Showing posts with label 9 Medal NSDAP Badge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 9 Medal NSDAP Badge. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Ritterkreuzträger with NSDAP Golden Party Badge (Goldenes Parteiabzeichen der NSDAP)


The NSDAP Golden Party Badge (Goldenes Parteiabzeichen der NSDAP), officially known as the Goldenes Ehrenzeichen der NSDAP, stood as one of the most prestigious political awards of Nazi Germany, authorized by Adolf Hitler via decree on 13 October 1933 and first bestowed on 9 November 1933 during the 10th anniversary of the Beer Hall Putsch. Reserved exclusively for the earliest members of the party—those with unbroken membership and registration numbers from 1 to approximately 100,000 as of late 1933—it symbolized the elite status of the so-called "Old Fighters" (Alte Kämpfer) who had joined before the Nazi Party's rise to power, distinguishing them from later, often opportunistic recruits. Crafted in two sizes—a larger 30–30.5 mm version for wear on military or service uniforms and a smaller 24–25 mm variant for civilian attire—the circular badge featured a central black swastika on a white field encircled by a gold wreath, with the recipient's unique number engraved on the reverse along with the maker's mark (primarily Deschler & Sohn or Josef Fuess of Munich). Wehrmacht officers and soldiers who qualified through prior party membership proudly displayed the large version on the left breast pocket of their tunics, positioned below or alongside military decorations like the Iron Cross, reflecting the regime's fusion of political loyalty with military service; meanwhile, SS members, particularly in the Waffen-SS and Allgemeine SS, wore it more liberally on both uniforms and civilian clothing, as the SS embodied the party's paramilitary vanguard and allowed greater integration of political insignia. Worn by high-ranking figures including Reinhard Heydrich and various decorated frontline commanders, the badge not only conferred prestige and preferential treatment but also served as a visible marker of ideological purity and early devotion to National Socialism amid the total war effort of World War II, until its public display was banned following Germany's defeat in 1945.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WAFFEN-SS

SS-Obersturmbannführer Vinzenz Kaiser (1904-1945), born on 28 February 1904 in Waltersdorf near Judenburg in Styria, Austria, and killed in action on 20 April 1945 near Nuremberg in Bavaria, Germany, was an Austrian SS officer whose military career in the Waffen-SS spanned from the pre-war SS-Verfügungstruppe through major campaigns on the Eastern Front, culminating in the award of the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes for his decisive leadership during the Third Battle of Kharkov. After early involvement in the Austrian Nazi movement, including founding SA troops and SS units in Styria, arrests by the Austrian authorities, and flight to Germany as a political refugee in 1933, he completed training with the Austrian SS Legion at Lechfeld and advanced through various SS training and leadership roles before the war, eventually serving as a company commander in SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment 4 "Der Führer" of the 2. SS-Panzergrenadier-Division "Das Reich". On 12 March 1943, as SS-Hauptsturmführer and Führer of the III.(gepanzerten) Bataillon of SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment 4 "Der Führer", during the bitter fighting to retake Kharkov, he found himself in a critical sector where the I. Bataillon of SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment "Deutschland" had established a bridgehead in the first rows of houses in the Zalyutino suburbs after the 16. Kompanie breached a deep Soviet anti-tank ditch, only for heavy enemy counterattacks to threaten its collapse in the early morning hours. Rather than simply reinforcing the defensive line as initially planned while awaiting the arrival of tanks, Kaiser proactively decided to launch an immediate attack from the bridgehead with his SPW-equipped battalion to relieve the hard-pressed I. Bataillon "Deutschland" and expand the foothold; his bold initiative and personal leadership turned the situation completely, enabling his forces to push the Soviets back, advance to the railway station area, link up with reconnaissance elements of the SS-Panzergrenadier-Division "Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler" near the Red Square, and then pursue the retreating enemy in a Kampfgruppe of armored personnel carriers that inflicted heavy losses and captured approximately forty artillery pieces in the woods southwest of the city. Kaiser himself personally destroyed four enemy tanks at close range with handheld weapons during the fighting, earning him four silver Tank Destruction Badges, and his tremendous personal bravery, tactical decisiveness, and proven combat leadership were singled out in the recommendation submitted by acting divisional commander SS-Standartenführer Kurt Brasack, leading to the award of the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes on 6 April 1943 (the 1684th such award). He later rose to the rank of SS-Obersturmbannführer, commanded units in formations including the 17. SS-Panzergrenadier-Division "Götz von Berlichingen", and met his end during a reconnaissance mission in the final defensive battles around Nuremberg in April 1945.



Source :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q640988

Sunday, February 18, 2024

Helmuth Valtiner and Ferdinand Schörner


From left to right: Oberfeldwebel Helmuth Valtiner (Zugführer in 1.Kompanie / I.Bataillon / Gebirgsjager-Regiment 143 / 6.Gebirgs-Division) and Generalmajor Ferdinand Schörner (Kommandeur 6. Gebirgs-Division). Valtiner received the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes on 13 June 1941 for his bravery and decisiveness during the German invasion of Greece, two months previously. On 18 April 1941 the First Battalion of Gebirgsjäger-Regiment 143 was ordered to force a crossing over the river Pinios and capture the position Evangelismos. The Bataillon ordered its 1. Kompanie to lead the way, intending for it to have established a bridgehead on the south bank of the river by 14:00. But by the ordered time a large portion of the Kompanie had not even reached the river, only Valtiner and 6 men. After a brief examination of the situation he swam over the river in full combat gear with his comrades. In doing so he was able to determine the most favourable crossing point over the river, and despite strong enemy artillery, mortar and MG fire he was able to hang on to a small toehold on the opposite bank. This was later exploited when the rest of 1. Kompanie arrived, and it led to the successful creation of the first bridgehead over the Pinios.


Source :
Michal S. photo collection
"Oberfeldwebel Helmuth Valtiner" by Roland Kaltenegger
https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/81893/Valtiner-Helmuth.htm

Wednesday, April 5, 2023

Bio of SS-Gruppenführer Bruno Streckenbach (1902-1977)

Bruno Streckenbach

Date of Birth: 07.02.1902 - Hamburg (German Empire)
Date of Death: 28.10.1977 - Hamburg (West Germany)

NSDAP Number: unknown (joined 01.10.1930)
SS Number: unknown (joined 01.09.1931)
Parents: Hans Heinrich Hugo Streckenbach (30 August 1869) and Minna Johanna Elisabeth Spenner (4 May 1877)
Wife: Klara Luise Wulff (divorced 11.07.1926); Helene Karolina Amanda Steinhard (married 20.10.1927 and divorced 11.06.1934; Franziska Konradone Dore Hartjen (married 15.07.1937)
Children: A son and a daughter (from third marriage)

Promotions:
24.12.1932 SS-Sturmführer
12.06.1933 SS-Hauptsturmführer
02.09.1933 SS-Sturmbannführer
09.11.1933 SS-Obersturmbannführer
20.04.1934 SS-Standartenführer
00.00.1935 Feldwebel der Reserve
12.09.1936 SS-Oberführer
20.04.1939 SS-Brigadeführer
01.01.1941 SS-Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Polizei
09.11.1941 SS-Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Polizei
18.01.1943 SS-Untersturmführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
01.03.1943 SS-Obersturmführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
10.03.1943 SS-Hauptsturmführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
11.03.1943 SS-Sturmbannführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
01.07.1943 SS-Obersturmbannführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
28.08.1943 SS-Standartenführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
30.01.1944 SS-Oberführer der Reserve der Waffen-SS
01.07.1944 SS-Brigadeführer der Reserve und Generalmajor der Reserve der Waffen-SS
09.11.1944 SS-Gruppenführer der Reserve und Generalleutnant der Reserve der Waffen-SS

