Plandemic

Plandemic are a trilogy of conspiracy theory video and films produced by Mikki Willis promoting misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. They feature Judy Mikovits, a discredited American researcher described as an anti-vaccine activist. The first video, Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19, was released on May 4, 2020, under Willis' production company Elevate Films. The second film, Plandemic Indoctornation, which includes more interviewees, was released on August 18 by Brian Rose's conspiracy distributor London Real. Later on June 3, 2023, Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening was released on The Highwire, a conspiracy website run by anti-vaccine activist Del Bigtree.

Upon its release, the first video went viral, becoming one of the most widespread pieces of COVID-19 misinformation, its popularity most attributed to online word-of-mouth. It was quickly removed by multiple online platforms, but this failed to stop its proliferation, and it might still be spreading secretly through various platforms. It had also contributed to the increasing rebellion against health protocols. Due to social media companies' preparedness for its release, Plandemic: Indoctornation received less attention.

Scientists and health professionals criticized all installments of the trilogy for their misleading claims, while Willis' filmmaking style awash with various modes of persuasion has been cited as lending to their conspiratorial and brainwashing nature. The latter was specifically poorly received for its narrative quality. After an outcry on the first video, Willis expressed doubt about Mikovits' claims but still defended her, with Indoctrination being self-described as a "response video" to debunkers. The Great Awakening also saw fact-checkers debunking its claims.

## Background

The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China and began exacerbating in 2020. Hundreds of millions of people contracted the disease, a percentage of whom died from it. As a result, travel restrictions, social distancing measures, and many other precautions have been taken to prevent the spread of COVID-19 while many vaccines underwent phased distribution in most countries. Meanwhile, misinformation and conspiracy theories about the pandemic emerged, concerning the pandemic's scale, the virus' origin, diagnosis, and treatment. Among the popular conspiracy theory is that the virus is a bioweapon to control the population. Some people have claimed to have magical or faith-based cures for the disease.

Judy Anne Mikovits is a former American research scientist who is known for her discredited medical claims, such as the claim murine endogenous retroviruses are linked to chronic fatigue syndrome. Mikovits has been engaged in anti-vaccination activism and the promotion of conspiracy theories, and been accused of scientific misconduct. Prior to Plandemic, Mikovits expressed support for various COVID-19 conspiracy theories, claiming, for example, that the COVID-19 pandemic is a predictable flu season.

Mikki Willis is a former model and actor who had been making several New Age documentary films and conspiracy videos. At age 25, he founded the New York/Los Angeles Theater of the Arts, where he made several experimental plays, before making his feature debut film, Shoe Shine Boys (1996). He owns a production company, Elevate Films, which operates under the 501(c)(3) non-profit Elevate Foundation, founded in 2006. At one point, it also operated a namesake film festival. He was also co-director, co-cinematographer, and co-editor of the documentary Neurons to Nirvana (2013), which makes therapeutic claims on psychedelics. Residing in Ojai, California, Willis has a wife and business partner, Nadia Salamanca, as well as two sons. He has a family YouTube channel, Elevate Family, where one of his videos encouraging young boys to be unashamed of their cross-gender interests went viral. In 2023, it was reported they were planning to launch an alternative learning center.

## Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19

### Summary

The first installment of the trilogy, a 26-minute video titled Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19, promotes the conspiracist claim that vaccines are "a money-making enterprise that causes medical harm", exploring themes of the loss of free speech and free choice, also promoting parental autonomy against the pharmaceutical industry. It takes the form of an interview between Willis and Mikovits, who makes unsupported and false statements about SARS-CoV2, the disease it causes, and her own controversial history.

#### Fact-checking responses

Fact-checking website PolitiFact highlighted eight false or misleading statements made in the video:

- That Mikovits was held in jail without charge. Mikovits was briefly held on remand after an accusation of theft from her former employer the Whittemore Peterson Institute but charges were dropped. There is no evidence to support her statement notebooks removed from the Institute were "planted" or that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and its director Anthony Fauci bribed investigators. When asked, both Mikovits and Willis said it was an error to say Mikovits had not been charged; she had meant to say the charges were dropped. Mikovits later said "I've been confused for a decade" and that in the future she would try to be clearer when she talks about the criminal charge; "I'll try to learn to say it differently".
- That the virus was manipulated. This possibility is still being investigated. According to Nature magazine, "Most scientists say SARS-CoV-2 probably has a natural origin, and was transmitted from an animal to humans. However, a lab leak has not been ruled out, and many are calling for a deeper investigation into the hypothesis that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), located in the Chinese city where the first COVID-19 cases were reported."
- That the SARS-CoV2 virus evolved from SARS-CoV-1 within a decade and that is inconsistent with natural causes. This is incorrect; SARS-CoV-2 is similar but is not directly descended from SARS-CoV (SARS-1), and the viruses have only 79% genetic similarity.
- That hospitals receive \$13,000 from Medicare if they "call it COVID-19" when a patient dies. This statement, which had previously been made on The American Spectator and WorldNetDaily, was rated "half true" by PolitiFact and Snopes; payments are made, but the amount is open to dispute and there is no evidence this influences diagnosis. The evidence suggests COVID-19 may be under-diagnosed.
- That hydroxychloroquine is "effective" against coronaviruses. This statement originates in work by Didier Raoult that subsequently received a "statement of concern" from the editors of the scientific journal in which it was published. The first randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 found no evidence of benefit and some evidence of harm. The NIH said there is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against its use to treat COVID-19. As of May 7, 2020, other bodies were running additional controlled trials to investigate hydroxychloroquine's safety and efficacy.
- That flu vaccines increase the chance of contracting COVID-19 by 36%. This statement is false; it misinterprets a disputed article that studied the 2017–2018 influenza season, predating the COVID-19 pandemic. The statement the flu vaccine increases the chance of contracting COVID-19 does not appear in the original article. The article's author Greg G. Wolff said coronavirus cases increased from 5.8% (non-vaccinated) to 7.8% (vaccinated) with an odds ratio of 1.36, with (1.14, 1.63) 95% confidence interval, and the article highlight said; "Vaccinated personnel did not have significant odds of respiratory illnesses". The article refers to seasonal coronaviruses that cause the common cold, but COVID-19 was added by the website disabledveterans.org.
- That despite the goal of preventing coronaviruses, flu vaccines contain coronaviruses. In reality, there are no vaccines with coronaviruses.
- That "Wearing the mask literally activates your own virus. You're getting sick from your own reactivated coronavirus expressions." This statement is unsupported by evidence. Masks prevent airborne transmission of the virus, especially during the up-to-14-day asymptomatic period when carriers may not be aware they have the disease. A virus may be deactivated, but cannot add to one's infection level if it leaves the body, even temporarily.

The journal Science also repeats some of the statements made by PolitiFact and fact-checked some of Mikovits' and Willis' other statements:

- That Italy's COVID-19 epidemic is linked to influenza vaccines and the presence of coronaviruses in dogs. There is no relation between these.
- That SARS-CoV-2 was created "between the North Carolina laboratories, Fort Detrick, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, and the Wuhan laboratory". Considering relations between the US and the Wuhan lab stopped, the claim is false.
- That Mikovits is not anti-vaccine. According to Science, she once wore a piece of Vaxxed II merchandise promoting the 2019 sequel to a 2016 film that says MMR vaccines cause autism and that she once sent Science a PowerPoint presentation calling for an "immediate moratorium" for "all vaccines".
- That the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) "colluded and destroyed" Mikovits' reputation, and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) kept this secret but did nothing to help her. Science said, "Mikovits has presented no direct evidence that HHS heads colluded against her".
- That Mikovits' article on Science "revealed that the common use of animal and human fetal tissues was unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases", which the article does not say.
- That Mikovits' Ph.D. thesis Negative Regulation of HIV Expression in Monocytes "revolutionized the treatment of HIV/AIDS"; the thesis "had no discernible impact on the treatment of HIV/AIDS".

Mikovits also alludes to several conspiracy theories that state Bill Gates is implicated in causing the pandemic to profit from an eventual vaccine, and makes false and unsupported statements such as the claim that beaches should remain open because of "healing microbes in the saltwater" and "sequences" in the sand that can "protect against the coronavirus". The video states the numbers of COVID-19 deaths are purposely being misreported to control people. External videos, such as one in which a chiropractor says tonic water can treat or prevent COVID-19 and one of a press conference among doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi in Bakersfield, California, says the COVID-19 pandemic is over-hyped. These external videos were also disputed beforehand.

### Production

According to Willis, producing Plandemic was a struggle. At that time, he was aware getting involved in controversial topics would risk his reputation and would likely embroil him in heated discussions. "And of course there’s been tons of it. I’ve just been navigating all of that", he told the Los Angeles Times. Willis' concern arose from his perception of the pharmaceutical industry's corruption, a concern that began with the deaths of his mother from cancer and of his brother from AIDS during his 20s.

Willis met Mikovits for the first time in 2019, via mutual friends. Willis told the Ojai Valley News: "Because of [Mikovits'] direct connection with [those] involved with the pandemic ... I reached out to her for advice. We met, had a meeting, and what she revealed to me I knew the world needed to know." Principal photography took a day and editing took two weeks. Willis said he stopped editing a "socially conscious" documentary film he produced in 2019, arguing Plandemic was urgent. He was unsure whether to make a continuation. After hiring a cinematographer and researcher to join the project, Willis calculated it had a budget at less than US\$2,000.

