In the spring of 1979 on the southeastern frontier, a sudden conflict was quietly unfolding. It was a dark and windy night, the starry sky was obscured by thick clouds, and the dense jungle ahead could only be faintly discerned in sight. The land has seen so much change over the decades, and now it will be the starting point for a new story.
Against this backdrop, a group of soldiers in green uniforms are quietly making their way through the dense forest, and their destination is an important enemy stronghold. The soldiers were from the Chinese People's Liberation Army, an elite detachment sent on special missions in the self-defense war against Vietnam. However, each member of the team had a red star visibly marked on their helmets, which stood out in the night. This kind of behavior, which violates almost all common sense of covert operations, seemed to be an irrevocable norm at the time.
Deficiencies in tactics and training: Lack of awareness of actual combat
The 1979 self-defense war against Vietnam was a key military operation in the history of the People's Republic of China (PRC) aimed at responding to Vietnam's aggression and safeguarding the country's sovereignty and territorial integrity. In this battle, the Chinese army demonstrated an unshakable sense of national honor and courage against the enemy with firm will and courageous actions. Although the smoke of gunpowder on the battlefield witnessed the feat of heroism, at the same time, the cruelty of the war also exposed a series of problems in the army.
Some units have shown obvious deficiencies in actual combat training when carrying out offensive tasks, and the problems in tactical layout and troop deployment are particularly conspicuous. Specifically, during offensive operations, the troops are densely formed, especially in the narrow mountain and jungle environments, and the soldiers are closely aligned, so that once they encounter enemy artillery fire, they will cause large casualties.
On the one hand, this situation arises because, in peacetime training, there is insufficient training in the tactical essentials of dispersed operations and flexible mobility, and troops often instinctively choose to gather forces when encountering unexpected situations, because this can enhance the offensive. However, this approach is often counterproductive in actual combat, especially when the enemy has already pre-planned defenses and ambushes. Enemy artillery and machine-gun fire was able to quickly and effectively lock on and hit dense targets, increasing the casualties of our troops.
In addition, the troops did not fully understand and utilize the battlefield environment before the offensive, and failed to fully consider the influence of terrain on the tactical layout. In some cases, due to insufficient knowledge of the enemy's situation and terrain, the troops chose a more direct route when attacking, which not only increased the risk of being detected by the enemy, but also limited the possibility of maneuvering and breaking through. The ideal use of skirmishers and battlefield dispersion can effectively reduce the effect of enemy fire concentration, but it lacks effective implementation in actual operation.
In view of this problem, the troops conducted a profound reflection and summing up after the war, and realized that in future training and combat preparations, it is necessary to strengthen the teaching and training of tactical essentials such as dispersed movement of troops, flexible mobility, and use of terrain. This includes enhancing the training of officers and men in the ability to quickly judge and respond to changes in the battlefield situation, strengthening the training of small units in combat coordination and independent combat capabilities, and enhancing the awareness of all officers and men on tactical diversity and flexibility.
Vulnerabilities in Defense and Camouflage: Obvious Red Signs
During the 1979 self-defense war against Vietnam, although our army attached great importance to taking covert actions to reduce the enemy's vigilance and improve the effectiveness of surprise attacks, in practice, some details were not properly handled and became an important factor affecting the effectiveness of concealment. Especially when using the distinctive red five-pointed star cockade and red collar badge, these obvious signs stand out in the jungle or at night, and become the key to revealing the soldier's position.
This situation is particularly obvious when carrying out special tasks such as penetrating and ambushing deep behind enemy lines. Operations, which should have been highly covert, greatly increased the likelihood of being detected by the enemy because of these conspicuous signs. In dense forests and night operations, even small color differences can be a clue to the enemy's observation forces. In some cases, the enemy has even been able to track the movements of our troops on the basis of these inappropriate markings alone, thus setting up ambushes or carrying out artillery strikes, inflicting unnecessary losses on our troops.
Many officers and soldiers seem to be aware of this danger, but they still wear these conspicuous pieces of equipment and conduct combat and operations, without resorting to simple and effective camouflage to reduce the risk of detection. Behind this phenomenon is related to the deep-seated culture and mentality formed by our army and the Chinese people against a special historical background.
In the long history of development, the red logo has become a strong political and cultural symbol, closely linked to the glory of the country and the revolutionary tradition. In a specific historical period, this symbol was deeply implanted in the hearts of every Chinese people, including military personnel. The color red, especially the iconic red star and red flag, is seen as a symbol of courage, sacrifice, and revolutionary spirit. The profound influence of this culture has created a collective sense of identity and pride, and even on the battlefield, the importance of this symbol is often unconsciously placed above the actual needs of the battlefield.
