The Second World War resulted in the deaths of around 85 million people. Additionally, tens of millions more people were displaced. However, amid all the carnage people demonstrated remarkable courage, fortitude, compassion, mercy and sacrifice. We would like to honour and celebrate all of those people. In the War Years Blog, we examine the extraordinary experiences of individual service personnel. We also review military history books, events, and museums. And we look at the history of unique World War Two artefacts, medals, and anything else of interest.
The British Army’s Occupation of Northwest Germany after May 1945
In this article, we will focus on the British occupation of Germany after May 1945, the British Army's occupation of West Berlin, the Victory Parade of July 1945, and relations with the Soviets.
After the defeat of Nazi Germany in May 1945, the victorious Allied powers divided the country into four occupation zones, each controlled by one of the four occupying powers - the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union. This division of Germany would mark the beginning of a new era for the country, as it faced a long and difficult process of reconstruction and democratization. In this article, we will focus on the British occupation of Germany after May 1945, the British Army's occupation of West Berlin, the Victory Parade of July 1945, and relations with the Soviets.
The British Occupation of Germany after May 1945
On 25 August 1945, Field Marshal Montgomery's 21st Army Group was renamed the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR). It was responsible for the occupation and administration of the British Zone in northwest Germany, including the cities of Hamburg and Bremen, assisted by the Control Commission Germany (CCG). The CCG took over aspects of local government, policing, housing and transport.
Their primary objective was to demilitarize and disarm the defeated German forces, as well as to dismantle the Nazi regime and bring war criminals to justice. The British forces, under the command of Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery, faced a daunting task, as Germany was in a state of complete chaos and disarray.
One of the first challenges the British faced was dealing with the large numbers of displaced persons, refugees, and prisoners of war. The British Army, along with other Allied powers, established numerous displaced persons camps and worked to repatriate prisoners of war and refugees to their home countries. The British also faced the challenge of providing food and shelter to the German population, which was suffering from severe shortages of basic necessities such as food, fuel, and medicine. The BAOR mobilised former enemy soldiers into the German Civil Labour Organisation (GCLO), providing paid work and accommodation for over 50,000 Germans by late 1947.
The BAOR was also responsible for pursuing suspected war criminals in its zone of occupation. It established the British Army War Crimes Investigation Teams (WCIT) and was assisted by other units, including the Special Air Service (SAS). The most famous Nazi caught by the British was Heinrich Himmler, chief of the SS and one of the main architects of the Holocaust. He was arrested at a checkpoint and taken to an interrogation camp near Lüneburg. However, Himmler was able to escape prosecution for his crimes by committing suicide with a concealed cyanide pill. Political support for war crimes prosecutions soon declined as relations with the Soviet Union deteriorated. It soon became a political necessity for the Western powers to make friends with the Germans rather than prosecute them.
The British Sector of Berlin 1945
The British Army's occupation of the British sector of Berlin in 1945 was a key moment in the post-war history of Germany. Berlin, which was located deep within the Soviet-occupied zone of Germany, was divided into four sectors, with the Soviet Union, the United States, Great Britain, and France each controlling a sector. The British sector was in the western part of the city.
The British Army faced numerous challenges in the occupation of Berlin. The city had been heavily bombed during the war, and many buildings were in ruins. The British Army worked to rebuild the city's infrastructure and provide basic services such as water, electricity, and sanitation.
Another major challenge faced by the British Army was dealing with the Soviet Red Army, which was stationed in and around Berlin. The relationship between the British and the Soviets was strained, with tensions running high over issues such as the repatriation of Soviet prisoners of war and the control of Berlin. The British Army, along with the other Allied powers, worked to maintain a delicate balance of power in the city, while also providing security and maintaining order.
The Victory Parade of July 1945
On 21 July 1945, the British held a victory parade through the ruins of Berlin to commemorate and celebrate the end of the Second World War. Around 10,000 troops of the British 7th Armoured Division, the famous 'Desert Rats', were paraded under review by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery. On 7 September 1945, there was another parade featuring all the victorious Allies, but neither Montgomery nor U.S. General Dwight D Eisenhower attended. This gesture signified a deterioration in the relationship between the Allies, as differences in ideology between the West and the Soviet Union were becoming harder to ignore and the slide towards a Cold War had begun.