Willis, a low-budget filmmaker who was 52 years old at the time of Plandemic's release, teamed up with Salamanca to market the video; among their efforts were creating an Instagram account. They intentionally chose conspiratorial branding to gain attention. The project's title, a portmenteau of plan and pandemic, was the most popular choice in a Facebook poll conducted by Willis; runners-up were The Invisible Enemy and The Oath.

### Release

Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 was released on May 4, 2020. It spread virally on social media, garnering millions of views, making it one of the most widespread pieces of COVID-19 misinformation. "Judy Mikovits" became a trending search on Google for two days. Two weeks prior to release, 30,368 tweets used the term "plandemic", most of which were merely retweets. After the video's release, the word "plandemic" was used 155% more on Twitter. According to CrowdTangle, QAnon Facebook groups endorsed the video. A Facebook spokesman recalled its hired fact-checkers wasting a huge amount of time to verify the video's claims, partly due to its duration and the number of claims. Before being removed, one of the videos featuring the work attracted one million views. Despite its removal, viewings of the video on the original site continued.

A YouTube spokesperson said the platform would remove videos supporting the claims of Plandemic without sufficient evidence, saying "[s]uggesting that wearing a mask can make you sick could lead to imminent harm". Vimeo's Trust & Safety team removed the video for violating its policies on misinformation; Twitter said hashtags like \#PlagueofCorruption and \#PlandemicMovie had been blacklisted and that not all of Mikovits' attempts to spread propaganda on the platform violated its policies. By the time the video was removed from Facebook, it had been watched 1.8 million times, had attracted 17,000 comments, and had been shared nearly 150,000 times. On TikTok, the video continued to find popularity via excerpted clips, some of which were removed from the platform. Google Drive and the Internet Archive were also used to spread the video; the former removed the files after being notified by The Washington Post.

According to Zarine Kharazian, assistant editor of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, as the film was removed from mainstream social media platforms, a "censorship backfire" that was characterized as a form of Streisand effect occurred; links to copies were promoted on alt-tech platforms—some of which were designed to host controversial content—were shared, with people's interest attracted by the video's perceived taboo nature. On Facebook, posts flagged as misinformation are more likely to be spread than those ignored. Shahin Nazar and Toine Pieters of the journal Frontiers in Public Health called the marketing campaign of encouraging people via decentralized social media to propagate the anti-vaccine belief "sophisticated", noting that it might have been a major contributor to the lack of compliance towards health protocols. According to The Verge, end-to-end encrypted services like WhatsApp and private groups meant the video was still being spread, unbeknown to the public.

### Reception

Scientists, medical doctors, and public health experts condemned Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 for promoting misinformation and NBC News called it "a hodgepodge of conspiracy theories". Governmental organizations, including the Indonesian COVID-19 Task Force, also labeled the video as a hoax, describing it as a brainwashing and a red herring to divert the public's attention from real issues. Experts like specialist disinformation reporter Marianna Spring and disinformation researcher Erin Gallagher said the video's professionally crafted atmosphere, cinematography, and ominously dramatic score made the stated claims sound true; according to Spring; "That makes them as dangerous—if not more so—than advice with a mix of truth and misleading medical myths".

Science journalist Tara Haelle described the video as pseudoscientific propaganda and said it succeeded at promoting misinformation because it plays on the viewers' confusion and desperation for answers. The opening sequence best targets people unfamiliar with Mikovits, painting her as the scientific industry's underdog, giving a good first impression on her. and editing, The video also uses various modes of persuasion such as the Gish gallop (giving excessive arguments to sound convincing), as well as scientific-looking images and "harrowing" stock footage of dying peole during the AIDS scene. Writing for the Deseret News, Amy Iverson expressed sympathy for those who stumbled upon the video in search for "someone to blame" for the effects of the pandemic, however noted "we cannot turn to outrageous, unchecked claims from a few loud voices to ease our concerns. And we definitely should not spread their unsubstantiated claims."

Meanwile, the British musician Seal expressed love for the video and called the responses to it unjustified. Other public figures including the mixed martial arts fighter Nick Catone, spread the video's misinformation and Melissa Ackison, a Republican politician, supported the video. The video's legacy continues long after its release; in February 2021, The Washington Post reported an anti-mask Facebook page called "Shop Mask Free Los Angeles" used Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 to support its claims. By this time, the Post reported some of the links had suffered from link rot.

The Los Angeles Times contacted yoga teacher and author Shiva Rea, who was a member of the board of directors of the Elevate Foundation; Rea stated she was not associated with the foundation or the film, and found Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 to be "very disturbing".

#### Mikki Willis' response

Willis said that although he expected the provocative marketing to garner interest, the actual scope of popularity was unexpected. Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Willis said he is not anti-vaccine and that he was merely trying to "start a conversation about science". He described himself as open-minded; "I have a profound love and respect of doctors despite how many doctors are mad at me now". Willis said he is also skeptical of Mikovits' claims in the video; "We’re working very hard right now to validate the majority of the claims that were made" and expressed a willingness to be involved in civil discussions with doctors "on all sides".

ProPublica health care reporter and investigative journalist Marshall Allen contacted Willis, who said Plandemic "is not a piece that’s intended to be perfectly balanced". When asked whether Plandemic might be fairly called propaganda, he said the definition fits, although he did not feel it contains anything misleading. According to Allan, "based on [the definition of propaganda], [Willis] feels 100% of news reporting is propaganda".

The Center for Inquiry's (CFI) Benjamin Radford and researcher Paul Offit asked Willis eight questions about the accuracy of the claims made in the video, either asking for evidence and clarification or asking questions such as "considering that bacteria don’t kill viruses, how would 'healing microbes' reduce or treat coronavirus infection?" Willis agreed to answer all of the questions but he never did. Radford said on the CFI's website:

> If the claims made by Mikovits and Willis in Plandemic are based in truth and facts, you’d think they would be eager to offer evidence supporting their claims. What better way to turn the tables on scientists, skeptics, and journalists than to offer a referenced, fact-based, point-by-point rebuttal to critics who offer them a platform? ... Where are their responses? Why are they suddenly so quiet? Why are they afraid to answer questions? What do they have to hide?

## Plandemic: Indoctornation

### Summary and fact check

The second installment, an 84-minute film titled Plandemic: Indoctornation was released on August 18, 2020. Willis said the film is a "response video to all the debunkers", and that he worked with a coalition of 7,000 doctors and attorneys to make the film to "reform our medical systems such that they’re not under the stranglehold of Big Pharma". PolitiFact categorized it as a pseudo-documentary.

The film says there is a worldwide conspiracy seeking to control humanity through fear and to make money for the putative conspirators; the COVID-19 pandemic is described as a key moment in a decades-long plan. The film says people and institutions including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Google and the fact-checking agencies it employs, climate scientists, John Oliver, and Bill Gates coordinate with each other to enact the conspiracy.

Plandemic: Indoctornation says COVID-19 was engineered in a laboratory, that Event 201—a 2019 disaster response exercise—was a plan to release a real virus into the population, and that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was ejected from India. The film also says a defensive patent applied by the CDC during the 2003 SARS outbreak was meant to "[control] the proprietary rights to the disease, to the virus, and to its detection and all of the measurement of it". These were later unproven:Event 201 was not a virus conspiracy plot, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation does not have technology allowing it to covertly implant an invisible proof of vaccination. The CDC's defensive patent covers the genetic material detection methods for human coronaviruses so "public research and communication were not jeopardized by commercial parties seeking exclusive private control".

### Production and release

Immediately after the release of Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19, Willis said he was contacted by an independent producer who said he had worked on projects with HBO, Netflix, and Amazon. The producer asked Willis if he had an interest in collaborating on making a feature-length version, though the Los Angeles Times found the companies had expressed no interest in the film. Soon after Plandemic's release, another set of teams announced the clips from Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19 would be part of a documentary feature film.

Plandemic: Indoctornation was released by an online distributor called London Real on the website Digital Freedom Platform, which has promoted several discredited theories about the COVID-19 pandemic, and was founded and managed by podcaster Brian Rose. Because the film's release was promoted in advance, social media platforms were able to prepare for its release rather than scrambling to react to misinformation already circulating on their networks. As part of their policy to counter disinformation about the pandemic, Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms took steps to limit the spread of the film as soon as it was posted, affixing warnings to links shared by users. YouTube removed multiple copies of the film and sixteen clips presenting specific sections from its servers. Although no steps to block the content were taken, Facebook warned users when clicking the film's URL, which was blacklisted by TikTok and Instagram.

According to London Real, Plandemic: Indoctornation was watched 1.2 million times by the end of its first day of release but the Digital Forensic Research Lab called the film "a total flop" that achieved much less social media engagement than the original video. Because social media companies were forewarned by the viral nature of the first video, the distribution of Plandemic: Indoctornation was limited. The Daily Dot said the only platform where it succeeded in getting exposure was Facebook, where it had 4,000 views of posts linking to the film on BitChute, where it had 40,000 views.

### Reception

Critics compared Plandemic: Indoctornation unfavorably with the first video. Jane Lytvynenko at BuzzFeed News gave it zero stars, saying while the first video presents a protagonist (Mikovits) and a fairly clear narrative, the film does neither: it is "bloated, confused, and filled with nonsense", switching between topics without clearly establishing how all the information presented relate to each other. Its subjects are said to be cliché with respect to the first video. Lytvynenko said Willis' initial claim 'the first video is a trailer for a feature film is incorrect; while Plandemic: Indoctornation discusses the same themes and includes Mikovits, most of the material in the first video is not used in the feature-length film.

## Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening

Willis teamed up with Del Bigtree, the founder of the anti-vaccination group Informed Consent Action Network, to release another film, Plandemic 3: The Great Awakening on Bigtree's website The Highwire. In February 2023, a rough cut was screened at the "Rabbit Room" section of the 21st Conscious Life Expo in Los Angeles, a New Age and far-right conspiracy event where he won a humanitarian award in 2008. The trailer was released on May 23, 2023, and the film itself on June 3. Its promotional tagline, placed at a "slick" official website, is "100% Censored, 0% Debunked." The fact-checking organization Logically reported that the trailer earned two million views on Twitter as of May 31. The 101-minute film is said to be dedicated to conspiracy theorist G. Edward Griffin, with archival clips of him used sporadically.

The film begins with Willis claiming that his AIDS-infected brother died of consuming the treatment drug zidovudine. PolitiFact and Agence France-Presse found no evidence that it caused the deaths of AIDS patients. The clip circulated in Instagram, but was then flagged by owner Meta. Willis then says that COVID-19 lockdowns are "synchronized tyranny" aimed at controlling the masses. The trailer includes out-of-context clips of world leaders and politicians discussing the Great Reset at the World Economic Forum (WEF), and features personalities who have promoted misinformation about the pandemic and vaccines, including Ghent University professor Mattias Desmet and Vladimir Zelenko. The film also misleadingly depicts WEF founder Klaus Schwab as creating a "purported plot for a unified world government" as well as a Nazi due to him being born in Nazi Germany. It also falsely covers the George Floyd protests (calling Black Lives Matter a pro-communist organization), antifa protests, and a Washington state bill regarding gender transition surgery.

## See also

- Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic
- Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic

### Similar films

- The Other Side of AIDS (2004), a film also alleging that HIV does not cause AIDS and that HIV treatments are harmful
- House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic (2009), another HIV-AIDS conspiracy film
- The Greater Good (2011), a film also alleging that MMR vaccines cause autism
- Hold-up (2020), another film promoting COVID-19 misinformation
- Planet Lockdown (2020), another COVID-19 misinformation film
- Medical Racism: The New Apartheid (2021), a video targeting with the African American community
- Died Suddenly (2022), a film promoting COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and Great Reset conspiracy theories

## Explanatory notes

COVID-19 conspiracy theory video and films

COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and hesitancy

Conspiracy theories in the United States


Armed Forces (album)

Armed Forces is the third studio album by the English singer-songwriter Elvis Costello, released on 5 January 1979 in the United Kingdom through Radar Records. It was his second album with the Attractions—keyboardist Steve Nieve, bassist Bruce Thomas and drummer Pete Thomas (no relation)—and the first to officially credit them on the cover. The album was recorded in six weeks from August to September 1978 in London under the working title Emotional Fascism. Produced by Nick Lowe and engineered by Roger Béchirian, the sessions saw Costello exert more control over production compared to This Year's Model, while Nieve contributed more to song arrangements.

For Armed Forces, Costello sought a more commercial sound than the punk rock style employed on his two previous records, resulting in a more pop-oriented production reflecting the new wave era. The overtly political lyrics concern the effect of politics on human relationships. The UK release featured an elaborate fold-out LP packaging, with a cover depicting a herd of elephants; it was simplified for the US release through Columbia Records, featuring an alternate drip-cover.

Supported by the successful UK singles "Oliver's Army" and "Accidents Will Happen", Armed Forces reached number two in the UK, becoming Costello's biggest commercial success up to that point. The American version, released in February 1979, omitted "Sunday's Best" and replaced it with Costello's version of Lowe's "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding". The album received positive reviews from music critics and appeared on several lists of the year's best albums. Costello and the Attractions supported the album on the Armed Funk tour in America.

In later decades, Armed Forces has continued to receive positive reviews, with many highlighting the production. Others noted that it contained musical styles Costello would utilise for later records. It is considered one of Costello's best works and has appeared on various best-of lists. The album has been reissued multiple times, including in 2020 as a super deluxe edition, which was positively received.

## Background and recording

Elvis Costello's second studio album This Year's Model (1978) was his first with the backing band the Attractions–bassist Bruce Thomas, drummer Pete Thomas (no relation) and keyboardist Steve Nieve, after using the American band Clover for his debut album My Aim Is True (1977). From mid-July to mid-December 1977, Costello and the Attractions underwent a rigorous touring schedule before taking a break to record This Year's Model. Another gruesome touring schedule followed throughout 1978, which contributed to growing exhaustion for the artist and band. Nevertheless, Costello continued writing new material; songs that would appear on Armed Forces began appearing in the setlists starting in May. In July, Costello recorded his song "Stranger in the House" with country artist George Jones, which appeared on the latter's My Very Special Guests album in 1979, after which the former began recording Armed Forces.

Under the working titles Cornered On Plastic and Emotional Fascism, Armed Forces was recorded at London's Eden Studios starting in August 1978 and lasted six weeks. Returning from This Year's Model were musician Nick Lowe as producer and Roger Béchirian as engineer. Costello's work ethic during the sessions was strong. His on-again/off-again romantic partner at the time Bebe Buell recalled: "Elvis wasn't the kind of guy who slept all day. He got up and went to the studio to record and rehearse. He was a working boy, not a loller." Unlike the previous album sessions, he asserted himself as the final decision maker on all takes, production and mixes. He later admitted: "By the third [album] I thought I was God's gift. I was totally convinced. I had no doubts."

Despite tensions present, Lowe remained instrumental in keeping high morale and orchestration. He was also responsible for incorporating the new sounds Costello wanted for the record. Béchirian later explained: "The whole way those things were directed and put together was very much down to Nick. Nick had a real pop sensibility about him." For his process, Lowe had the band record backing tracks first before commencing on overdubs. Regarding band dynamics, Costello contended that he and the Attractions reached a level of musical agreement that would never be matched again. Nieve, in particular, was more involved in the song arrangements, particularly on "Oliver's Army". Also recorded was a cover of Lowe's "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding", originally released by his band Brinsley Schwarz on The New Favourites of... Brinsley Schwarz (1974). The new version was prepared for release as a B-side for Lowe's upcoming single "American Squirm", released in November 1978; the band were credited as "Nick Lowe and His Sound". Recording wrapped in September, after which Costello and the Attractions continued live performances.

## Music and lyrics

After having achieved relative commercial success with My Aim Is True and This Year's Model, Costello decided to take Armed Forces in his most commercial direction yet, stating in a 1982 interview that he was selling out modestly-sized venues but received little success with singles compared to artists such as the Bee Gees and Fleetwood Mac. As such, Armed Forces marked a departure from the punk rock of its two predecessors to become, according to biographer David Gouldstone, Costello's most pop-oriented album up to that point. Joe Marchese of The Second Disc retrospectively noted that Costello embraced the new wave sound of the era, working with Lowe and Béchirian to create a "more intricate" sound compared to its predecessors, while still "immediate and direct in its power and aggression". Spin and Ultimate Classic Rock later identified the album's sound as new wave and post-punk, respectively. Writer Greil Marcus noted that compared to its two predecessors, the sound of Armed Forces is "suppressed, claustrophobic, [and] twitching". Lowe's production, which some compared to the Wall of Sound-style of Phil Spector, utilised the studio to greater effect, creating a grander production overall, particularly on tracks such as "Accidents Will Happen", "Chemistry Class" and "Party Girl".

Costello also used a variety of influences when crafting the sound he wanted for Armed Forces. He stated in an interview that while on the road during tours, he and the Attractions listened to the 1976–77 works of David Bowie (Station to Station, Low and "Heroes") and Iggy Pop (The Idiot, Lust for Life), Kraftwerk (Autobahn), the 1969 works of the Beatles (Abbey Road and Yellow Submarine), as well as ABBA (Greatest Hits). Reviewing in 2002, Mojo's Mat Snow found a cross between Abbey Road and Bob Dylan's Highway 61 Revisited (1965). ABBA influenced Nieve's keyboard part for "Oliver's Army" and due to his greater contributions to the arrangements, his keyboards are more prominent throughout the entire album, predominantly on "Green Shirt" and "Party Girl". Béchirian later downplayed the numerous influences, stating that "a lot of that was just in the air".

While its two predecessors dealt with issues of immediate concern to the narrators, Armed Forces focuses on bigger issues on a broader scale. Marcus described it as a political album, or "a set of songs about how we live out the politics of our age whether we want to, mean to, or not". He specifically writes that on the album, "every moment of personal failure or unsatisfied passion is invaded by the cruelty and shamelessness of the political world." Indeed, Gouldstone identifies tracks that reflect political themes include "Senior Service", "Oliver's Army", "Goon Squad" and "Sunday's Best". Writing for PopMatters, Zeth Lundy described the album as "a collection of musings on human nature and relationships, bolstered by the pervasive military metaphors". The interplay is reflected by the album's working title Emotional Fascism. Although he had previously displayed fascist themes in tracks such as "Less Than Zero", "Night Rally" and "Radio Radio", Costello references fascist ideals frequently on Armed Forces, from Nazis to the Holocaust. Like its two predecessors, Thomson finds that Costello uses his signature wordplay on the album to great effect, composing various puns, double entendres, double-bluffs and non-sequiturs.