Career:
00.00.190_ Volksschule
00.00.1908 Realgymnasium des Hamburger Johanneums
00.10.1918 Unterprimaner Jungmann-Etappen-Kommando
00.02.1919 Oberprimaner Freikorps Hermann
00.00.19__ Freiwilligen Wachtabteilung Bahrenfeld
00.00.19__ Norddeutschen Heimatbund
00.00.19__ Wehrwolf
00.00.19__ Fremdsprachenkorrespondent
00.00.1925 Gaugeschäftsführer ADAC in Hamburg
00.00.1928 Verkäufer Stöver-Werken
01.10.1930 Member of NSDAP
00.12.1930 Member of SA
01.09.1931 Member of SS
00.00.193_ - 00.00.1932 Autovermietung "Selbstfahrer-Union"
00.00.1932 Werbevertreter Automobilbranche
00.12.1932 Führer Sturmbann I / 28. SS-Standarte
00.00.1933 Werbeabteilung Norddeutschen Rundfunk
20.10.1933 Leiter der politischen Polizei Hamburg
00.00.193_ Leiter Zeitfunkabteilung Norddeutschen Rundfunk
00.00.193_ Polizeidirektion München
05.10.1933 Regierungsrat
01.02.1938 Regierungsdirektor / Inspekteur der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD (IdS), Wehrkreis X
00.09.1939 Führer Einsatzgruppe 1 / 14.Armee
01.11.1939 Befehlshaber der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD (BdS), Krakau
12.06.1940 Chef Amt I (Organisation, Verwaltung und Recht) in Reichssicherheitshauptamtes (RSHA)
11.07.1942 Stellvertretender Gerichtsherr des RSHA
00.12.1942 Entered Waffen-SS
15.01.1943 Panzerjäger-Ersatz-Abteilung, Hilversum
15.03.1943 Führer Panzerjäger-Abteilung 8 / SS-Kavallerie-Division "Florian Geyer"
00.00.194_ Panzertruppschule Wunsdorf
10.01.1944 Kommandeur 8. SS-Kavallerie-Division "Florian Geyer"
01.04.1944 Führer 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS "Latvia" (lettische Nr. 2)
10.05.1945 POW Soviet forces
18.02.1954 Convicted to 25 years forced labour, Mosow Military Tribune
00.00.195_ Wladimir Prison
10.10.1955 Released
00.00.19__ - 30.06.1969 kaufmännischer Angestellter und Prokurist, Ottenser Eisenwerk GmbH

Awards and Decorations:
00.00.1924 Meisterschaftsabzeichen des Deutschen Ruderverbandes
00.00.193_ SS-Totenkopfring
00.00.193_ Ehrendegen des Reichsführers-SS
16.12.1935 Julleuchter der SS
00.00.193_ SA-Sportabzeichen in Bronze
24.08.1938 Magyar Érdemkereszt (Hungarian Order of Merit)
30.01.1939 Goldenes Parteiabzeichen der NSDAP
00.00.19__ Dienstauszeichnungen der NSDAP in Bronze und Silber
00.00.19__ SS-Dienstauszeichnungen, 3. und 2. Stufe (12 Jahre)
00.09.1939 Eisernes Kreuz II.Klasse
30.01.1942 Kriegsverdienstkreuz II.Klasse mit Schwertern
30.01.1942 Kriegsverdienstkreuz I.Klasse mit Schwertern
15.07.1943 Eisernes Kreuz I.Klasse
06.09.1943 Tapferkeitsauszeichnung für Angehörige der Ostvölker I.Klasse in Silber
25.09.1943 Allgemeines-Sturmabzeichen
30.10.1943 Nahkampfspange in Bronze
15.12.1943 Deutsches Kreuz in Gold
09.08.1944 Mentioned in the Wehrmachtbericht: "Im Nordabschnitt der Ostfront haben sich die norddeutsche 83. Infanteriedivision unter Oberst Götz mit unterstellten Teilen der ostpreußischen 61. Infanteriedivision und die 19. lettische SS-Division unter Führung von SS-Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Waffen-SS Streckenbach in Angriff und Abwehr besonders bewährt." (In the northern section of the Eastern Front, the North German 83rd Infantry Division under Colonel Götz with subordinate parts of the East Prussian 61st Infantry Division and the 19th Latvian SS Division under the leadership of SS Brigadefuhrer and Major General of the Waffen-SS Streckenbach have proven themselves in attack and defense).
27.08.1944 Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes, as SS-Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Waffen-SS and Kommandeur 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS (lettische Nr. 2). Streckenbach’s Ritterkreuz recommendation reads as follows: “On the 06.08.1944 the Kampfgruppe 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS (Lett. Nr. 2) was engaged in combat behind the Aiviekste river (west of Lake Lubana), however it did not have friendly contact to either the left or right as a result of deep hostile penetrations. During the afternoon an attack by a Soviet Division from the north threatened to sever the single retirement road of the Division at a point northwest of Lubana. High command ordered that this penetration be sealed off. In this precarious situation SS-Brigadeführer Streckenbach made the decision to go over to the attack. He assembled all available reserves (including every last supply driver and clerk he could find) and then personally led a pincer maneuver against the broken-in hostile elements. Success: Total destruction of 2 Soviet rifle regiments, Division was able to pull back as ordered along the sole available route. SS-Brigadeführer had been the soul of resistance for his Division since the beginning of its prolonged withdrawal on the 10.07.1944. Throughout this time he rushed from Kompanie to Kompanie in the foremost line, all while rallying wavering units and upholding the combat morale of his Latvian formations. The countermeasures that he executed during this period repeatedly led to notable successes. His proven personal bravery and leadership qualities make him a particularly worthy candidate for being awarded the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes.”
30.09.1944 Mentioned in the Wehrmachtbericht: "In der Abwehrschlacht in Lettland hat sich die 19. Waffengenadierdivision der SS (lettische Nr. 2) unter Führung von SS-Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Waffen-SS Streckenbach bei der Verteidigung ihres Heimatbodens hervorragend geschlagen." (In the defensive battle in Latvia, the 19th Waffen Genadier Division of the SS (Latvian No. 2) under the leadership of SS Brigadefuehrer and Major General of the Waffen-SS Streckenbach did an excellent job in defending their homeland).
27.12.1944 Mentioned in the Wehrmachtbericht: "Bei den schweren Abwehrkämpfen in Kurland haben sich die 205. Infanteriedivision unter Führung des Generalleutnants von Mellenthin und die 19. Freiwilligendivision unter SS-Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Waffen-SS Streckenbach hervorragend geschlagen." (During the heavy defensive fighting in Kurland, the 205th Infantry Division under the command of Lieutenant General von Mellenthin and the 19th Volunteer Division under SS Group Leader and Lieutenant General of the Waffen-SS Streckenbach did extremely well).
16.01.1945 Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes mit Eichenlaub #701, as SS-Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Waffen-SS and Kommandeur 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS (lettische Nr. 2). “During the morning hours of the 23.12.1944 the Russians conducted a short yet ferocious artillery barrage before launching a surprise multi-division assault against the left neighbouring Division (Gruppe Henze) as well as the left wing of the 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division. Although the Division was able to repulse all attacks against it, the enemy was able to achieve a deep penetration in the sector of the left neighbouring Division. Within a short time the foe had overrun the second position, and then they pressed on to the Artillerie’s defensive screen. Enemy forces pivoted to the northwest, and by pushing on in this direction they threatened to cut off the left wing of the Division. This could easily have led to the disintegration of the frontline: the enemy would have achieved their deep penetration and thereby enabled their planned breakthrough to proceed. In this particularly critical moment SS-Gruppenführer Streckenbach decided to first order his Waffen-Gren.Rgt. 42 to form a blocking front. At the same time he planned to commit all available forces against the enemy’s main thrust in the left flank of his Division. These included the II./W.-Gren.Rgt. 43, the existing alarm units from the supply troops and the Kampfschule of the Feld-Ers.Btl. Although his right flank was also being attacked at several points he nonetheless pull additional elements from it in order to reinforce his left wing. This risky decision paid off however, as it held up the deep flank of his Division and ensured that the hostile thrust towards the northwest would be temporarily contained. However the enemy pressure against the deep flank of the 19. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS continued to increase throughout the 24.12.1944, and so during the afternoon the divisional commander was assigned the II./Gren.Rgt. 273 of the 93. Infanterie-Division (which had been brought up via motor transport). On the morning of the next day he did not use it to seal off the new hostile penetrations, but rather he used it to deliberately counterattack the flank of this enemy thrust. This countermeasure again halted the enemy’s thrust to the northwest for the time being, and it also helped buttress the ever-lengthening deep flank of the Division. This initiative by the divisional commander was the deciding factor that enabled the extended frontline of the 19. Waffen-Gren.Div. der SS to be held for 4 days long despite strong enemy attacks in the front and flank. Such an action furthermore presented the enemy with a dangerous flank threat for their own thrust to the northwest. It was only on the night of the 26./27.12.1944 that the frontline of the 19. Waffen-Gren. Division der SS was pulled back to the Artillerie defensive position due to the situation in the sector of Gruppe Henze. The Korps’ ability to delay this breakthrough attempt by 6 divisions and 1 Soviet Tank Corps with its own weak forces bought enough time for armoured reinforcements to arrive from other sectors of the Courland front, and once they had arrived it was possible to transition to a more active form of combat. This outstanding achievement by the 19. Waffen-Gren.Div. der SS (which was notable enough to merit a mention in the Wehrmachtbericht) is largely attributable to the clear and energetic leadership of its commander. He personally directed the heavy forest combat of his Latvians from the vicinity of the regimental command posts, and everywhere he was the soul of the bitter resistance. Captured Russian officers stated that these combat days were some of the worst they had seen in the entire war. Up until now this Latvian Division has held its ground in an exemplary fashion whilst engaged in defensive combat. It shows clear evidence of having been influenced by the personality of its commander. The high combat value of his unit can be credited to the decisiveness, energetic leadership and personal devotion to duty displayed by the divisional commander, SS-Gruppenführer Streckenbach. In these 9 major days of combat the Russians suffered heavy losses in men at the hands of the 19. Waffen-Gren.Div. der SS. They also sustained the following materiel losses to the Division in this time: 1 aircraft (to infantry weapons), 18 tanks (including 8 to close combat weapons), 1 assault gun, 18 anti-tank guns, 12 trucks, 26 medium and heavy mortars, 44 heavy machine-guns, 156 light machine-guns, and numerous additional war materiel. 104 prisoners were also captured (including 4 deserters). In these days of bitter forest combat along a wide front, the Division inflicted such heavy losses on 3 attacking Russian divisions that the enemy was forced to call off their assault on the 01.01.1945. The defensive resolve of this Division laid the groundwork for the crushing defeat sustained by the Russian 22nd Army during the first days of January.”
00.00.1945 Ärmelband "Kurland"