In addition, the "collective unconscious" formed in this cultural context has also led to a certain degree of neglect of the recognition and application of the principles of pragmatism in war. Even though officers and soldiers understand that the requirement for concealment is far more important than symbolic signs in certain situations, this awareness is often overshadowed by deep-rooted cultural habits in everyday behavior and decision-making. Therefore, even if simple camouflage can significantly improve the survival rate on the battlefield, such measures have not been widely adopted and implemented.
Cultural and Psychological Influences: The "Collective Unconscious" in a Special Era
In China in the late 70s of the 20th century, military-themed literary and artistic works occupied an extremely important position in cultural life, and their influence was far-reaching and extensive. The characters in these works are often portrayed as an idealized and sculptural heroic image - whether in literature, films, plays, propaganda posters and various theatrical performances, these heroic figures always appear in a high-spirited, high-pitched and agitated attitude, and their images and stories are designed to inspire patriotic enthusiasm and hero worship in the audience and readers.
The universality of this kind of character image is closely related to the social environment and cultural policies of the time. In a specific historical context, this heroic image full of power and sculpture is regarded as one of the important means of shaping the new socialist man. Through the depiction and admiration of these idealized heroes, it aims to cultivate people's spirit of collectivism, revolutionary heroism, and loyalty to the country and nation.
The characteristics of this kind of literary and artistic creation were reflected at all levels of society at that time. Such heroic images and stories are ubiquitous in government organs, military units, schools, factories, and even families and kindergartens, and people are given long-term and systematic cultural edification and ideological education through books, movies, plays, paintings, and various theatrical evenings. Especially for the younger generation, these works not only shape their perception of heroes, but also profoundly affect their values and worldview.
However, to a certain extent, this kind of heroic image, characterized by a sense of sculpture, has also led to the formalization and idealization of literary and artistic works, which often lacks more complex and multi-dimensional depth when expressing the characters' personalities and emotions. The universality and consistency of this image, while having specific historical significance and cultural value at the time, also limited the depth of literary and artistic works in exploring the diversity and complexity of human nature.
With the passage of time and changes in the social environment and cultural concepts, this singular and idealized image of the hero has gradually been challenged and reflected. People are beginning to seek more realistic and diverse characters and storylines to reflect the complexity and diversity of human nature more comprehensively and deeply. In this process, military-themed literary and artistic works have also begun to try to innovate and transform, presenting richer and more realistic war and life experiences through more delicate emotional descriptions and more complex character creation.
The engraving of this form of work has also led to a widespread cultural and conceptual influence in the military, which is rooted in long-term historical education and social culture. In particular, in the attitude towards bravery and heroism, the military emphasizes an image of holding its head high and forging ahead bravely, and this image is constantly emphasized and exaggerated in many military training and propaganda. In this context, soldiers have an underlying cognitive pattern of how they behave on the battlefield: they are to show bravery and fearlessness when charging into battle, and any hesitation or cowering is seen as a sign of cowardice and dishonor.
To a certain extent, this perception influenced the actual actions of the soldiers on the battlefield. When facing enemy artillery fire, some soldiers may be subconsciously influenced and ignore the basic principle of battlefield survival - using all possible cover, maneuvering flexibly and minimizing their own damage. They may charge with their heads held high, ignoring the threat of enemy fire, increasing their own risk on the battlefield.
The existence of this situation reflected a contradiction in the military culture at that time: on the one hand, the heroic spirit of heroism and sacrifice and dedication was emphasized, and on the other hand, the cruel reality of the actual battlefield required soldiers to have sufficient survival skills and the ability to be flexible. This contradiction has led to the fact that in some cases, soldiers may overlook the performance of heroism at the expense of safety and efficiency in actual combat.
In the post-war reflection and summing up, this issue has become an aspect that cannot be ignored in the training and cultural construction of the army. The military's leadership is beginning to realize that more emphasis should be placed on the development of soldiers' battlefield survival skills and resilience while emphasizing bravery and fearlessness. This includes how to effectively use the various conditions on the battlefield for cover and camouflage while maintaining the offensive, and how to maintain sufficient caution and vigilance while maintaining a high will to fight.
Subsequently, the concept of "wisdom and courage" began to be emphasized in military training, that is, bravery is not simply ignoring dangers, but on the basis of fully recognizing the dangers of the battlefield, and overcoming difficulties through wisdom and courage together. This shift in philosophy aims to foster a more holistic and in-depth heroism, not just in physical bravery, but also in mental firmness and intelligence.
Li Gang.1979 The Inside Story of the Decision-making of the Self-Defense Counterattack War against Vietnam[J].Archives and Society,2010(5):14-15