### Side one

The opening track, "Accidents Will Happen", is a non-political pop song that reflects the complexities of human relationships. Labelled by Hinton as a cross between the Byrds and the Beatles, it is addressed to Buell-type figure, but the actual subject is Costello himself, referring to his newfound sexual possibilities after achieving fame. NME's Charles Shaar Murray described it as "an ornate, melodic and exquisitely danceable pop song designed to lull American record executives into a state of false security". The second track, the upbeat "Senior Service", concerns office politics and class warfare. More specifically, the song is about the brutality of big business in striking those down who are too weak to obtain power for themselves. It contains the first reference to the 'armed forces'. Writer Franklin Bruno states that while "Accidents Will Happen" was a showcase for Costello's voice, "Senior Service" "reintroduces" the Attractions and contains a widely different production style from the previous track. Continuing the political theme is "Oliver's Army", which boasts a pop-friendly production and melody over sinister lyrics on military imperialism. According to Gouldstone, the song's narrator is "presumably" a British soldier serving in Northern Ireland. Costello refers to the Irish as "white niggers" and references the conquest of Ireland in 1649 by English Parliamentarian leader Oliver Cromwell. Musically, Bruno makes comparisons to ABBA's "Dancing Queen" (1976) and the Beach Boys' "Don't Worry Baby" (1964).

Described by Murray as "sexual fascism", "Big Boys" follows a narrator who is split between sympathy and contempt in his infatuation with a woman; he wants to be a 'big boy' and is seen as immature. Gouldstone compares it to "The Beat" from This Year's Model. Bruno states that it is the album's first track on which the mixture of personal and political themes appear as "volatile". "Green Shirt" concerns paranoia and predicts the rise of sex hotlines. It uses three different themes: assault on the media, a woman tidying herself, and images of betrayals to establish a connection between personal behaviour and relationships on a larger scale. Musically, it is primarily led by a loop created on a Minimoog. Regarding the colour green, Bruno interprets it as a possible reference to the members of the Romanian fascist movement Iron Guard. "Party Girl" is a ballad in the vein of "Alison" and "Little Triggers"; away from the new wave of the rest of the album. Reportedly about Buell, Costello denied this in the 2002 Armed Forces reissue liner notes, stating he wrote it for an art student he barely knew. In the song, the narrator pleads for the 'party girl' not to dismiss him even though he knows she has control over him and does not care how long it will take. After multiple political-related tracks, "Party Girl" represented a return to a more personal side.

### Side two

The first track on side two, "Goon Squad" builds on the theme of "Oliver's Army" of "underhand recruitment". In the song, a soldier relays messages on his experiences back to his family but by the end, he has lost his hand and fully joined the 'good squad'. Gouldstone notes that the vague lyrics do not specifically mention the 'good squad' as being the army–they could be police or big businesses–but the song nevertheless paints them in a poor light. Musically, Costello traced the song back to Don Covay's "It's Better to Have (and Don't Need)", but admitted that "we were too wound up to play it in that fashion". Described by Lundy as "intentionally cavernous and bleak", Gouldstone finds it "near heavy metal", while Hinton compares the intro to Thin Lizzy and the outro to the Beatles' "Tomorrow Never Knows" (1966). "Busy Bodies" is, in Gouldstone's words, a "snappy pop tune" that evokes Roy Orbison's "Pretty Woman", "A Whiter Shade of Pale" and the Beach Boys' "Heroes and Villains" (1967). Like "Pump It Up", it concerns the insignificance of modern life; people spend their lives purchasing superfluous items, sleeping with each other and ultimately amounting to nothing, becoming busy bodies. Originally written for Ian Dury, "Sunday's Best" is a waltz that targets the worst aspects of British life. Gouldstone writes that it shows how ordinary people are "trivial and monotonous". On the song, Costello said that it is "not so much a song as an attack on the small-ads page of The News of the World with a big pair of scissors". It has been musically compared to John Cooper Clarke's "You Never See a Nipple in the Daily Express".

Murray considered "Moods for Moderns" a "charming pastiche of Booker T & the MGs overlaid with an oddly disturbing ghost of a song". Gouldstone finds it "borderline funk", while Bruno compares it to Bowie's "plastic soul" era. Lyrically, the song is about the pain one feels at the end of a relationship, with sinister undertones that reflect moods of disillusionment, alienation and fear. "Chemistry Class" combines the personal and political themes to tell a tale about the natural attraction of two people. One of the last lines references Adolf Hitler's Final Solution as a metaphor for two lovers parting ways. Costello described it as a reaction to the gratification of American college campuses he experienced while on tour in America. Like the previous track, "Two Little Hitlers" captures the album's dual themes of love and politics, fully comparing the disagreements in personal relationships to opposing factions of fascism. According to Hinton, it paints a picture of two long-time lovers, "like beasts engaged in a fight to the death". Musically, it uses Bowie's "Rebel Rebel" (1974) riff and elements of "TVC 15" (1976).

## Packaging

### Title

The new album was to be titled Emotional Fascism until the last minute. Author Tony Clayton-Lea contends that Armed Forces, coined by Pete Thomas, continued Costello's theme of "control and domination over both governing and individual bodies". In his memoir, Costello acknowledged changing the title to Armed Forces after knowing radio stations would refuse to play an album titled Emotional Fascism. Although Hinton opined that the titles were "much [of] the same", Murray argued that Emotional Fascism was the superior title, stating: "Armed Forces tells you what institution Mr. Costello has in his gunsights this time around ... but Emotional Fascism tells you what attitude is about to be subjected to both long-and-short-range fire." In the 2002 liner notes for the album, Costello explained: "Two or three half-formed notions collided uneasily in that title, although I never would have admitted to having anything as self-conscious as a 'theme' running through the songs. Any patterns that have emerged did so as the record was completed or with the benefit of hindsight." Bruno contends that the album "embodies a critique" under either title, but also deduces that it "does not present an argument".

### Artwork

The packaging for Armed Forces was designed by Barney Bubbles and featured different cover artworks for the UK and US releases. In the UK, the cover was a painting depicting a herd of elephants in front of mountains, with birds flying overhead and mist overlaying the ground. The lead elephant stares directly at the onlooker, which Gouldstone notes mirrors Costello on the cover of This Year's Model. For the first time, the Attractions received co-artist credit on the sleeve. The artist credit is on top while the album title is on bottom. Initial UK editions boasted an elaborate fold-out sleeve containing four colour postcards of the band. The back cover illustrated art pop geometric patterns, of which emerged various army soldiers and animal prints. The inner sleeve contained two photographs: one showed Costello and the Attractions on a suburban road, while the other featured Costello laying across a swimming pool diving board with a body lying submerged at the bottom, overall surrounded by numerous yellow boxes; the words "my place ... or yours" and "emotional fascism" appeared on the sides. When it was reissued on CD, the album failed to replicate the elaborate fold-out sleeves, instead having the booklet appear in the shape of a cross. Bruno argues that the cover "conveys an unmistakable sense of attack" and is more significant for its statement on Costello's position at that point in his career rather than its actual design.

The US release opted for a more standardised LP packaging. The elephant cover was replaced with the drip-image that was unveiled in the inner sleeve of the UK release. The UK image had various black scribble lines extending into the outer panels that utilised various animal prints. Additionally, the US sleeve moved the elephant cover to the back and reduced it to make room for a track listing and larger rendering of the album title and artist name. Bruno argues that the "modest" cover reflected Costello's lesser status in America. He furthermore associates Bubbles' decision to use the splatter design as a "mocking appropriation" of Roy Lichtenstein's mid-1960s "brushstroke" paintings. A promotional photo taken for the album depicted Costello holding a machine gun barrel down his throat with the words "Don't Join" over him. The first 100,000 pressings of the LP in both the UK and the US included a bonus EP titled Live at Hollywood High, recorded in June 1978, which contained live recordings of "Alison", an extended "Watching the Detectives" and a slower version of "Accidents Will Happen".

## Release and promotion

"Radio Radio" was issued as a standalone single in October 1978 as a stopgap release between This Year's Model and the still-titled Emotional Fascism, which was scheduled for release in early 1979. The single reached the UK top 30, earning Costello and the Attractions an appearance on BBC's Top of the Pops. From November to December, the band toured Canada, Japan and Australia and filmed promotional videos for "Oliver's Army" and "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding". By the start of another British tour at the end of December, the band's growing exhaustion began to affect their performances. Bruce Thomas later admitted: "We were all fried. ... we just didn't get a break. I know what Jake [Riviera] was doing, but I think he pushed it too hard, I think he really did."

Now titled Armed Forces due to a complaint from Columbia/CBS, Radar Records issued the new album in the UK on 5 January 1979, with the catalogue number RAD 14. The album was Costello's biggest commercial success to date, peaking at number two on the UK Albums Chart, held off the top spot by the disco compilation Don't Walk – Boogie; it remained on the chart for 28 weeks, twice as long as This Year's Model.

For its February 1979 release in the US, Columbia replaced "Sunday's Best" with "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding". This release went gold by the end of the year. After garnering significant radio exposure in the UK, "Oliver's Army" was released as a single on 2 February 1979, backed by Costello's solo rendition of the 1937 show-tune "My Funny Valentine". It peaked at number two on the UK Singles Chart in March. "Accidents Will Happen" was issued as a single on 4 May, backed by "Talking in the Dark" and "Wednesday Week", and peaked at number 29 in the UK.

## Critical reception

Armed Forces received positive reviews from music critics on release. Murray hailed the record as containing "some of the best rock music we'll hear this year" in NME, while a writer in The Observer cited it as "an album you just can't ignore". The Guardian's Robin Denselow named Armed Forces the "first important album" of the year, and referred to it as musically "Costello's most relaxed, mellow and gentle album yet". In the Los Angeles Times, Robert Hilburn named Armed Forces the best album at mid-year in July 1979. Citing it as Costello's "most compelling" album yet, Hilburn described it as "a feverish, unflinching approach" that is a cross between the "social fury of John Lennon's first two solo albums" and the "haunting dissection of Bob Dylan's choicest works". The Washington Post's Geoffrey Himes also compared Costello's lyrical strategy of placing harsh ideals into more seductive settings with Dylan's break from the folk rock movement in the mid-1960s. In his review of Armed Forces, Himes singled out "Accidents Will Happen" as "the kind of high point that marks a great era of music". The same publication's Eve Zibart described Armed Forces as Costello's "third and most polished album [that] stakes out New Wave's first major fiefdom in the United States".

Writing for Rolling Stone, Janet Maslin felt the album was a "killer in several senses of the word", remarking on the brief, energetic songs with dense and sometimes overly clever but snappy lyrics. Maslin felt that Costello "wants to be daring, but he also wants to dance". The Village Voice critic Robert Christgau felt Costello was using words to "add color and detail to his music" rather than as "a thinking, feeling person", though he approved of the "intricate pop constructions" and found the album overall to be "good" but not "great". Both reviewers felt that the album was more densely or richly produced than its two predecessors. Other reviewers compared Armed Forces to its two predecessors, including Ira Robbins of Trouser Press, who considered it inferior to the "supercharged bite" of This Year's Model, but nevertheless deemed it a good record in its own right. On the lyrics, Robbins found that they "suffer from an excessive penchant towards cheap puns and pseudo-Spoonerisms". Additionally, in a review titled "Swell El", Record Mirror's Sheila Prophet found the "bitter bite" of its predecessors exchanged for "depth and subtlety and new textures". Tony Rayns of Melody Maker took issue with the use of the terms "nigger" and "darkies" in "Oliver's Army" and "Sunday's Best", respectively, but was overall positive to Costello's improved vocals and songwriting, and the performance of Nieve on keyboards. Sounds magazine's Giovanni Dadomo highlighted "Accidents Will Happen", "Big Boys" and "Green Shirt", while also naming "Goon Squad" "easily the best 'political' song of the last five years".

In The Village Voice's annual Pazz & Jop critics poll for the year's best albums, Armed Forces finished at number five. It also featured on year-end lists by Melody Maker and NME at numbers fourteen and six, respectively.

## Tour and aftermath

To support the album, Costello and the Attractions embarked on the Armed Funk tour in America, which lasted from February to April. The tour was plagued with issues, including drug and alcohol problems, aggressive behaviour from Riviera and Costello to the press, and poor performances that led to critical and audience backlash. In March, a racist-filled exchange between Costello and Stephen Stills, where the former insulted various American musical artists, was leaked to the public and received additional backlash. Even though Armed Forces had reached the top ten on Billboard's Top LPs & Tape chart during the tour, by April it fell off quickly after boycotts were enacted by American radio stations and listeners. By the tour's end, Costello's reputation in America was nearly destroyed. Bruce Thomas later admitted, "We never really recovered from that tour. Every time Elvis is doing something well, he kind of sabotages it." His reputation in the UK remained largely unaffected, mostly due to newspapers failing to pick up the story. Author Mick St. Michael compared it to the worldwide response from John Lennon's 1966 more popular than Jesus comment.

Following the disastrous tour, Costello decided to reevaluate himself and his career. He ended his relationship with Buell and reconciled with his wife Mary and son Matthew. Apart from the occasional demo, he and the Attractions took some time off over the summer of 1979. Upon reconvening in the studio later in the year, Costello took a more soul-influenced direction for his next album, Get Happy!! (1980). Costello acknowledged the incident in an interview with Rolling Stone in 1982, feeling that it "outweighs my entire career", but later reflected in his 2015 memoir Unfaithful Music & Disappearing Ink: "So what if my career was rolled back off the launching pad? Life eventually became a lot more interesting due to this failure to get into some undeserved and potentially fatal orbit." Although he was not dropped by Columbia, he did not tour America again until 1981 in support of Trust.

## Legacy

Hinton argues that Armed Forces marked the end of the angry persona of Costello's early works, although Thomson cites Get Happy!! as the first step away from the persona. Bruno saw the songs on Get Happy!! as a response to the events of the Armed Funk tour. Despite the tour's initial impact on him, his career recovered from the incident. He later reflected: "Some of the highly charged language may now seem a little naive; it is full of gimmicks and almost overpowers some songs with paradoxes and subverted clichés piling up into private and secret meanings. I was not quite 24 and thought I knew it all." Although he continued to reference aggressive and fascist themes in his lyrics, including on his 2020 album Hey Clockface, David A. Graham of The Atlantic argued that "he has never written another record so searing in its combination of romantic and political fury as Armed Forces." Graham further contended that the fascist elements described on Armed Forces were still alive in America during the presidency of Donald Trump, writing: "More than four decades after its release, Armed Forces feels more frighteningly vital and relevant than ever."

### Retrospective appraisal

In later decades, Armed Forces has received acclaim as one of Costello's best works. In 1991, Entertainment Weekly's Armond White called the album a "landmark", while Greg Kot of the Chicago Tribune called it "Costello's 'political' record, and also one of his most irresistibly melodic." Reviewing for Rolling Stone in 2002, Gavin Edwards found a record "filled with great rock songs that explore the boundaries between the political and the personal". He further highlighted Costello's wordplay, Nieve's keyboard playing and the inclusion of "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love and Understanding?" as the final track. Ultimate Classic Rock's Jeff Giles stated that with the album, Costello achieved a balance between critical and commercial success, creating an album that proves "a smart, sardonic set of pop songs can also be a hit". In PopMatters, Lundy described Armed Forces as "a bold, highly ambitious effort" that represented a "giant leap" from its two "flawless" predecessors. He noted that neither of the earlier records could match Armed Forces' "acidic intellectualism".

Several reviewers commented on the production. In AllMusic, Stephen Thomas Erlewine found a more "detailed and textured pop production" on Armed Forces compared to Costello's first two albums, making the music more accessible, though the lyrics were "more insular and paranoid". Although he felt some of the lyrics were forced, he hailed the music as "demonstrat[ing] the depth of Costello's compositional talents", and named Armed Forces the artist's "third masterpiece in a row". Pitchfork's Matt LeMay described the production as "extravagantly layered with dense instrumentation and rich, effusive textures" that "often serve[s] to conceal, rather than reveal the nuances of Costello's songwriting". He concluded that "the greatest strength of Armed Forces may be the same thing that makes it less viscerally powerful than Costello's two prior records – its songs absolutely demand to be appreciated for their craftsmanship." He further argued that the album marks the point at which Costello found his voice as a songwriter. Paul Sexton of uDiscoverMusic wrote that the production's "crisp and disciplined" delivery kept the material "live and vital" on a record "that enhanced Costello's reputation as an artist with depth behind the vitriol".

Some reviewers noted that the album contained styles that hinted at the artist's later works. AllMusic's Mark Deming highlighted "Accidents Will Happen" as previewing the "stylistic diversity" Costello would incorporate into future works, while Stewart Mason felt that "Party Girl" presaged the soul music he would explore on Get Happy!!, and Bruno cited the keyboards on "Green Shirt" as foreshadowing Imperial Bedroom (1982). Sexton stated that the songs hinted at the artist's future rock and soul directions but nevertheless "sounded entirely cutting-edge at the same time". Lundy also noted that Armed Forces enacted "an eclectic blueprint of restless genre hustling" that Costello continued to utilise throughout his long career.

### Rankings

Armed Forces has appeared on several best-of lists. In 1993, the album placed at number 61 on The Times 100 Best Albums of All Time list. In 2000, it was voted number 264 in the third edition of English writer Colin Larkin's book All Time Top 1000 Albums (2000). The same year, Q placed Armed Forces at number 45 in its list of the "100 Greatest British Albums Ever". In 2003, the album was ranked number 482 on Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums of All Time, and then was moved to number 475 on an updated list in 2012. NME and Sounds ranked Armed Forces at numbers 89 and 67 in 1985 and 1986, respectively, on lists compiling the 100 greatest albums of all time.

The album was also included in the 2018 edition of Robert Dimery's book 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die.

## Reissues

Armed Forces was first released on CD through Columbia and Demon Records in January 1986. Its first extended reissue through Demon in the UK and Rykodisc in the US on CD came in October 1993. The single disc featured the original album as well as bonus tracks, including the addition of "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love and Understanding" as the album's closing track. Rhino Records reissued the album in 2002 as a two-disc set; disc one contained the original UK album plus "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love and Understanding", and disc two contained bonus tracks.

On 6 November 2020, Armed Forces was reissued as a vinyl-only super deluxe box set. Titled The Complete Armed Forces and issued by UM<sup>e</sup>, the nine-LP set consists of a 2020 remaster of the original album plus various B-sides, demos, outtakes, unreleased live recordings from the era, and a new set of liner notes written by Costello himself totalling over 10,000 words. The collection was praised by critics for giving an in-depth view of the artist's work during the period.