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruno Streckenbach (7 February 1902 – 28 October 1977) was born in Hamburg, Germany on 7 February 1902. His highest education was Gymnasium, which he left in April 1918 to voluntarily report to the German Army during World War I. Just like his close colleagues Erwin Schulz and Heinrich Himmler, he never served on the front lines of the battlefield due to the ceasefire that took place in November 1918.

After the end of the First World War, he was an active member of the Freikorps Bahrenfeld, which took part in the 1920 Kapp-Putsch. He was employed as a wholesale merchant, tried his hand at advertising, being a radio editor and also trying to establish himself as the director of a local office.

1933 was a huge year for many soon-to-be SS and police officers. As some historians have mentioned, for people like Streckenbach, 1933 was the year in which they assumed positions of the Gestapo (Political Police), but also the year which they were put into “leadership positions, posts they would hardly have occupied without the National Socialist seizure of power.” Following the Reichstag Fire on 27 February 1933 which the Nazis falsely propagated to be “communist-led,” there was a suspension of constitutional rights in the Weimar Republic, which increased the power of the government. Protests occurred and subsequently severe persecution towards left-wing politicians followed the Presidential Decree for the Protection of Volk and State on 28 February. In the March 5 Reichstag Elections, the National Socialists won power, although only upon merging with the Deutschnationale Volkspartei. After having the majority vote, the Nazi's seized full power. Persecution against political opponents and Jews increased, as did incidence of brutal assault, sporadic murder, and arson. It was during this seizure of power that many of the future leaders of the RSHA were given their first positions in the party.

More than a quarter of the future RSHA leaders had already been police officers in their respective home towns before 1933. In 1933, almost two-thirds of these men were given political police positions in their towns or cities, or sent to Berlin as a part of the Gestapo Office. Streckenbach himself only entered the police force on 31 August 1931 as the leader of the SS-Sturmbanner in Hamburg, Streckenbach's placement as chief of the Gestapo in Hamburg illustrates the “superficiality of professional continuity” – referring to the lack of qualifications many candidates possessed – as some historians characterize the Nazi Party's seizure of power. For years, these young radical right-wing militants had been marginalized, but with the rise of the Nazis, they were now given the chance to pursue a career which preserved their radical and violent worldviews, and indeed encouraged such behaviour. Historian Bradley Smith argues that the Nazi seizure of power offered these young men, including Bruno Streckenbach, a career which abided by and even enhanced their radicalism, and provided professional advancements which they had failed to receive in their careers up to this point.

Reinhard Heydrich and Himmler were always trying to expand their power and authority beyond the confines of the German Reich. In accordance with Hitler's notion of Lebensraum, active persecution against Polish people, and long-term goals of “conquering extensive territories in the Soviet Union”, Hitler and other top Nazi leadership started preparing for a war, marked by the invasion of Poland. In preparation for the invasion of Poland, Heydrich expressed his ambition of having mobilized killing squads, a “fighting administration” as he put it.

The Einsatzgruppen were in charge of securing German power and occupational authority in Poland through terror, furthering the ideology of ethnic cleansing and Lebensraum via deportations out of the occupied territory and mass executions within. The number of Einsatzgruppen corresponded to the Wehrmacht army units deployed. The leaders of the Sicherheitspolizei (SiPo; Security Police) in Berlin selected the office heads of the Einsatzgruppen very carefully, most of them being prior SD members or leaders. The members of the Einsatzgruppen— 500 men per Einsatzgruppe— were taken from local SS and police stations near the five units’ locations.

