Friday, November 29, 2019
Motivation in Combat The German Soldier in World War II
Recent decades saw the publishing of a number of historical books, the authors of which promote essentially a revisionist outlook on the history of WW2.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Motivation in Combat: The German Soldier in World War II specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Omer Bartovââ¬â¢s Hitlerââ¬â¢s army: Soldiers, Nazis, and war in the Third Reich represents a good example of such a literature, because in it, the author had made a point in trying to reveal the conceptual fallaciousness of an idea that, during the course of Germanyââ¬â¢s campaign in Eastern front, Wehrmacht had fought in a gallant manner and that it is namely the Waffen SS, which should be solely blamed for the atrocities, committed against Soviet civilians through 1941-1944. According to Bartov, throughout the course of hostilities, German soldiers were becoming increasingly committed to Nazi ideology, which in its turn, had natura lly predisposed them towards conducting the ââ¬Ëwar of annihilationââ¬â¢: ââ¬Å"Unable to rely on its hitherto highly successful Blitzkrieg tactics, the Wehrmacht accepted Hitlerââ¬â¢s view that this was an all-or-nothing struggle for survival, a ââ¬Ëwar of ideologiesââ¬â¢ which demanded total spiritual commitmentâ⬠(p. 4). Author strives to substantiate the soundness of this idea by pointing out to the fact that, throughout campaignââ¬â¢s initial stages, the representatives of ââ¬Ëprimary groupsââ¬â¢ within German army (consisting of Prussian aristocratic officers) had been effectively eliminated due to a high atrocity rate. Therefore, through years 1942-1943, Wehrmacht had ceased being the army of professionals, in traditional sense of this word. Instead, it became the ââ¬Ëarmy of civiliansââ¬â¢, who compensated for their lack of military training with the sheer extent of their commitment to the Nazi cause: ââ¬Å"Nazi propaganda did its utmost to convince the troops (Wehrmacht) that they were defending humanity against a demonic invasionâ⬠(p. 9). Hence, Bartovââ¬â¢s thesis ââ¬â Wehrmacht used to indulge in genocidal actions against civilians in Russia to the same extent as it used to be the case with Waffen SS. Apparently, author implies that the very fact that German soldiers considered Russians sub-humans, had motivated them to fight to the bitter end.Advertising Looking for essay on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Nevertheless, even though Bartovââ¬â¢s book contains a number of legitimate suggestions, as to the manner in which German army had fought the Soviets, it appears that in many cases author deliberately tried to misrepresent these suggestionsââ¬â¢ actual significance. For example, unlike most contemporary historians, Bartov had proven himself being intellectually honest enough by dispelling the myth that in the summer of 1941 W ehrmacht enjoyed a complete technical and numerical superiority over the Red Army: ââ¬Å"In June 1941 the Ostheerââ¬â¢s troops attacked with 3648 tanks. Facing it in Western Russia wereâ⬠¦ no less than 15,000 tanks out of a total armored force of 24,000 ââ¬â more than all the tanks in the rest of the world put togetherâ⬠(p. 15). Yet, author never bothered to come up with an explanation as to why, as of June 22, 1941, Soviets concentrated these tanks within 50-100 kilometers wide strip, along German border. The reason for this is simple ââ¬â as it was being revealed by Suvorov (1990), Stalin himself was planning to invade Germany and consequentially the whole Europe as early as July 6, 1941.1 Therefore, Germanyââ¬â¢s attack on Soviet Union in the summer of 1941 was essentially preventive. Had Bartov mentioned the true reason for Hitlerââ¬â¢s attack on USSR, his academic reputation would have been damaged ââ¬â after all, as we are being well aware of, B ritish most prominent historian David Irving had spent three years in Austrian jail due to being charged with ââ¬Ëhistorical revisionismââ¬â¢. In its turn, this explains why, despite Bartovââ¬â¢s intention to provide readers with rather unconventional insight onto the actual realities of Germanyââ¬â¢s war against Soviet Union, his bookââ¬â¢s discursive suggestions appear utterly conformist. As we have mentioned