Why didn't the Soviet Union invade Pakistan in the 80s with India's help?

During the Soviet-Afghan War, one of the main annoyances for the Soviet troops was the presence of Mujahideen bases in Pakistan. Whenever Soviet forces cleared an area of Afghanistan, the Mujahideen would simply relocate to Pakistan, regroup and resupply, and then continue their fight. America today is now facing a similar problem, which is the reason for US drone strikes in Pakistan. However, unlike the US, the Soviet Union never struck Pakistan. The Mujahideen camps, sheltered from Afghan and Soviet air strikes by the PAFs sparkling new F-16s, grew unhindered and became the Frankenstein that the Taliban is today. Propped up by Pakistani, US, Chinese, and Arab support, the Mujahideen went on to extract a severe toll on the Red Army (14,000 dead), and along with the poor economic condition of the USSR prompted its withdrawal.

But now let's rewind back to 1985/86, when the Soviet presence was at its height. Realizing that most US aid to the Mujahideen was routed through Pakistan, and that Pakistan itself was the base of many Mujahideen groups, what if the Red Army invaded Pakistan with India's help? A combined attack on both fronts would wipe Pakistan off the map within a few weeks. The combined might of the Soviet and Indian forces would be far too much for Pakistan to handle, especially since they were not yet a nuclear weapons state.

My question to DFI members: How come the Soviet Union never invaded Pakistan?

Pakistan since beginning was under un-announced usa protectorate.west pakistan was the red line USSR would never ve dared to cross like usa never dared to cross cuba red line drfined by the USSR.Even indira ghandi had to declare ceasefire in 1971 due to usa.Even after the U2 incident of 1960 ussr never dared to cross red line in pakistan due to usa.And thats the only reason USSR never attacked pakistan during whole afghan war.

Because of American influence. CCCP could invade Afghanistan prior to US intervention (by whatever means).

So are you saying that US would have started WWIII over Pakistan?

As much as it would have over Cuba, so yes.

Soviet did attack via SPETSNAZ SF covert raids into Pakistan , They keep track of Mujaheddin and engage them when necessary, the most famous is “Karera operation”

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/Krer-SOF.pdf
Spetsnaz, Direct Action - Russian Special Purpose Forces


Going Openly was not wise, the reason are well known..

The onus was on us to start war with pak then ussr could do there bit.

It was ideal time to back pok imo.

Well, Cuba is right in America's backyard. Pakistan is not.

USSR did not use nukes when America invaded Vietnam either.

Kunal sir,
Special operations attacks are different thing then openly attacking..You were in IA isnt it true that whole 1990s and after kargil and during op.parakram indian forces did conduct special operations across LOC in POK????(citation needed)

Likewise, Cuba wasn't right in USSR's backyard, Pakistan pretty-much was.

No,
We didn't require to cross LOC, we never cross LOC!
During Op.prakram`s early phases ie. before massive mobilizations we shelled PA bases to a point that they were out of order for weeks..
Special Operations are top-secrets, their are no-knowledge abt it to anyone, even to those who are in the unit which is involve for long range patrols..
We are mainly neutralizing tangos inside our territory..

Yanks brought upon the cuba crises...firstly by installing a puppet dictator then getting bitter and refusing castro's govt by imposing economic embargo. They also installed missies in turkey which the ussr didn't like so they turned there attention to cuba to get back at the yanks.

The western media claimed victory when the ussr removed there missiles from cuba whilst forgetting that in return the yanks had to remove there missiles from turkey.

This is slightly off-topic, but I think most threats to use nukes are bluffs. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the USSR backed down because Cuba wasn't so important that they would risk WWIII over it. America, on the other hand, had a lot to lose if Soviet nukes remained in Cuba; due to the seriousness of the situation they were ready to go as far as necessary to get Soviet nukes off of Cuba. IMO, the Cuban Missile Crisis was just a ploy by the USSR to safeguard Cuba from American attack; threatening America with the nukes, and then removing the nukes in exchange for an American promise to never invade Cuba, might have been part of the plan. The USSR didn't have the capability to defend Cuba conventionally, and they knew it.

In the context of our discussion, just replace Cuba with Pakistan. As you said, Pakistan is pretty much in USSR's backyard, and the US had a relatively solid presence there. Thus, the Soviet Union had more at stake in regards to Pakistan than the US. If, hypothetically, Pakistan fell and was partioned into an Indian-occupied zone, a Soviet-occupied zone, and an independent Balochistan, would the US be severely affected? It would lose its influence in South Asia, sure, but its overall global standing and security would be intact.

Afghan itself had turned a mine field for Soviet,they may dont want to have a bonus in form of Pakistan

Pakistan could not be attacked because of US. US was a stakeholder and it could lead to greater confrontation.

US can use drones since Russia would welcome it, even if silently, because they too must be very happy that the terrorists are getting a hiding.

China will not object if a maximum of fundamentalist are killed as that would prevent them from being surplus to the Afghan effort and thereby being free to be used to 'help' the Uighurs. Pakistan maybe a friend of China, but the fundamentalists are only friend to their ideology and are a State within a State and couldn't care less for Pakistan!