After the war, Bruno Streckenbach testified that Werner Best had directed deployment orders directly to him at the end of July or beginning of August. Streckenbach immediately left Hamburg to drive to Vienna, where he was deployed as head of Einsatzgruppe I. The German Wehrmacht invaded Poland on the morning of 1 September 1939. The Einsatzgruppen followed after them sending reports back to Berlin detailing the actions of Operation Tannenberg, the code name given to the anti-Polish extermination action carried out by the SD and SiPo in Poland during the opening weeks of the war. It was Streckenbach's task to oversee four districts as Befehlshaber der Sicherheitspolizei im General Gouvernement: Warsaw, Krakow, Radom and Lublin. In each of these districts, thousands of Polish intellectuals—many former officers, professors, teachers, or politicians—were arrested and soon after, murdered. Streckenbach detailed the mission of the Einsatzgruppen: they were to seize and destroy all political and racial enemy groups, such as leftists, Roma, Polish resistance and Jews. In addition, they were to report on and evaluate material seized during the campaign and to gather information from agents among the Soviet population. Streckenbach ordered all enemies of the Third Reich to be deported to concentration camps and there to be executed. Jews were especially singled out for Sonderbehandlung ("special treatment"), a process that entailed particularly brutal beatings. On 9 November 1941 he was promoted to SS-Gruppenführer und Generalleutnant der Polizei.

By the end of 1939, the Einsatzgruppen were permanent units of the RSHA. Many members of the RSHA worked alongside the Einsatzgruppen in implementing brutal violence and mass murder throughout Poland. In May 1940, thousands of Poles were reported as liquidated. At the end of this month, Streckenbach had reported that “sentencing by martial law” was completed, with over 8,500 persons–whether accused as being “career criminals” or summoned to “summary sentencing”–were either already executed or would be shortly.

During his time in Poland, he had earned a reputation as the ruthless chief, who fought with such determination and mercilessness to eradicate any, and all, Nazi opponents.

Historian Michael Wildt suggests a stark increase in the activation of Streckenbach's radicalness from his time as a Gestapo chief in Hamburg to his first few months as the head of Einsatzgruppe I in Poland. Wildt notes the difference in responsibilities, going from arrests, abuses, assaults and killings of prisoners to the mindset of extermination of large groups of people. More than just a racial justification, Wildt suggests that Streckenbach's first few months as head of Einsatzgruppe I escalated into a murderous ideology that was unconceivable before this position.

Most of the previous SD men who were now employed in the Einsatzgruppen hadn't inflicted such murderous activity on so many people up until this point. As Wildt suggests, the deployment in Poland for the Einsatzgruppen was a defining moment for how policing matters were to be handled. It was these men's “first experience as racist mass murderers”. The deportations to the General-Gouvernement came from the Reich as well as newly “Germanized” territories which Germany had taken from Poland, removed the local “opponents”–Jews, Poles, Roma, and “asocial persons”–and replaced with ethnic Germans. During the late months of 1939, a span of eight weeks consisted of the execution of over 60,000 people by the Nazi forces, including by the Einsatzgruppen. Hitler insisted that this “harsh ethnic battle” could only be defeated without any internal resistance or legal restrictions upon implementation. Furthermore, the RSHA was the appropriate department for this “ethnic battle."

At the beginning of 1941, the attack on Soviet Union was first discussed among leaders of the RSHA. In March 1941, Heydrich informed a small circle of leaders, including Streckenbach, about the offensive that was to take place. The Wehrmacht army would lead and the Einsatzgruppen would secure the area after Soviets had been defeated. Streckenbach volunteered his unit's but Heydrich decided differently.

Streckenbach had commissioned the Personnel and Administration Office Leaders, advising them to prepare for deployment. In May 1941, Streckenbach called on his long-time colleague Erwin Schulz to prepare his men in the Leadership School of the Security Police in Berlin-Charlottenberg for deployment after just having completed their training as Criminal Police inspectors. Streckenbach sent them to Pretzsch, where they were to assume leadership status of the Einsatzkommando. These young soldiers, many of them recent college graduates, came motivated to fight and impress authority. The Einsatzgruppen were divided and formed in Pretzsch in May 1941. Streckenbach, Müller and Heydrich had the most authority in dispersing directions of the Einsatzkommandos in Pretzsch leading up to the offensive on the Soviet Union. Furthermore, in Otto Ohlendorf's Nuremberg Trial, he testified that Bruno Streckenbach had communicated the “order for the Final Solution” to the Einsatzgruppen.

Himmler and Hitler's actions following the assassination attempt and death of Heydrich were particularly vengeful. Hitler stated in reference to the Czechs who killed Heydrich, whenever you “kill someone, what results is always worse.” Streckenbach was called to Prague following the 4 June death of Heydrich. Himmler deemed the situation dire, the head of the RSHA having been killed with such abruptness.

Despite considering many leaders to assume Heydrich's position, Himmler decided to lead the RSHA himself. While Himmler was the head of the RSHA, Streckenbach — along with each of the other RSHA office heads — had near-full autonomy in deciding the internal structure of their respective divisions. Himmler focused his efforts on ensuring that Western European Jews be sent to extermination camps as efficiently and completely as possible, allowing the office heads like Streckenbach to control how it was done.

At the end of July 1942, Himmler named Streckenbach his representative as the legal authority of the RSHA. This essentially gave the latter absolute authority in deciding disciplinary cases regarding members of the RSHA. After Streckenbach had served as RSHA chief for about six months, Himmler concluded that a successor had to be publicly named. Bruno Streckenbach's responsibilities and qualifications were highly regarded and far exceeded expectations, and for this reason he was largely considered the best candidate for the position. Historian Tuviah Friedmann speculated that Himmler saw Streckenbach in some regards as having far too much power in his hands, possibly even seeing him as professional competition. To this day however, it is still unknown why Streckenbach was not appointed for the position of head of the RSHA, and Ernst Kaltenbrunner was chosen instead.

Hitler and Himmler wanted to name Streckenbach as the Senior SS and Police Leader of the Alpenland in Salzburg, Austria. Extremely disappointed, nonetheless, Streckenbach declined and in a personal letter to Himmler, requested to be placed in a military position.

Streckenbach trained in Hilversum, Holland with an antitank unit (as an Untersturmführer) in the beginning of 1943, and quickly advanced through the ranks of the Waffen-SS, even for being a senior SS leader. He was a regiment and division leader of the 8th SS Cavalry Division Florian Geyer and went on to lead the 19th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (2nd Latvian) in the offensive against the Soviet Union in 1944 as a general. On 10 May 1945, Streckenbach and his division were taken prisoner in the Courland Pocket by the Soviet army. He remained a Soviet prisoner of war until 9 October 1955, when he was sent back to Hamburg.

When Streckenbach returned to Hamburg, he was informed that he faced charges for actions he had taken as the city's Gestapo chief. He was accused of beating someone in the kidneys; however after further investigation, the state prosecutor could not obtain the appropriate documents which provided evidence of the charges.

During the Nuremberg Trials, Streckenbach's name was continuously mentioned in court papers, among which was a testimony from Otto Ohlendorf who, as mentioned before, identified Streckenbach as one who had directed the Einsatzgruppen towards implementation of the Final Solution. However, the Hamburg State Prosecutor's Office concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that his actions conflicted with the extant governing laws of the National Socialist rule. It was the case that many inhumane acts taken by the former Nazi members; as Wildt says, the assumption that National Socialism was synonymous with the “German Dictatorship rendered indivisible” the murderous acts that the party had taken in eastern and southern Europe and the Soviet Union.