British Pathe News footage of the Berlin Victory Parade, 21 July 1945.
An Iron Curtain
Relations between the Western powers and the Soviet Union deteriorated immediately following the end of the war in Europe. The main sources of tension were the Soviet Union's unwillingness to allow democratic governments to emerge in Eastern Europe, and its desire to maintain a sphere of influence in the region. The Western powers, led by the United States, saw this as a threat to their own security and interests.
The Soviet Union's aggressive actions in the post-war period, including the establishment of communist governments in Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, fuelled Western fears of Soviet expansionism. The United States responded by implementing the Truman Doctrine, which committed the U.S. to support countries threatened by communism, and by providing economic and military aid to Western Europe through the Marshall Plan.
Tensions between the West and the Soviet Union reached a boiling point in 1947 when the Soviet Union refused to participate in the Marshall Plan and instead formed its own economic bloc, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON). In 1948, the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin, prompting the Western powers to launch the Berlin Airlift to supply the city.
On March 5, 1946, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill delivered his famous "Iron Curtain" speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri. In this speech, Churchill warned of the growing Soviet threat in Europe and called for a closer alliance between the United States and Great Britain to contain Soviet aggression. The speech marked a turning point in the post-war era and is considered a seminal moment in the Cold War.
In 1949, the three western occupation zones were merged to form the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). The Soviets followed suit in October 1949 with the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). In 1955, West Germany joined NATO and was encouraged to build a new military, the Bundeswehr. In response, the Communist states of Eastern Europe formed the Warsaw Pact.
Sources:
Photography/Images:
All photographs used to illustrate this article were taken by my relative George Trumpess who was stationed in Minden, Germany, and travelled regularly to Berlin during the summer of 1945.
The enduring importance of studying military history
This article explores the importance of military history and how it can shed light on the reasons behind conflicts, the motivations of those who took part, and the impact of technological innovations on warfare. It also discusses how the study of military history can broaden our understanding of the world and develop critical thinking and analytical skills.
The Second World War had a significant impact on the world we live in today. The study of military history has played a crucial role in understanding the causes and consequences of global conflict. This article explores the importance of military history and how it can shed light on the reasons behind conflicts, the motivations of those who took part, and the impact of technological innovations on warfare. It also discusses how the study of military history can broaden our understanding of the world and develop critical thinking and analytical skills.
The Second World War was a defining moment in human history, marking the end of the world as people knew it and paving the way for a new era of international relations, politics, and global economic power. It was a time of intense political, social and military upheaval, where nations and ideologies collided in a struggle for dominance and survival. Today, many years since the end of the war, the study of military history remains an important discipline, one that provides valuable insights into the causes and consequences of global conflict.
Lessons learned from a world at war
There are several reasons why the study of military history is important. First, military history helps to shed light on the reasons behind conflicts and the motivations of those who took part in them. This understanding can help to prevent similar conflicts from occurring in the future. For example, the lessons learned from the Second World War have helped to shape the modern world, including the establishment of the United Nations, the creation of international human rights laws and the promotion of democracy and free trade. However, on the first anniversary of the war in Ukraine, it is also tragically clear that the lessons of history do not prevent old enmities and new conflicts from happening.
Of course, military history can only teach us what we are willing to learn and does have practical applications that are relevant to the modern world. For instance, military history is used by policymakers, military planners and international organisations to inform their decisions and shape their strategies. Understanding the lessons of past conflicts can help to inform present and future military operations, improving the effectiveness of military interventions and reducing the risk of unintended consequences.
Technology and innovation
The study of military history can also provide insights into technological developments and innovations that have had an impact on warfare. For example, the Second World War saw the development of new weapons, tactics and technologies that changed the face of warfare forever. By studying the development and application of these technologies, military historians can help to inform future innovations and ensure that new technologies are used in the most effective and responsible manner possible.