## Track listing

All songs written by Elvis Costello.

Side one

1. "Accidents Will Happen" – 3:00
2. "Senior Service" – 2:17
3. "Oliver's Army" – 2:58
4. "Big Boys" – 2:54
5. "Green Shirt" – 2:42
6. "Party Girl" – 3:20

Side two

1. "Goon Squad" – 3:14
2. "Busy Bodies" – 3:33
3. "Sunday's Best" – 3:22
4. "Moods for Moderns" – 2:48
5. "Chemistry Class" – 2:55
6. "Two Little Hitlers" – 3:18

## Personnel

Credits adapted from AllMusic:

- Elvis Costello – guitar, vocals
- Steve Nieve – keyboards
- Bruce Thomas – bass
- Pete Thomas – drums

Technical'

- Nick Lowe – producer
- Roger Béchirian – engineer
- Barney Bubbles – cover artwork

## Charts

### Weekly charts

### Year-end charts

## Certifications


Uruguayan War

The Uruguayan War (10 August 1864 – 20 February 1865) was fought between Uruguay's governing Blanco Party and an alliance consisting of the Empire of Brazil and the Uruguayan Colorado Party, covertly supported by Argentina. Since its independence, Uruguay had been ravaged by intermittent struggles between the Colorado and Blanco factions, each attempting to seize and maintain power in turn. The Colorado leader Venancio Flores launched the Liberating Crusade in 1863, an insurrection aimed at toppling Bernardo Berro, who presided over a Colorado–Blanco coalition (fusionist) government. Flores was aided by Argentina, whose president Bartolomé Mitre provided him with supplies, Argentine volunteers and river transport for troops.

The fusionism movement collapsed as the Colorados abandoned the coalition to join Flores' ranks. The Uruguayan Civil War quickly escalated, developing into a crisis of international scope that destabilized the entire region. Even before the Colorado rebellion, the Blancos within fusionism had sought an alliance with Paraguayan dictator Francisco Solano López. Berro's now purely Blanco government also received support from Argentine federalists, who opposed Mitre and his Unitarians. The situation deteriorated as the Empire of Brazil was drawn into the conflict. Almost one fifth of the Uruguayan population were considered Brazilian. Some joined Flores' rebellion, spurred by discontent with Blanco government policies that they regarded as harmful to their interests. Brazil eventually decided to intervene in the Uruguayan affair to reestablish the security of its southern frontiers and its regional ascendancy.

In April 1864, Brazil sent Minister Plenipotentiary José Antônio Saraiva to negotiate with Atanasio Aguirre, who had succeeded Berro in Uruguay. Saraiva made an initial attempt to settle the dispute between Blancos and Colorados. Faced with Aguirre's intransigence regarding Flores' demands, the Brazilian diplomat abandoned the effort and sided with the Colorados. On 10 August 1864, after a Brazilian ultimatum was refused, Saraiva declared that Brazil's military would begin exacting reprisals. Brazil declined to acknowledge a formal state of war, and for most of its duration, the Uruguayan–Brazilian armed conflict was an undeclared war.

In a combined offensive against Blanco strongholds, the Brazilian–Colorado troops advanced through Uruguayan territory, taking one town after another. Eventually the Blancos were left isolated in Montevideo, the national capital. Faced with certain defeat, the Blanco government capitulated on 20 February 1865. The short-lived war would have been regarded as an outstanding success for Brazilian and Argentine interests, had Paraguayan intervention in support of the Blancos (with attacks upon Brazilian and Argentine provinces) not led to the long and costly Paraguayan War.

## Uruguayan Civil War

### Blanco–Colorado strife

The Oriental Republic of Uruguay in South America had been, since its independence in 1828, troubled by strife between the Blanco Party and the Colorado Party. They were not political parties in the modern sense, but factions that engaged in internecine rebellion whenever the other dominated the government. The nation was deeply divided into Colorado and Blanco camps. These partisan groups formed in the 1830s and arose out of patron–client relationships fostered by local caudillos in the cities and countryside. Rather than a unity based upon common nationalistic sentiments, each had differing aims and loyalties informed by their respective, insular political frameworks.

Uruguay had a very low population density and a weak government. Ordinary citizens were compelled by circumstances to seek the protection of local caudillos—landlords who were either Colorados or Blancos and who used their workers, mostly gaucho horsemen, as private armies. The civil wars between the two factions were brutal. Harsh tactics produced ever-increasing alienation between the groups, and included seizure of land, confiscation of livestock and executions. The antagonism caused by atrocities, along with family loyalties and political ties, made reconciliation unthinkable. European immigrants, who came in great numbers during the latter half of the nineteenth century, were drawn into one party or the other; both parties had liberal and conservative wings, so the social and political views of newcomers could be reconciled with either. The feuding blocs impeded development of a broadly supported central national administration.

### Liberating Crusade of 1863

In the latter half of the 1850s, leading members of the Colorados and Blancos attempted a reconciliation. With the approval of many from both parties efforts were made to implement "fusionist" policies, which began to show results in cooperation in government and military spheres. The attempt at healing the schism was dealt a setback in 1858 when reactionaries in the Colorado Party rejected the scheme. The revolt was put down by Gabriel Pereira, a former Colorado and Uruguayan president under the fusionist government. The rebellious leaders were executed at Paso de Quinteros along the Río Negro, sparking renewed conflict. The Colorados suspected fusionism of promoting Blanco aims to their own detriment and called for the "martyrs of Quinteros" to be avenged.

With the internal weaknesses of fusionism now exposed, the Colorados moved to oust its supporters from the government. Their leader, Brigadier General Venancio Flores, a caudillo and an early proponent of fusionism, found himself without sufficient military resources to mount a sustained revolt and resorted to asking for intervention by Argentina.

Argentina was a fragmented nation (since the 1852 downfall of Argentine dictator Juan Manuel de Rosas), with the Argentine Confederation and the State of Buenos Aires each vying for supremacy. Flores approached the Buenos Aires Minister of War, Bartolomé Mitre, agreeing to throw the support of the Colorados behind Buenos Aires in exchange for subsequent Argentine assistance in their fight against the fusionist government in Montevideo (the Uruguayan capital). Flores and his Colorado units served Buenos Aires with fierce determination. They played a decisive role in the Battle of Pavón on 17 September 1861, in which the Confederation was defeated and all Argentina was reunited under the government in Buenos Aires.

In fulfillment of his commitment, Mitre arranged for the Colorado militia, Argentine volunteer units and supplies to be carried aboard Argentine vessels to Uruguay in May and June 1863. Ships of the Argentine navy kept Uruguayan gunships away from the operation. Back on his native soil, Flores called for the ouster of the constitutional government, by that time headed by Bernardo Berro. Flores accused the Montevideo government of Blanco sympathies and framed his "Liberating Crusade" (as he called his rebellion) in the familiar terms of a Colorado vs. Blanco struggle. Colorados from rural areas joined defectors from the military in responding to his call.

## International crisis

### Paraguayan–Blanco ties

Although the Colorados had defected to the Flores insurgency, the national guard continued to support the fusionist government. Blanco partisans filled its depleted ranks. They also replaced army officers who had deserted to Flores. The Blancos received aid from several Argentine Federalists who joined their cause. As in Uruguay, Argentina had long been a battleground of rival parties, and Bartolomé Mitre's victory at Pavón in 1861 had signaled the triumph of his Unitarian Party over the Federal Party led by Justo José de Urquiza. Mitre denied any involvement in the Flores rebellion, even though his complicity was widely known and taken for granted.

Relations between Argentina and Uruguay worsened, and both nations came close to declaring war on each other, although neither could afford a direct military conflict. Argentina had only recently emerged from a long civil war, and was still struggling to suppress a Federalist rebellion in its western province of La Rioja. Uruguay was too weak militarily to engage in a fight unaided.

Since 1862, the Blancos had made repeated overtures to Paraguay, governed by dictator Carlos Antonio López, in an attempt to forge an alliance that might advance both their interests in the Platine region. Upon the death of López, his son, Francisco Solano López, succeeded him as Paraguayan dictator. Unlike the elder López, who strove to avoid encumbering alliances, Solano greeted the Blancos' proposal with enthusiasm. He believed Argentina was working towards the annexation of both Uruguay and Paraguay, with the goal of recreating the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata, the former Spanish colony that once encompassed the territories of all three nations. Solano López had, as far back as 1855, expressed this concern, commenting to the Uruguayan Andrés Lamas that "the idea of reconstructing [the old viceroyalty] is in the soul of the Argentines; and as a result, it isn't just Paraguay that needs to stand guard: your country, the Oriental Republic [of Uruguay], needs to get along with my own in order to prepare for any eventualities." In late 1863, Solano López was mobilizing his army and was in talks with Urquiza, the leader of the dissident Argentine Federalists, to convince him to join the proposed Paraguayan–Uruguayan alliance.

### Brazil and the civil war

The developments in Uruguay were closely watched by the Empire of Brazil, which had vital interests in the Río de la Plata Basin. After Rosas fell in 1852, Brazil became the dominant regional power. Its foreign policy included the covert underwriting of opposition parties in Uruguay and Argentina, preventing strong governments that might threaten Brazil's strategic position in the area. Brazilian banking and commercial firms also had ventures in the area, furthering ties within the region. In Uruguay, the bank run by Irineu Evangelista de Sousa (Baron and later Viscount of Mauá) became so heavily involved in commercial enterprises that the economy depended on this source of continued capital flow.

About 18 percent (40,000) of the Uruguayan population (220,000) spoke Portuguese and regarded themselves as Brazilian rather than Uruguayan. Many within Flores' ranks were Brazilians, some hailing from the nearby Brazilian province of Rio Grande do Sul. Life along the frontier between Rio Grande do Sul and Uruguay was often chaotic, with hostilities erupting between partisans of various cattle barons, cattle-rustling and random killings. Large landowners on both sides of the border had long been antagonistic toward Berro's policies. The Uruguayan president attempted to tax the cattle coming from Rio Grande do Sul and to impose curbs on the use of Brazilian slaves within Uruguayan territory; slavery had been outlawed years before in Uruguay.

Among the Brazilian land barons were David Canabarro and Antônio de Sousa Neto, both allies of Flores and former separatist rebels during the Ragamuffin War that had ravaged Rio Grande do Sul from 1835 until 1845. Canabarro, a frontier military commander, misled Brazil's government by denying that Brazilians were crossing the border to join Flores. Sousa Neto went to the Brazilian capital to request immediate government intervention in Uruguay, claiming that Brazilians were being murdered and their ranches robbed. The "fact that Uruguayan citizens had just as valid claims against Brazil as Brazilians had against Uruguay was ignored", said historian Philip Raine. Although Sousa Neto had ties with the governing political party, his claims, including that he could amass a force of 40,000 to invade Uruguay, were not taken seriously by all. The Uruguayan crisis arrived at a difficult moment for Brazil, which was on the verge of a full-blown war with the British Empire for unrelated reasons. Brazil's government decided to intervene in Uruguay, fearful of showing any weakness in the face of an impending conflict with Britain, and believing that it would be better for the central government to take the lead rather than allow the Brazilian ranchers on the frontier to decide the course of events.

## Early engagements

### Brazilian ultimatum

On 1 March 1864, Berro's term of office ended. The ongoing civil war prevented elections; therefore Atanasio Aguirre, president of the Uruguayan senate and a member of the Amapolas (the radical wing of the Blanco Party) replaced Berro, on an interim basis. In April, José Antônio Saraiva was appointed minister plenipotentiary by the Brazilian government and charged with quickly reaching an accord that would settle Brazil's claims and ensure the safety of Brazilian citizens. His focus soon shifted from satisfying Brazil's terms to a more immediate goal of hammering out a deal between the antagonists in the civil war, with the expectation that only a more stable regime would be able to reach a settlement with Brazil.

The government in Montevideo was at first reluctant to consider Saraiva's proposals. With backing from Paraguay, it saw little advantage in negotiating a close to the civil war or in seeking to comply with Brazil's demands. The main factor, as historian Jeffrey D. Needell summarized, was that the "Uruguayan president had been unwilling to resolve these, particularly because the Brazilians whose grievances were at issue were allies of Venancio Flores, a client of the Argentines, and a man who was seeking his overthrow." A mutual enmity between Brazil and its Hispanic-American neighbors compounded the difficulties, the result of a long-standing distrust and rivalry between Spain and Portugal that had been carried over to their former American colonies. Brazil and Uruguay exhibited loathing for one another; as Robert Bontine Cunninghame Graham put it: "the Brazilians holding the Uruguayans as bloodthirsty savages, and the Uruguayans returning their contempt for the unwarlike ways of the Brazilians, whom they called monkeys, and looked down upon, for their mixed blood."

Eventually, in July 1864, Saraiva's persistent diplomacy moved the Uruguayan government to agree to mediated talks including Edward Thornton (the British resident minister in Buenos Aires), Argentine foreign minister Rufino de Elizalde and Saraiva himself. Initially, the negotiations seemed promising, but soon bogged down. On 4 August, convinced that the government in Montevideo was unwilling to work toward a settlement, a frustrated Saraiva delivered an ultimatum, which the Uruguayans rebuffed. On 10 August, Saraiva informed Aguirre that the Brazilian military commanders would receive orders to begin retaliation, marking the beginning of the war.

### Alliance with rebel Colorados

Under the orders of Vice-Admiral Joaquim Marques Lisboa (Baron of Tamandaré), a Brazilian fleet was stationed in Uruguayan territorial waters. The naval force comprised twelve steamships: one frigate, six corvettes and five gunboats. On 11 August 1864, Tamandaré, as the commander-in-chief of Brazilian naval and land forces in the war, received orders from Saraiva to begin retaliatory operations. Brazilian warships were deployed to the Uruguayan towns of Salto, Paysandú and Maldonado, ostensibly to "protect Brazilian subjects", while Uruguay's only warships, the small steamers Villa del Salto and General Artigas, were to be neutralized. When Tamandaré demanded these steamships remain at their docks, only the crew of General Artigas complied.

Tamandaré created a naval command assigned to Captain of Sea and War Francisco Pereira Pinto (later Baron of Ivinhema). Consisting of two corvettes and one gunboat, the division was sent to patrol the Uruguay River, a tributary of the Río de la Plata and part of the Platine region. On 24 August, Pereira Pinto sighted the Villa del Salto, which was conveying troops to fight the Colorados. The Villa del Salto ignored warning shots and a demand to surrender; after a desperate run from the Brazilian warships, it escaped to Argentine waters. This first skirmish of the war prompted the Uruguayan government to sever all diplomatic ties with Brazil on 30 August. On 7 September, Pereira Pinto again encountered the Villa del Salto sailing from Salto to Paysandú. The two Brazilian corvettes attacked the Uruguayan ship as it again tried to escape to Argentina. The battle ended when the Villa del Salto ran aground near Paysandú, where its crew set it on fire to prevent it falling into Brazilian hands. Meanwhile, the General Artigas had been sold to prevent its capture by the Brazilians.

To Flores, Brazil's military operations against the Blanco government represented a priceless opportunity, since he had been unable to achieve any lasting results during the rebellion. He entered talks with Saraiva, winning the Brazilian government over, after promising to settle their claims refused by the Blanco government. The Brazilian plenipotentiary minister gave instructions to Tamandaré to form a joint offensive with the Colorado leader and overthrow the Blancos. On 20 October, after a swift exchange of letters, Flores and the Brazilian vice-admiral formed a secret alliance.

## Colorado–Brazil joint offensive

### Sieges of Uruguayan towns

The Brazilian naval fleet in Uruguay was supposed to work in conjunction with a Brazilian land force. But months passed, and the "Army of the South" (called the "Division of Observation" until the ultimatum) stationed in Piraí Grande (in Rio Grande do Sul) was still not ready to cross into Uruguayan territory. Its main objectives were to occupy the Uruguayan towns of Paysandú, Salto and Melo; once taken, they were to be handed over to Flores and his Colorados.

On 12 October, a brigade led by Brigadier José Luís Mena Barreto detached from the main army. Two days later, near the Brazilian town of Jaguarão, the force invaded Uruguay's Cerro Largo Department. After skirmishes failed to halt their march, the Blancos abandoned Melo, and the brigade entered this capital of Cerro Largo unopposed, on 16 October. After handing over control of Melo to the Uruguayan Colorados, the Brazilians withdrew on 24 October, to rejoin their Army of the South. The next Brazilian target was Salto. Pereira Pinto sent two gunboats under First Lieutenant Joaquim José Pinto to blockade the town. On 24 November, Flores arrived with his troops and began the siege. Colonel José Palomeque, commander of the Uruguayan garrison, surrendered almost without firing a shot, on the afternoon of 28 November. Flores' army captured and incorporated four artillery pieces and 250 men; 300 Colorados and 150 Brazilians were left behind to occupy Salto.

Paysandú, the last Brazilian target, was already under blockade by Pereira Pinto. Tamandaré, who had been in Buenos Aires until this point, took charge of the blockade on 3 December. It was enforced by one corvette and four gunboats. Paysandú was garrisoned by 1,274 men and 15 cannons, under the command of Colonel Leandro Gómez. Flores, who had come from Salto, headed a force of 3,000 men, mostly cavalry. He invested Paysandú, deploying 800 infantrymen, 7 cannons (3 of which were rifled), and detachments of an additional 660 Brazilians. Gómez declined the offer to surrender. From 6 December until 8 December, the Brazilians and Colorados made attempts to storm the town, advancing through the streets, but were unable to take it. Tamandaré and Flores opted to wait for the arrival of the Army of the South. Meanwhile, Aguirre had sent General Juan Sáa with 3,000 men and four cannons to relieve the besieged town, forcing the Brazilians and Colorados to briefly lift the siege while dealing with this new threat. Sáa abandoned his advance before encountering the enemy force, and fled north of the Río Negro.

### Army of the South in Paysandú

Rather than the show of force that had been intended by the Brazilian government, the war revealed the empire's lack of military readiness. The Army of the South, stationed in Piraí Grande, was commanded by Field Marshal João Propício Mena Barreto (later Baron of São Gabriel) with two divisions. The 1st Division, under Brigadier Manuel Luís Osório (later Marquis of Erval), was formed by regular army units. The 2nd Division, under Brigadier José Luís Mena Barreto (who had since returned from his attack on Melo), was composed entirely of national guardsmen. Altogether, it numbered only 5,711 men—all (except some officers) native to Rio Grande do Sul. The army was poorly equipped for siege operations: it brought along no engineers (who could direct the construction of trenches); it was under-equipped, lacking even hatchets (necessary to cut fences, break through doors and scale walls); and its 12 cannons (a mix of La Hitte and Paixhans) were of small calibers ill-suited to attacking fortifications.