In 1957, state prosecutors in Germany began discovering the unfathomable atrocities and millions of deaths of Soviet Jews culminating in the Ulm Einsatzkommando trial. His case prompted the 1959 establishment of the Central Office of State Justice Administration for the Investigation of National Socialist Crimes (Zentrale Stelle der Landesjustizverwaltungen zur Aufklärung der nationalsozialistischen Gewaltverbrechen) in Ludwigsburg. In the early 1960s, the office discovered a document providing evidence of deployment orders to Criminal Police and Gestapo officers that incited murderous activity. The court ordered the resumption of the investigation of crimes committed by Bruno Streckenbach.

On 30 June 1973, a bill of indictment for the murder of at least a million people was brought. Streckenbach, who was suffering from serious heart disease at the time, claimed ineligibility notwithstanding the strains a trial might place on his health. On 20 September 1974, the Hanseatic Appellate Court confirmed a diagnosis postponing trial commencement indefinitely. Bruno Streckenbach never had to answer for his part in the Nazi regime. He died on 28 October 1977 in Hamburg, Germany.


Chief of the Reich Security Main Office and Deputy Protector in Bohemia and Moravia SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich (centre) in conversation with SS-Gruppenführer Bruno Streckenbach (right) at the inauguration of the Reich School of the Security Police and Security Service (RSSPSD) in Prague on April 16, 1942; far left is SS-Oberführer Erwin Schulz (1900–1981).


Source :
Bundesarchiv photo collection
https://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Streckenbach,_Bruno
https://www.holocausthistoricalsociety.org.uk/contents/germanbiographies/brunostreckenbach.html
https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/14001/Streckenbach-Bruno.htm

Monday, October 3, 2022

Gerhard Kauffmann and Walther von Brauchitsch

From left to right: Generalmajor Gerhard Kauffmann (Kommandeur 256. Infanterie-Division) and Generalfeldmarschall Walther von Brauchitsch (Oberbefehlshaber des Heeres). The picture was taken in the period between July 1940 (Brauchitsch's promotion to Generalfeldmarschall) and April 1941 (Kauffmann's promotion to Generalleutnant). Brauchitsch is wearing the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes which he received on 30 September 1939. Kauffmann himself would receive the same medal on 9 July 1941 during Unternehmen Barbarossa.

Source :
Jason Mustar photo collection
https://www.forum-der-wehrmacht.de/index.php?thread/71578-foto-von-zwei-gener%C3%A4len/

Tuesday, July 20, 2021

Bio of Generalfeldmarschall Walther von Brauchitsch


Germany's last professional Commander-in-Chief of the Army. Walther von Brauchitsch, was an artilleryman who had served throughout the Great War on the General Staff. When the Nazis achieved the discrediting and downfall of his predecessor, Colonel-General von Fritsch, it had been Hitler's wish and intention to get von Reichenau promoted in his place. But this the Army, led by von Rundstedt, would not accept, so the post went to von Brauchitsch who was acceptable to all and popular throughout the Army. He was several years junior in age and seniority of rank to von Rundstedt, but was promoted Colonel- General on the day of his appointment, 4 February 1938, and became Field-Marshal in the mass promotion Hitler ordained after the victory over France in July 1940.

Brauchitsch has been hardly, even severely, dealt with by many historians, particularly by Sir John Wheeler-Bennett ('a man of little moral courage and no strength of character'), Barry A. Leach, Walter Görlitz, and Colonel Albert Seaton, and his case has not been helped by the disloyalty to his Chief which Haider sometimes showed even during the war. It is time that at least a part of his reputation be re-established.

Brauchitsch was born in Berlin in 1881. In 1900 he became a subaltern in the 3rd Foot Guards, a famous regiment which nurtured one of his predecessors as Commander-in-Chief, Colonel-General Freiherr Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord, and Field-Marshal von Manstein. But the next year Brauchitsch, despite promptings to the contrary from his friend in the cavalry, von Kleist, transferred to the 3rd Guards Field Artillery Regiment. A major at the end of the Great War, he served as a staff officer in the Truppenamt from late 1922, and in 1925 commanded an artillery battalion. By 1928 he was a colonel, followed by further spells of duty in the Truppenamt in 1930 as Director of Army Training, a departmental head, and in 1932 as Inspector of Artillery. He became a Major-General in 1930; a Lieu tenant-General in 1933, when commander of Wehrkreis I and the 1st Division at Königsberg; commander of I Army Corps at Königsberg from June 1935; a full General of Artillery in 1936, and commander of Gruppenkommando 4 in 1937.

An innovator in artillery methods and a thoroughly good gunner, Brauchitsch was not fenced in by traditional military beliefs and was, in fact, largely responsible for developing the formidable 88 mm. gun for dual-purpose work, that is as both an anti-tank and an anti-aircraft gun. The dual-purpose 88 mm. became the finest artillery piece of the war. As a former grammar-school boy he was not subservient to the tenets of the Junker class. When he was commanding in East Prussia Brauchitsch clashed with Gauleiter Erich Koch, an equivocal character, and with the S.S., elements of whom he ejected from Army manoeuvres. His appointment as C-in-C Army came as a great surprise, partly because he was by no means considered to be a Nazi sympathizer. Powerful though such an appointment might be, much of its strength was vitiated because Hitler chose the time of the demise of von Blomberg and von Fritsch to establish the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, or O.K.W., under General Keitel, who had previously been head of the lesser Wehrmachtsamt and, in Blomberg's words, 'the man who runs my office'. Thus the new C-in-C Army became less of a power than he had been previously. His position with the Nazis was also weakened because in 1938 he divorced his first wife, and married a woman who was notoriously pro-Nazi. It was suggested at the time that possibly Hitler and certainly Goring had smoothed the way for this second marriage to take place, as conservative Army circles did not relish divorces in those days, and Brauchitsch was the son of a Prussian General of Cavalry.

Brauchitsch has been criticized for accepting his appointment before Fritsch's case was dealt with, for tamely accepting Hitler's new unification of command in the O.K.W., and for agreeing to some vital changes of personnel in the High Command. Jodl thought he would have accomplished most of the latter in his own interests anyway, but it remains true that more or less contemporaneously with Brauchitsch's promotion sixteen high-ranking generals lost their commands (though nearly all were to regain them within a year or so) and many others were transferred. In the view of Wheeler-Bennett, Brauchitsch was an appeaser who had sold the pass before he started his top job. Others may feel that he had a sincere desire to protect the Army from undue Nazi influence. He told Hitler in 1938 that the interference of civilians in military affairs invariably led to disastrous results, a warning which seems to have passed the Führer by; and he kept on von Fritsch's staff and remained on good terms with his predecessor. He did not think much of Keitel, and he was bold enough to threaten to challenge Dr Göbbels to a duel for spreading unpleasant rumours about his divorce.

Like others who had thought that they might tame the tiger, von Brauchitsch was to find Hitler an impossible customer to deal with. The tragedy is that Brauchitsch progressively weakened and eventually lost control of his own organization, to become merely a figurehead. The reasons for this were a certain weakness of character, the unstoppable success and undeniable orders of an emphatic Hitler, a misguided sense of loyalty, and the very considerable influence upon him of his '200 per cent' Nazi wife. It was thus that he became, in von Manstein's words, 'demoted from the status of military adviser to the Head of State to that of a subordinate commander pledged to unquestioning obedience'.