The Second World War saw the development of many technologies that went on to transform post-war life.
The development of cryptography during the Second World War led to the creation of the first computers, which were used to decode enemy messages. The first electronic computers, such as the American ENIAC and British Colossus, were developed during the war and laid the foundation for the digital revolution that would transform post-war life. The use of computers in business, research, and everyday life has become ubiquitous, and the ability to process and store vast amounts of data has revolutionised every field of human endeavour.
Similarly, the development of jet engines during the war helped transform aviation. In 1949, the de Havilland DH.106 Comet became the world’s first commercial passenger jet. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, the commercial airline industry reached 38.9 million flights globally in 2019.1 The jet engine made air travel faster, more comfortable, and more accessible to the public. But emissions from aviation have also made a significant contribution to air pollution and possibly climate change.
The jet engine also had a profound impact on post-war military aviation, enabling supersonic flight and the development of fighter jets with unprecedented speed, stealth, agility and firepower. The impact of the jet engine on travel, commerce, and military power is still felt today. For example, it is believed that the use of western warplanes like the F-16 and Gripen fighter by the Ukrainian Air Force could prove decisive in the war against Russia. Of course, only time will tell.
Critical thinking and analytical skills
In addition to its practical applications, military history is also important in a more general sense, as it helps to broaden our understanding of the world. The study of military history provides a context for understanding the complex relationships between nations, and the motivations behind political, economic and military actions. This understanding can help to inform our understanding of the world today and the events that shape it.
Furthermore, military history is an important tool for teaching critical thinking, analytical skills and historical awareness. By studying military history, students can learn how to evaluate evidence, think critically about historical events, and understand the context in which they occurred. This knowledge can help to develop the skills necessary for a successful future, whether in the military, government, private sector, or academia.
In his 1961 paper, The Use and Abuse of Military History Michael Howard discusses the role of military history in the study of war and its use and abuse by politicians, military leaders, and the public.
Howard argues that military history is an essential tool for understanding the nature of war, but it is often misused for propaganda purposes. Military history should be studied objectively, without political bias, and used to inform policy decisions. However, politicians and military leaders often use selective historical examples to justify their actions, leading to a distorted understanding of history and potentially dangerous policies.
One of the key conclusions of the paper is that military history should be used to illuminate the realities of war, rather than to glorify it or justify particular policies. Howard emphasizes the importance of studying the social, economic, and political context of war, as well as military tactics and strategy. He argues that a more nuanced understanding of history can help prevent the mistakes of the past from being repeated in the present.
Overall, Howard's paper is a call for a more critical approach to the use of military history, both in academia and in the public sphere. It highlights the potential benefits and pitfalls of using history to inform policy decisions and stresses the importance of a clear-eyed understanding of the complexities of war.2
Certainly, I would agree with Howard’s premise that military history should be studied in breadth, depth and within the context of the times to try and gain an unbiased perspective of events. To the school pupil and casual observer, history might appear dusty, static and linear, but that is seldom the case. The study of history is a dynamic, interpretive, and iterative process that welcomes new viewpoints and encourages debate.
The utility of history as a military training aid
Operation Goodwood was a British offensive launched on July 18, 1944, during the Normandy Campaign. The operation involved a massive armoured and infantry assault against German forces in the Caen sector, with the aim of drawing German forces away from the American offensive, Operation Cobra, further west. The operation was supported by a massive aerial bombardment.
Despite the numerical superiority of the Allied forces, the operation met with mixed success. The British armoured units suffered heavy losses from German anti-tank guns, self-propelled (SP) guns and tanks, while the infantry made only limited gains. Nevertheless, the operation resulted in the destruction of many German tanks and artillery pieces but at a high cost in terms of Allied casualties. Immediately after the conclusion of Goodwood on 20 July 1944, controversy began about the operational intentions of the plan.