earlier, Bartov claims that it was German soldiersââ¬â¢ ideologically inspired hate of Russian ââ¬Ësub-humansââ¬â¢ that motivated them to indulge in genocidal activities: ââ¬Å"Because they were fighting against Untermenschen (sub-humans), the troops were allowed to treat them with great brutalityâ⬠(p. 71). Moreover, just as it has traditionally been the case with Communist historians, Bartov also refers to Germanyââ¬â¢s war against USSR as the classical war of conquest, instigated by Hitlerââ¬â¢s intention to expand his countryââ¬â¢s à ¢â¬Ëliving spaceââ¬â¢: ââ¬Å"The German invasion of Russia, intended to create a vast new Lebensraum for the Aryan raceâ⬠(p. 73).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Motivation in Combat: The German Soldier in World War II specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Apparently, while working on his book, author remained quite ignorant as to the fact that the term Untermenscben has never been applied to Russians en masse, but only to Communist officials, Commissars and to their puppets among locals. Otherwise, there would not be more then million of former Soviet subjects fighting along the side with Germans in Russian Liberation Army and as volunteers in Waffen SS divisions. Also, the expansion of Lebensraum (living space) has never been Hitlerââ¬â¢s priority ââ¬â had he been truly concerned with the expansion of Lebensraum, he would have proceeded with occupying Southern France, instead of embarking upon th e conquest of Russiaââ¬â¢s snowy plains. The same can be said about Bartovââ¬â¢s treatment of the subject of ââ¬Ëatrocitiesââ¬â¢. According to the author, it was due to German soldiers being ideologically brainwashed that they used to deal with Soviet partisans rather harshly. Yet, the actual explanation to is more banal ââ¬â according to the Geneva Convention of 1927, partisans were never considered a legitimate combatants, which is why, upon being caught shooting at Germans from behind without wearing the uniform of an opposing army, they used to be treated as spies. After all, Americans, British and Soviets acted in essentially similar manner, while addressing the issue of armed resistance, on the part of German civilians in Germanyââ¬â¢s occupied territories. Thus, unlike what Bartov would like readers to believe, it was namely German soldiersââ¬â¢ rationale-driven considerations of protecting their homeland, which had motivated them to fight Soviets on Eas tern front ââ¬â not their ideological commitment to the Nazi cause.Advertising Looking for essay on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More After having captured the huge amounts of Soviet military equipment, located right along the border, and after having been exposed to the actual realities of how Soviet citizens lived in ââ¬Ëworkersââ¬â¢ paradiseââ¬â¢, even those German soldiers with Communist past became instantly convinced that Germanyââ¬â¢s cause in the war against USSR was absolutely just. In his book, Bartov quotes from the letter of a German soldier Egon Freitag, dated August 28, 1941: ââ¬Å"We were never mercenaries, but ââ¬â to use the hackneyed phrase ââ¬â defenders of the Fatherlandâ⬠(p. 34). As author had rightly pointed out: ââ¬Å"For him (Freitag)â⬠¦ Germanyââ¬â¢s invasion of the Soviet Union was a defensive operationâ⬠(p. 34). Therefore, the overall thesis of Bartovââ¬â¢s book as to the fact that Wehrmacht soldiersââ¬â¢ willingness to fight to the bitter end in Russia came as the result of these soldiers being continuously subjected to Nazi propaganda, doe s not stand much of a ground. The actual explanation for is much simpler ââ¬â German soldiers did not want Communist Commissars to be allowed to do in Germany what they had done in Russia ââ¬â pure and simple. Nazi propaganda had very little to do with it. References Bartov, O. (1992). Hitlerââ¬â¢s army: Soldiers, Nazis, and war in the Third Reich.à Oxford, Oxford University Press. Suvorov, V. (1990). Icebreaker: Who started the Second World War? London, Hamish Hamilton. Footnotes 1 Suvorov, V. (1990). Icebreaker: Who started the Second World War? London, Hamish Hamilton. 82 p. This essay on Motivation in Combat: The German Soldier in World War II was written and submitted by user Trevor A. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.