In various ways Brauchitsch had a wider outlook than many of his colleagues. He was a well-educated man, spoke several foreign languages, and himself listed economic and political questions of the day as his outside interests. Like Raeder in the Navy, he tried to maintain the old religious traditions in the Army. He had very good manners, to those outside the Army as well as to his colleagues, and showed warmth and understanding towards his subordinates. As a result people liked to serve under him. He was particularly solicitous of the welfare of the troops, and paid attention to their housing and food. Militarily he had shown himself keen on new ideas in the 'twenties by organizing manoeuvres to test the co-operation of aircraft with motorized troops. Unfortunately, although not a Nazi in the sense that his more galvanic superior, von Blomberg, had been, he was when he came to his high post a warm personal admirer of Hitler.

Thus, in an order about the training of officers issued on 18 December 1938, he said: 'Adolf Hitler, our leader of genius, who has recast the great lesson of the front-line soldier in the form of the National Socialist philosophy, has built and secured for us the new Great-German Reich. Only he who can comprehend the yesterday, today and tomorrow in their full difficulty and immensity can appreciate the historic nature of the deeds of this man. The revolution has been stupendous in all fields. A new German being has grown up in the Third Reich, filled with ideas different from those of the generation which went before us. . . . Our loyalty to the man who has created all this, who by his faith and will has worked this miracle, is unshakeable, our confidence in him is firm. . . . The Armed Forces and National-Socialism are of the same spiritual stem. They will accomplish much for the nation in the future, if they follow the example and teaching of the Führer, who combines in his person the true soldier and National-Socialist.'

This was not at all the stuff to appeal to Colonel-General Ludwig Beck, Brauchitsch's first Chief of Staff, who, though he had resigned by the time of that order, had had to listen to much similar tub-thumping before. Beck was utterly against a war with the West, as indeed was Brauchitsch, but whereas Beck put his arguments in the most forceful way Brauchitsch managed only to convey weak protests to Hitler, though he himself had told a conference of senior generals that war would mean the end of German culture. Relations between the two men progressively worsened, and Beck finally did for himself in Hitler's eyes by a memorandum of 3 June 1938, in which he asserted that a war with Czechoslovakia would involve all Europe in a war, which Germany would lose. After several offers of resignation Beck finally went that August, to be succeeded by the Bavarian General Franz Halder.

In Hammerstein's view Brauchitsch had no political sense, and, owing to the deliberate reorganization by Hitler of the High Command, no power. The opinion of this most anti-Nazi and intelligent of German generals, interestingly one who achieved the reputation of being 'red', is recorded by Ambassador Ulrich von Hassell as early as December 1938, and should be respected.

It is evident that Brauchitsch, in many ways a reformer, had the opportunity to put the German Army on a new track, but followed the wrong one. Had he made common cause with Beck and decent and respected pillars of the old school such as Rundstedt, Witzleben, Leeb, and Blaskowitz, and had he tried to win over Goring, with whom he was on good terms, and some of the ex-Army officers in the Luftwaffe such as Kesselring and Sperrle, and Raeder, who as a traditionalist presented no great problems, it is just possible that a last chance to head off Hitler from his path to destruction might have been created. Whether Brauchitsch thought, like some Army generals before him, that Hitler could be used, and did not see the dangers in this false belief until too late; or whether he genuinely believed that the Army and Nazism must walk hand in hand, is not certain. At all events, either from weakness when confronted with the extraordinary forcefulness of Hitler, or from compliance, he proved lamentably unable to stand up to Hitler, and not the man to lead an Army revolt against him. Not that the idea did not occur to him, for though Beck had learned to put no faith in him and the conspirators did not include him in their plans, Brauchitsch was well aware that there was a conspiracy. Beck had tried to get him to act, and had sought at least a free hand to act himself before it was too late and the West flared into war, but Brauchitsch had never consented. Political events had conspired, it seemed, to give Hitler one triumph after another, in the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia. Brauchitsch, meanwhile, consoled himself with the trappings of office and a genuine but naive hope that all would turn out for the best.

It is significant of the weakness of his position that when the German- Soviet Pact was signed in late August 1939, Brauchitsch was not consulted, nor had he been given any hand in drawing up the 'Pact of
Steel' signed between Italy and Germany on 22 May 1939, though the latter was a military alliance containing military clauses, and there were pronounced military undertones in the former.

Brauchitsch was not against the invasion of Poland, but only because he believed Hitler's assurance that it would not lead to general war. He was in charge of the planning of the campaign, but in fact this closely followed plans that had been laid down by von Fritsch. Brauchitsch was more worried about Russian intervention than anything else, for he had consistently urged Hitler to come to an accommodation with the Russians. He was well-informed about the strength of the Red Army.

Hitler did not interfere with the conduct of the Polish campaign, but he very much resented it when Brauchitsch reported that many German infantry units had not shown the same dash and discipline as had been noteworthy in the Great War. Brauchitsch was against the Norwegian venture, because he did not believe that the Royal Navy would allow a German force to reach Norway; as things turned out the major planning was done by Raeder and his staff, and Brauchitsch was proved wrong. He was also against the invasion of France, for having been at Verdun and other Great War battles he tended, like most Germans of his age and experience, to over-estimate the qualities of the French Army and of Gamelin's leadership. He was also afraid that the full weight of the British Empire would be brought into the war and would not prove easy to deal with. He and Halder became responsible, however, for the detailed planning of the invasion of France, and he resisted the changes proposed by Rundstedt and Manstein which took away the main effort from the German right flank and put it towards the left. When, however, he was overruled he went even further than Rundstedt and Manstein so that the former ended up with more divisions and much greater armoured strength than had originally been proposed.

In the famous 'halt' dispute before Dunkirk Brauchitsch emerges well. On 24 May 1940 he ordered that encircling attacks should proceed, and, more important, that the whole 4th Army, which controlled all the panzer divisions and was attacking the B.E.F. and the 1st French Army from the south and west, should be removed from von Rundstedt's Army Group A and given to von Bock's Army Group B which was attacking the Allies, including the Belgians, from the east. This would place Bock in command of the final encirclement drive, and had the advantages of nominating one ground commander to finish off the Allies in the north, and of using troops who were fresher than those of von Rundstedt. Halder did not agree with Brauchitsch and, as was his right as Chief of Staff, expressed his disagreement by annotating the order to the effect that it went out without his signature 'to signify disapproval of the order and its timing'.

Hitler, however, heard Rundstedt's explanation of the 'halt and close up' order when he visited him on 24 May, and without bothering to consult Brauchitsch countermanded his order and endorsed that of Rundstedt. This was both high-handed and discourteous; worse, it was a grave tactical error. Not unnaturally the atmosphere at Hitler's headquarters was very unpleasant when next Brauchitsch saw the Führer. It is also regrettable that the personal war diary (not the official one) of Halder, kept throughout the French campaign, sometimes contains unpleasant references to Brauchitsch, to whom he owed absolute loyalty.