On 1 December, almost four months after Saraiva presented the ultimatum, the Army of the South invaded Uruguay. Its troops were accompanied by a semi-independent militia unit, consisting of no more than 1,300 Brazilian gaucho cavalrymen, under the former Ragamuffin Antônio de Sousa Neto. The 7,011-strong force (with 200 supply carts) marched through Uruguayan territory unopposed, heading toward Paysandú in the southwest. The disorganized and undisciplined bands of gauchos, who formed the armies of both Blancos and Colorados, were no match for the Brazilian troops. The Uruguayan gauchos "had combat experience but no training and were poorly armed save for the usual muskets, boleadoras, and facón knives", remarked historian Thomas L. Whigham. "Fire arms he [the Uruguayan gaucho] rarely possessed", said Cunninghame Graham, "or if by chance he owned a pair of long brass-mounted pistols or a flintlock blunderbuss, they were in general out of order and unserviceable. Upon the other hand, a little training made him a formidable adversary with the sabre and the lance."

Field Marshal Barreto reached Paysandú on 29 December with two infantry brigades and one artillery regiment under Lieutenant Colonel Émile Louis Mallet (later Baron of Itapevi). The Army of the South's cavalry established its camp a few kilometers away. Meanwhile, Gómez beheaded forty Colorados and fifteen Brazilian prisoners and "hung their still-dripping heads above his trenches in full view of their compatriots". On 31 December, the Brazilians and Colorados recommenced their attack and overran the city's defenses, after a bitter struggle, on 2 January 1865. The Brazilians captured Gómez and handed him over to the Colorados. Colonel Gregorio "Goyo" Suárez shot Gómez and three of his officers. According to Whigham, "Suárez's actions were not really unexpected, as several members of his immediate family had fallen victim to Gómez's wrath against the Colorados."

## Blanco capitulation

### Further operations

On 12 November 1864, before the siege of Paysandú, the Paraguayan dictator Solano López seized the Brazilian steamer Marquês de Olinda, beginning the Paraguayan War. While the Army of the South crossed Uruguay heading toward Paysandú, Brazil's government sent José Maria da Silva Paranhos (later Viscount of Rio Branco) to replace Saraiva. He arrived in the Argentine capital of Buenos Aires on 2 December and a few days later sought a formal alliance with Mitre against the Blancos. The Argentine president refused, insisting that neither he nor his government had any role in Flores' rebellion, and that Argentina would remain neutral. On 26 December, the Paraguayans invaded the Brazilian province of Mato Grosso, laying waste to towns and the countryside.

As the situation deteriorated, the Brazilian government mobilized army units from other regions of the Empire. On 1 January 1865, one brigade (composed of two infantry battalions and one artillery battalion) with 1,700 men from the Brazilian province of Rio de Janeiro disembarked and occupied the Uruguayan town of Fray Bentos. Paranhos, along with Tamandaré, met Flores in Fray Bentos and decided to launch a combined attack against Montevideo. It was apparent that the Paraguayans would take too long to reach Uruguay and no help would come from Urquiza and his Argentine Federalists. Increasingly isolated, Aguirre hoped that the foreign powers could intervene, but when, on 11 January, he asked the diplomatic corps in Montevideo whether they would provide military assistance to him and his government, none responded positively. João Propício Mena Barreto sailed from Fray Bentos on 14 January with the Brazilian infantry, bound for a landing near the mouth of the Santa Lucía River near Montevideo. On the way, he occupied the Uruguayan town of Colonia del Sacramento, garrisoning it with 50 soldiers.

The cavalry and artillery were placed under Osório and went overland. They met João Propício Mena Barreto and the infantry at their landing place. From there, the reunited Army of the South marched on Montevideo. On 31 January, Brazil and the Colorados besieged the Uruguayan capital. In the meantime, on 19 January, Paranhos attempted to clarify the nature of the Brazilian operations against the Blancos. He issued notes to the foreign diplomatic corps in Buenos Aires declaring that a state of war existed between Brazil and Uruguay. Until then, there had been no formal declaration of war, and the Empire's military operations in Uruguay since August 1864 had been mere "reprisals"—the vague term used by Brazilian diplomacy since the ultimatum.

### Armistice

In an attempt to divert the attention of Brazil from the siege of the capital, the Blanco government ordered the "Vanguard Army of the Republic of Uruguay", composed of 1,500 men under General Basilio Muñoz, to invade Brazilian soil. On 27 January 1865, Muñoz crossed the border and exchanged fire with 500 cavalrymen from Brazil's National Guard units. The Brazilians retreated to the town of Jaguarão, where they were joined by 90 infantrymen also from the National Guard, and hurriedly constructed trenches. There were also two small steamers and one other large vessel, each equipped with one artillery piece, to protect Jaguarão. The Blanco army attacked the town in the Battle of Jaguarão, but were repelled. Muñoz established a brief siege and asked Colonel Manuel Pereira Vargas (the commander of the Brazilian garrison) to surrender, but to no effect. In the early hours of 28 January, Muñoz retreated with his men toward Uruguay, ransacking property and taking all the slaves they could find.

On 2 February, Tamandaré declared to foreign diplomats that Montevideo was under siege and blockade. The Uruguayan capital was defended by between 3,500 and 4,000 armed men with little to no combat experience and 40 artillery pieces of various calibers. On 16 February, the Army of the South was further reinforced by 1,228 men from the 8th Battalion of Caçadores (Sharpshooters) arriving from the Brazilian province of Bahia, raising its numbers to 8,116. Sousa Neto and his gauchos had detached from the main force weeks before to pursue Muñoz and his army. British and French nationals were evacuated to Buenos Aires. The "general exodus of foreigners that followed caused those who remained in Montevideo to feel terror for the first time. All agreed that a full-scale assault against the city could not be postponed." However, neither Paranhos nor his government were willing to risk the destruction of Montevideo and face the inevitable outcry from other nations that would follow it.

On 15 February, Aguirre's term of office expired. Against the wishes of the Amapolas, the moderate Tomás Villalba was elected by the Senate to replace Aguirre. French, Italian and Spanish troops landed in Montevideo at Villalba's request to dissuade the radical Blancos from attempting a coup to retake power. Villalba entered into talks with Flores and Paranhos. With the Italian resident minister Raffaele Ulisse Barbolani serving as intermediary, an agreement was reached. Flores and Manuel Herrera y Obes (representing Villalba's government) signed a peace accord on 20 February at the Villa de la Unión. A general amnesty was granted to both Blancos and Colorados, and Villalba handed over the presidency to Flores on an interim basis until elections could be held.

## Aftermath

In early March, Flores assembled a cabinet composed entirely of Colorados, among them a brother of the Blanco Leandro Gómez. The new Uruguayan president purged government departments of employees with Fusionist or Blanco associations. All Blanco officers and enlisted men were eliminated from the army and replaced by those Colorado and Brazilian loyalists who had remained with Flores throughout the conflict. Public commemorations glorified the Colorados, and a monument dedicated to the "Martyrs of Quinteros" was erected. The costs of the Liberating Crusade are unknown. Flores' losses amounted to around 450 dead and wounded; there are no estimates of the number of civilians who died of famine and disease, nor is it known how much damage was sustained by the national economy. The effects of the Uruguayan War have received little attention from historians, who have been drawn to focus on the dramatic devastation suffered by Paraguay in the subsequent Paraguayan War.

News of the war's end was brought by Pereira Pinto and met with joy in Rio de Janeiro. Brazilian Emperor Dom Pedro II found himself waylaid by a crowd of thousands in the streets amid acclamations. But public opinion quickly changed for the worse, when newspapers began running stories painting the accord of 20 February as harmful to Brazilian interests, for which the cabinet was blamed. The newly raised Viscount of Tamandaré and Mena Barreto (now Baron of São Gabriel) had supported the peace accord. Tamandaré changed his mind soon afterward and played along with the allegations. Paranhos (a member of the opposition party) was used as a scapegoat by the Emperor and the government, and was recalled in disgrace to the imperial capital. Subsequent events show the accusation was unfounded. Not only had Paranhos managed to settle all Brazilian claims, but by avoiding the death of thousands, he gained a willing and grateful Uruguayan ally, not a dubious and resentful one—who provided Brazil an important base of operations during the war with Paraguay that followed.

Victory brought mixed results for Brazil and Argentina. As the Brazilian government had expected, the conflict was a short-lived and relatively easy affair that led to the installation of a friendly government in Uruguay. The official estimates included 549 battlefield casualties (109 dead, 439 wounded and 1 missing) from the navy and army and an unknown number who died from disease. Historian José Bernardino Bormann put the total at 616 (204 dead, 411 wounded and 1 missing). The war would have been deemed an outstanding success for Brazil, had it not been for its terrible consequences. Instead of demonstrating strength, Brazil revealed military weakness that an emboldened Paraguay sought to exploit. From the Argentine viewpoint, most of Bartolomé Mitre's expectations were frustrated by the war's outcome. He had succeeded in bringing to power his friend and ally, but the minimal risk and cost to Argentina he had envisioned at the outset proved to be illusory. The resulting attack by Paraguay on Brazilian and Argentine provinces sparked the long and devastating Paraguayan War.

1864–1865 war between Brazil and Uruguay