not a bomb stored on the base that initiated.

Hurd, as Home Secretary, would have authorised the employment of the SAS. There would also be a clear paper trail in the Home Office, from the Security Service, the MoD and Suffolk Police.
When added to the evidence from the bomb itself the British government would have very convincing evidence that the initiation was not of an American weapon. The reaction in the UK, Western Europe and North America would be volcanic once it was known that a Soviet 1.5kT weapon had been initiated on British soil.

I have always been of the opinion that the plot would have failed even if it had 'succeeded', principally because the signature of a nuclear weapon can't be hidden.

*

I think that this may well be a one off, or at least the only bit for a long time as I'm busy with other projects at the moment.
 
Good article that, though I think it has partially been ripped off for the wiki article.
Oddly enough The Fourth Protocol is the one instance where I prefer the film over the novel. I'm a little uncomfortable with some of the politics Forsyth brings to the story - he was evidently of the opinion that a lot of a Labour Party in '87 were potential traitors.

The traceability of the bomb is the main reason that I think it would have caused a war. Also speaking to a few people 'in the know' there are two other things to consider:

1: It is apparently harder to smuggle nuclear materials into a country than one might think.
2: Nobody is going to let a nuclear device get loose away from proper command and control.
 
My article has to pass the test of plagiarism, and is checked by an editor, who checks it against on-line articles.
Of course when writing a review of a film it is always going to be similar in some cases.
I only read the wiki article after I wrote mine.
The wiki article wrongly claims the plot will strengthen the anti-nuclear movement in the advance of a general election, which is wrong this comes from the book. There are various other differences.
I hope you will withdraw that comment please.
Thanks
 
No, sorry, you misunderstand my comment. I'm implying that whoever wrote the wiki article ripped off some of what you had written. Apologies if that was not clear.
I've noticed that taking parts of articles from other websites without attributing them is common on wiki and I'd assumed that someone had copied and pasted from your article to the wiki one.
 
Sorry about that, but I have to be careful being a freelance writer.
I think that there where some changes to the film that Forysth although was exec producer didn't like, eg Petrofsky and his American neighbours, and the Joanna Cassidy bit.
Get the special edition DVD, with a commentary by Forysth it is worth it.
 
That's all right, again I'm sorry that I caused any offense.

I can understand why Forsyth might not have liked those additions. As soon as I have a spare bit of cash I'll look out for that DVD.
I have a feeling that Cassidy's character does actually somewhat overestimate the damage that the bomb will do. I've modeled it on the web and an initiation close in size to the one she mentions (1.5kT seems to stick in my head) won't do as much damage as she says. In fact when I mistakenly used Alconbury it didn't even destroy most of the airfield!

The book puts Petrofsky's house in Ipswich, but I moved it to a small village nearer Bentwaters because the base is far enough away from the town that a tactical sized nuke would hardly touch it. If the bomb initiates in Ipswich it is going to be hard to convince people that it was an American weapon on RAF Bentwaters. :p

I have to admit that I knocked this up in an hour between getting home and dinner time. I should have spent my research time double checking the source material, rather than finding out who was the junior minister at the Scottish Office. That would have avoided embarrassing mistakes!
 
Top