Brauchitsch had had many arguments after Poland with Hitler, Keitel and Jodl, some of which had been bitter; he had actually offered to resign when Hitler called for a Saarbrücken offensive, and according to Allen Welsh Dulles 'told the conspirators, with whom he was still in touch, that he did not know whether he would arrest Hitler or Hitler would arrest him'. But he had given no encouragement to Beck when the latter tried to get him to act before the real war in the west began.

About 'Sea-Lion' Brauchitsch had mixed feelings, but he did believe that, given the right circumstances—which included a triumphant Luftwaffe, good weather, and proper naval preparations—it might well be feasible. He was certainly more optimistic than Rundstedt, and he might have shared the feeling in some Army quarters that the Navy were dragging rather cold feet about the prospect of invading England. Raeder wrote on 22 June 1940, the day the French armistice was signed: 'I told the C-in-C [Brauchitsch] that the operation would involve very great dangers indeed.'

Looking forward to the German occupation of Britain, Brauchitsch produced a series of instructions, some in considerable detail, called 'Orders Concerning the Organization and Function of Military Government in England'. They included matters of law, order, requisition, deportation, work, etc., of which the keynote, in Peter Fleming's words, is 'a drab, impersonal ferocity'. On 9 September 1940 Brauchitsch signed a directive which provided that 'the able-bodied male population between the ages of 17 and 45 will, unless the local situation calls for an exceptional ruling, be interned and dispatched to the Continent'. In other words, the bulk of the adult male English population were to become slave labour for the Nazis, and would probably never see their homes again. It shows how far Brauchitsch had progressed along the slippery path of Nazism that he allowed himself to sign an order like this.

Brauchitsch had instructed Halder to examine the possibility of a war with Russia as early as 2 July 1940, though it was not until 31 July at the Obersalzberg that Hitler told Brauchitsch and Halder of his intention to attack the Soviet Union 'the sooner the better, and preferably this year. With Russia defeated, Britain's last hope will be gone'.

To start with, owing to surprise, good weather, and the aggressive dash of individual German generals and their troops, things went remarkably well. But at the end of July 1941 a serious difference of opinion arose between the Commander-in-Chief and Hitler, a dispute which was to become even more acrimonious in August. It involved Moscow. Brauchitsch was, after the capture of Smolensk, in favour of an all-out effort to take Moscow and thus finish off Stalin and the war, for he thought that if the capital went the country would collapse. His opinion was shared by Halder, Guderian, Bock, Hoth, and all the other leading commanders on the Eastern front. And as O.K.H. was charged with the conduct of the Russian war, it should have prevailed.

But Hitler disagreed. In his Directive No. 34 of 30th July 1941 he ordered Army Group Centre, which faced Moscow, to go over to the defensive. The main targets were given as, in the north, the encirclement of Leningrad and juncture with the Finnish Army; and, in the south-east, the destruction of strong enemy forces west of the Dnieper and the establishment of bridgeheads across that river. Hitler had always held that Leningrad should be captured before Moscow, and refused to consider a strike against the capital first. On 18 August Brauchitsch submitted his views on the conduct of future operations, but three days later Hitler replied tersely that they were not in accordance with his instructions.

'The most important aim to be achieved before the onset of winter is not to capture Moscow, but to seize the Crimea and the industrial and coal region on the Donets, and to cut off the Russian oil supply from the Caucasus area. In the north, the aim is to cut off Leningrad and to join with the Finns.'

Finally, on 23 August, Colonel-General Guderian, representing the views of Field-Marshal von Bock and Colonel-General Halder, flew to Rastenburg in East Prussia to put to Hitler the case for taking Moscow. Although forbidden by von Brauchitsch to broach the subject of Moscow himself, Guderian, when asked by Hitler if he thought his Panzer Group still capable of a major effort, found it easy to get on to the vital subject. Hitler heard him out in silence, then rejected the Moscow idea.

Brauchitsch was not present to protest, but it would have made no difference, for Hitler had ceased to consult him seriously. From the beginning of the Russian campaign he had opposed and then ignored the views of his General Staff, in particular their insistence that the best way to finish the war quickly was an all-out drive on Moscow to bring down the Soviet government. On 21 August Hitler had accused Brauchitsch of not conducting the offensive as he wished it, a fairly idle complaint since he was standing for no opposition to his own views.

In Directive No. 35, of 6 September 1941, the main objective was 'a decisive operation against the Timoshenko Army Group which is attacking on the Central Front'. On von Bock's front the attack against Timoshenko would take place at the end of September to destroy the Russian forces east of Smolensk and in the Vyazma area. Only when these had been defeated would his Army Group Centre be directed against Moscow 'with its right flank on the Oka and its left on the Upper Volga'. Von Bock's strength was raised to some seventy divisions by additions from Army Groups North and South, and the air forces covering him were also strengthened. Fourteen of his divisions were Panzer ones, and eight Panzer Grenadier ones.

But Hitler had, by ignoring the advice of Brauchitsch and the experts, left it too late. In west and central Russia summer ends by early September at the latest, the autumn is short, and the weather breaks up—and so do the roads—in October, with heavy rains, hard frosts, thaws, and mud. By mid-November Hitler's Moscow offensive had ground to a halt, held up more by bad weather than by Russian resistance. At a conference at Orsha on 13 November the representatives of von Leeb and Rundstedt advocated going over to the defensive in the sectors of Army Groups North and South; Leeb, indeed, had already done so. Von Bock was in favour of resuming the Moscow offensive at once, and since Brauchitsch, Haider and Guderian had long striven without result for the Moscow objective, they too wanted to press on now that it at last was a reality. Even Brauchitsch's bad heart attack on 10 November did not change his views.

It was decided at Orsha that the attack on Moscow would be resumed on 19 November. It was, and in the face of fierce Russian resistance and further bad weather 'Operation Typhoon', as it was now called, made progress but at very heavy cost in casualties. Some advanced units and reconnaissance troops managed to reach the farthest of Moscow's outlying suburbs, but could get no farther. Exhausted, lacking winter clothing, and short of supplies, the troops of Guderian's Panzer Army could get no farther than a general line twenty miles from the capital, and there were no reinforcements now to make the breakthrough. On 5/6 December Guderian recalled his advance units and went over to the defensive. The attack on Moscow had failed. Two days later even Hitler realized this, though he put it down to 'the surprisingly early winter and the consequent difficulties in bringing up supplies'. Heads now began to fall. Rundstedt had already gone; Brauchitsch was to be next, at an acrimonious meeting on 19 December 1941. The dismissal of Brauchitsch was a watershed. Never again now was there to be a Professional head of the German Army during Hitler's war. Instead, contemptuous of the General Staff and convinced of his own military far-sightedness, Hitler himself assumed the chief command. He became Commander-in-Chief, in tide as well as in effect, thus brooking even less interference or guidance than before. In fact the position of Brauchitsch had long been eroded, and since the summer of 1941, with the O.K.W. ventures in Yugoslavia and Greece, over which he was not consulted, and then Africa, Russia had been the only proving ground where' the Army could have recovered its old authority. But even here, though it was officially an O.K.H. theatre of war, Hitler had constantly interfered, so that Brauchitsch was never able to fulfil his function as Commander-in-Chief, certainly not to the extent that he had in Poland and France.

It is facile to criticize him for weakness in not standing up to Hitler. This was more difficult than it sounds, not only because the danger of dismissal, disgrace, and even prison always loomed in the background, but because it was simply not possible to argue with Hitler. On various occasions Brauchitsch had been prepared to resign, or offered his resignation, but either Halder persuaded him that they could best serve their colleagues—and their country—by remaining where they were, or Hitler
contemptuously rejected it. His constant bullying and rudeness would have worn down most men—they were infinitely worse than anything Field-Marshal Sir Alan Brooke ever had to endure from Winston Churchill in his worst moments. Moreover, Brauchitsch genuinely suffered from a bad heart. It could not have been improved by the knowledge that in the east by December 1941, Germany had suffered three million casualties in soldiers dead, wounded, ill, or frostbitten. These figures were not disclosed to the public, but they weighed heavily on Brauchitsch, who was a decent man. A final cause of his dismissal was his belief that the German Army should conduct a large scale withdrawal to a safe winter line in 1941-2, west of Smolensk, to the Baltic states in the north, and to the west Ukraine in the south. Here he was only in agreement with his Army Group commanders. But, as always, Hitler would not concede ground.

For the remainder of the war von Brauchitsch was to be in sad retirement, though he was not forgotten, least of all by Hitler, who even on 15 March 1942 was referring to him as 'a nincompoop and a coward'. Assuredly Brauchitsch was neither. Göbbels, taking a leaf from his master's book, wrote in his diary on 20 March 1942 of the grievous German losses in the Russian winter of 1941-2: 'Brauchitsch bears a great deal of responsibility for this. The Führer spoke of him only in terms of contempt A vain, cowardly wretch who could not even appraise the situation, much less master it. 'By his constant interference and consistent disobedience he completely spoiled the entire plan for the eastern campaign as it was designed with crystal clarity by the Führer. The Führer had a plan that was bound to lead to victory. Had Brauchitsch done what was asked of him and what he really should have done, our position in the east today would be entirely different.

'The Führer had no intention whatever of going to Moscow. He wanted to cut off the Caucasus and thereby strike the Soviet system at its most vulnerable point But Brauchitsch and his general staff knew better. Brauchitsch always urged going to Moscow. He wanted prestige successes instead of factual successes. The Führer described him as a coward and a nincompoop. He also had tried to weaken the plan of campaign in the west. But the Führer was able to intervene in t i m e . . . .'

After the war von Brauchitsch gave evidence at Nuremberg, and was himself listed as a war criminal. In the sense that every general staff has to prepare contingency plans for attacking other countries, it is hard to see how he could have been convicted, for he had steadfastly done his best to maintain the old traditions of the German Army, and to prevent excesses by the S.S., of whom he disapproved. But he never came to trial, as he died in 1948. Brauchitsch never joined or countenanced the anti-Nazi generals or their conspiracy, of which he was well aware. Equally, he never betrayed them although he once threatened to have General Georg Thomas, the Chief of War Economy and Armament, arrested if he did not cease his persistent intrigues against Hitler. Later, however, shortly before his dismissal, in November 1941 he seems to have relented, for Hassell records on 1 November 1941: 'Falkenhausen and General Thomas have visited Brauchitsch and report that he comprehends what beastliness is rampant. He is also gradually awakening to the fact that a share of the responsibility is his. If Hitler should be eliminated, he has decided to take action. This at least indicates some progress.' According to Hassell, Brauchitsch intervened to save von Falkenhausen from being dismissed from his post as C-in-C of occupied Belgium and north-western France, and Falkenhausen was one of the most consistent anti-Hitler plotters. Brauchitsch was Commander-in-Chief for nearly four years. He is the classic example of the man who thought that, by going along with Hitler, he could save the Army and Germany. The result was failure and bitterness, and when he went the position of the Army became weaker than ever before. Now there was no one to intervene between Hitler and disaster, for Halder's days were numbered and he himself already a broken reed.

Brauchitsch cannot be rated in the high ranks as a Hofgeneral. This small, wiry, upright man, whose speech and actions were rapid and brisk, came to his high rank with the full support of the Army; when he left it, he had lost the goodwill of some and the respect of others, but he still maintained the confidence of a large body of his colleagues. Because he did not exercise strict personal control over the campaigns in which he was engaged, his abilities as a general are hard to assess. It must be granted, however, that as Commander-in-Chief of the mightiest Army that Europe had ever seen, the huge successes it achieved from 1939 to 1941 reflect no little credit on his own pre-war preparations as a professional soldier.

His tactical decisions, had they been freely carried out, seem to have been the right ones, notably his wish to push on in France in 1940, his desire to concentrate on the capture of Moscow in the summer of 1941, and his wish to withdraw to a safe winter line in 1941—2. Had he been an outstanding personality, he might just have been able to stand out against Hitler. But whilst having the intelligence, he lacked the character. Hermann Rauschning gives a somewhat different judgement: 'I make no secret of the fact that I esteemed and sympathized with this man . . . but his features did not bear the stamp of any extraordinary ability.'

Brauchitsch himself, paraphrasing words of von Fritsch, has summed up most vividly his quandary. 'Hitler was the fate of Germany, and this fate could not be stayed.'

 


Source :
"Hitler's Generals" by Richard Brett-Smith
https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/forum/wehrmacht-era-militaria/photos-and-paper-items-forum/152358-general-photos?p=12464097#post12464097

Monday, April 5, 2021

Ritterkreuz Action of Julius Riepe

 
Julius Riepe as an SS-Hauptsturmführer in the black Allgemeine-SS uniform.

 Julius Riepe (18 December 1903 - 22 June 1983) received the Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes on 13 January 1945 as SS-Sturmbannführer and Führer I.Bataillon / SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment 40 / 18.SS-Freiwilligen-Panzergrenadier-Division "Horst Wessel". Riepe’s Ritterkreuz recommendation reads as follows…

“On 10 December 1944 Sturmbannführer Riepe had the order to hold the village of Szeczeny against the Bolshevik onslaught. At his disposal were some hastily assembled alarm units and the II./Grenadier-Regiment 42. In the midst of enemy drumfire and bombing from Russian aircraft, Riepe was a shining example of prudence and fearlessness for his men as they defended against the ceaseless enemy attacks that were supported by tanks.

For a whole week (10-17 December 1944) the Russians stormed against the city, undeterred by their losses. Driven forwards by their commissars, all their attempts were in vain.

Sturmbannführer Riepe led the hodgepodge garrison of Szeczeny with iron energy and a firm hand. In the most trying of hours his inspiration was able to inspire his men to resist to the last. Whenever the Russians managed to achieve a penetration with the support of heavy artillery preparation, Sturmbannführer Riepe was able to restore the old frontline through counterattacks led with boldness and skill that also brought bloody losses to the enemy.

In the early morning of 16 December 1944 the Russians managed to penetrate through the heavily thinned German ranks along the southwest edge of Szeczeny with 300-400 men and 9 tanks. However this penetration was sealed off by the personal intervention of Sturmbannführer Riepe. Acting on his own initiative, Riepe ruthlessly stripped the not yet attacked sections of his security line of men. With these hastily thrown-together forces (strongly outnumbered by the Russians) he launched an energetic attack with a loud ‘Hurra’ that pushed the enemy out of the city once again. In the process he inflicted heavy losses on the enemy and destroyed 6 enemy tanks with his heavy weapons.

Through his prudence and determination, Sturmbannführer Riepe therefore played a decisive role in holding the key city of Szeczeny. In doing so he prevented our divisions positioned in the Matra mountains from being outflanked.”

 

Source :
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=29879&p=2330477&hilit=riepe#p2330477
https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/13837/Riepe-Julius.htm