Quick conquest of Poland. Rapid capture of the Benelux countries. The crushing defeat of France and the staggering progress of Operation Barbarossa in the summer of 1941. All of this is presented as evidence of the murderous effectiveness of the Blitzkrieg. Meanwhile, Professor Lawrence Freedman views German strategy quite differently.
In the book "The Future of War", which has just been published by Bellona Publishing House, the English military historian denies the remarkable effectiveness of the Blitzkrieg. While analyzing the plan of the German attack on the Soviet Union, they will emphasize that this tactic "proved successful in 1940", but also notes that:
The main feature of Hitler's strategy was not the alleged originality of his military theory and tactics, as he did not understand that the Blitzkrieg in Western Europe had largely improvised character.
The leader of the Third Reich was sure that the Red Army had no chance of repelling the surprise attack. He also hoped that the Soviet units "would soon be disintegrated." He argued that Germany is a strong nation, endowed with an iron will, and that they have a weak state against themselves. "
The brown dictator, however, did not take into account - as Lawrence Freedman emphasizes in The Future War - that in 1940 " Germany was lucky, because France was still focused on a defensive campaign in the spirit of trench warfare." In the Russian steppes, this strategy did not work very well ”.
Professor Freedman believes that in 1940 the Germans were lucky.
As a result, although the invasion started on June 22, 1941, Stalin was completely taken aback by the shock, but then he "shook off it and began to direct the defense." Moreover, the ruthless brutality with which the Wehrmacht waged the war in the East meant that even enemies of the Soviet regime joined the "fierce struggle against the invaders." The Germans approached Moscow and besieged Leningrad, but failed to capture any of these cities.
In the end, the Eastern Front Blitzkrieg concept failed miserably. As Professor Freedman points out in his book:
The initial advantage of the attacking side was too small to bring the war to an end quickly. Over time, the greater potential of the Soviet Union became more and more important [...] and it, too, ultimately ensured victory.
The text is based on the book by Lawrence Freedman entitled "The Future of War" (Bellona 2019).
It also happened because:
the dedication of large forces and resources to the extermination campaign and the brutal occupation of nations that could be recruited to fight the Soviet system wiped out any chances for Hitler to win this war .
The professor clearly bases his opinion on the Blitzkrieg in the east on the fact that the Third Reich ultimately lost the campaign against the Soviet Union. However, it does not take into account the quick and brilliant victories that took place in the first months after the launch of Operation Barbarossa. Or maybe it's worth it - what do you think?
Source:
Trivia is the essence of our website. Short materials devoted to interesting anecdotes, surprising details from the past, strange news from the old press. Reading that will take you no more than 3 minutes, based on single sources. This particular material is based on the book:
- Lawrence Freedman, Future War , Bellona 2019.
Buy the book at a discount at the Publisher's bookstore:
