He was a Prussian aristocrat from the landed Junker class
and a long line of soldiers. Patriotic, conservative, Lutheran and a devoted
father and husband, he was a believer in authority and obedience. He believed
obedience meant soldiers were to follow their leaders and stay out of politics.
His name was Erich von Manstein and as the architect of the operational battle
plan that felled France in a few months in 1940 and led armies to win battles
on the Eastern Front in 1941 and 1942 he was considered by many to be the
Wehrmacht’s best all-around general. He
was not afraid, as most were, to challenge Hitler on military operations and
tactics. They didn’t even like each other most of the time. Yet Hitler quickly
recognized Mansteins military brilliance and Manstein would never publically
challenge Hitler’s preeminent strategic decisions, flawed as they were.
It was early in January 1944 that Field Marshal Erich von
Manstein left his outnumbered and outgunned army group on the Eastern Front to
personally challenge Der Fuhrer for the last time. He wanted Hitler to stop directing
and interfering with army operations and it wasn’t the first time "One
thing we must be clear about, mein Führer," Manstein said, "is that
the extremely critical situation we are now in cannot be put down to the
enemy's superiority alone, great though it is. It is also due to the way in
which we are led." Hitler, Manstein later recalled, "stared at me
with a look which made me feel he wished to crush my will to continue. I cannot
remember a human gaze ever conveying such willpower." Three months later
Manstein was relieved of his command.
The horror and tragedy of battle is largely overlooked in
the enumeration of military maneuvers and units. That includes Stalingrad the
largest and most horrific of all the battles which comes across as a chess game.
What I was hoping to find in this book was an answer to the
question as to why so many upstanding German military leaders followed Adolf Hitler
to the death and destruction of their nation and millions of innocents at home and
abroad. It seems the most worthwhile questions surrounding Manstein's career
involve the moral judgments
military leadership. Was he the innocent leader of a professional army, blind
to Hitler's ideology and ignorant of what the SS and other extramilitary
outfits were up to? Or was he, with other German commanders, aware of the
extremes of National Socialism and an enabler of its cruelest policies?
Mr. Melvin is on better footing when he turns to the moral
questions. He fairly points them out and tries to clarify what Manstein said and did. And then leaves it all hanging. At the Nuremburg trials Manstein, the main witness for the defense argued that he had served his nation, not Hitler or Nazism. He testified that it was only after the war that he learned of the annihilation of the Jews, only then that he came to believe that Hitler "had no moral scruples." But, as Mr. Melvin makes clear, Manstein's recollections were often self-serving.
Manstein took a legalistic stance on the innocence of his soldiers
and applied that to himself. They were just following orders. He said he
could not have known about all the battlefield "transgressions" and
could not have joined an organized opposition to Hitler, given the code of
military honor. ("Prussian field marshals," he said, "do not
mutiny.") In any event, he claimed, Hitler's overthrow would have brought
unacceptable chaos to Germany.
In the end while Melvins book is superbly researched and
documented though it is fatally flawed like Manstein himself. Well written biographies
today cut to the soul of the subject. Military biography today remains in the genre of the "great leaders of past wars." My bad analogy would be like my six hundred page manual for my new Chevy Cruze. All of that just to learn how to open a trunk? I wanted to take it out on the road and just see how it runs. It not enough to say a general sent this division and another right. How could he ignore thousands of civilians being murdered in his area of responsibility? You need to know the culture, the psychology, the previous history etc.
In a sense, the book mirrors the failure of Manstein
himself, who, while talented, could not transcend his limitations to achieve
true greatness. We never learned what really made him tick. At the end, I remained
completely puzzled about Manstein the man and famous general….. That's too bad.
You've given an interesting summary. One sometimes wonders how many more stories are out there to be written about WW II
ReplyDeleteFascinating post. Thanks so much for sharing.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I could read this. My memories go back too far.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting story, I find it hard to believe he had no idea of the atrocities going on.
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesting summary. How could he not know about the extermination of the Jews that went on?
ReplyDeleteVery interesting. I do wonder too, how could he not know about the Jews?
ReplyDeleteI guess a single minder person could have been unaware but it does stretch the imagination. Interesting to look into the other side.
ReplyDeleteYour range of history is phenomenal. I believe you said in one of your posts that you taught history? If you did then your interests of teaching and literature go hand in hand much to our benefit. -- barbara.
ReplyDeleteI find it difficult to comprehend how that was allowed to happen. I find it even more difficult to understand that it was not the first or last attempt at genocide. The US government tried to eradicate all of the Indians, there was Bosnia, and Rwanda...humans are capable of such evil.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate you wading through this so I will not have to. Still interesting to get the gist.
ReplyDeleteMungo may have been swayed by current political considerations, if not have an agenda himself in treating Manstein as he did.
ReplyDeleteMungo's an at least adjunct member of the British and European ruling elite and no doubt hobnobs with movers and shakers. People are trying to get the European Union going and some in Britain are quite opposed to it.
Aside from that, Britain and Germany are allies and between them Europe's bankers. I think the question of what to do with Germany's past is still being resolved, and may be a politically sensitive matter he felt he had to tiptoe around.
Still, as you say, if he's going to call himself a biographer he should biograph, not politic. Good review, good picking all that out of it, and good call.