Today, Operation Goodwood continues to generate historical debate and controversy regarding its intentions and results. Subsequently, it has become a popular subject for writers, journalists, historians, and military theorists. In 1980, General Sir William Scotter proposed that German defensive tactics used at Goodwood might provide a template for NATO forces to repel a Soviet armoured offensive in northwest Europe. General Scotter’s proposition suggested that the German defensive strategy during Operation Goodwood, which involved using a combination of anti-tank guns, minefields, and concealed infantry positions to halt enemy armour, could be effective against Soviet tank formations. The idea was that NATO forces, like the Germans, could use a combination of conventional and unconventional tactics to slow down and disrupt Soviet tank offensives. This strategy was seen as especially useful for defending key chokepoints and urban areas.3
In 1982, Charles Dick sought to refute the so-called ‘Goodwood concept.’ Dick argued against this proposition, pointing out that the Soviet army had evolved since the Second World War and had developed new tactics and weapons systems. He argued that a strategy based solely on the German model would be insufficient to defeat a modern Soviet army. Moreover, it can be argued that the German defensive strategy was ultimately unsuccessful during Operation Goodwood. After all, the Allies were still able to achieve limited success and write down tanks, troops, and equipment that the Germans could not afford to lose or easily replace. Nevertheless, a generation of British Army officers visited the Goodwood battlefield, escorted by key protagonists such as Major-General Roberts, commander of the 11th Armoured Division, and Colonel Han Von Luck, 21st Panzer Division, and quite possibly learned the wrong lessons from a study of the operation.4
According to the U.S. Army’s Centre of Military History, staff rides (a combination of battlefield tours and exercises) represent a unique and persuasive method of conveying the lessons of the past to the present-day Army leadership for current application. Properly conducted, these exercises bring to life, on the very terrain where historic encounters took place, examples, applicable today as in the past, of leadership, tactics and strategy, communications, use of terrain, and, above all, the psychology of men in battle. It is true that staff rides are widely used by military organisations across the globe as a teaching aid, but not universally.5
The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) reject the type of learning-from-history model typified by the staff ride. The IDF prefers to rely on practice and its own experience to prepare for future operations rather than the study of history. In The Staff Ride: A Sceptical Assessment, Anthony King argues that staff rides are of limited practical utility for preparing military leaders to face the unique challenges and stresses of combat. Instead, he contends that staff rides are primarily a social networking exercise, which helps unify the officer corps and create personal bonds between them. Secondly, he believes that staff rides also help fortify commanders when faced with making difficult decisions, knowing that their predecessors experienced similar challenges.6
As every conflict is a unique, never to be repeated event, the staff ride might be of limited practical use to the fledgling military commander. Nevertheless, the study of military history highlights the many similarities as well as the differences between conflicts, which in turn can provide useful templates to help inform and fortify the decision-making of tomorrow’s commanders. The British Army believes that military history can provide examples of courage, leadership and resilience that can be applied in a variety of contexts. However, it is also clear that we should be critical of how we choose to interpret historical events and the lessons we believe they teach us.
A deeper understanding of identity
The study of military history can help individuals develop a deeper understanding of their nation's identity and place in the world. In the United Kingdom, for example, military history is seen as an important part of national identity and heritage. According to The Royal British Legion studying military history can help individuals understand the significance of the role the Armed Forces have played in shaping the nation.
Military history also helps to preserve the memory of those who served and died in wars. The Second World War was one of the deadliest conflicts in human history, with millions of lives lost. By studying its history, we can honour the sacrifices of those who fought and died and ensure that their memory is not forgotten.
Studying genealogy, which is the study of family ancestry and lineage, can help someone gain a greater sense of identity by providing them with a deeper understanding of their family history and cultural heritage. Learning about one's ancestors, traditions, values, and experiences, can help individuals connect with their roots and develop a sense of belonging to a larger family community. By exploring their family history, individuals may discover inspiring stories of military service, resilience, determination, and triumph over adversity, which can serve as a source of inspiration and motivation. Overall, studying genealogy can help individuals better understand and appreciate their identity and place in the world.
In conclusion, the study of military history remains an important discipline that has both practical and academic applications. By studying military history, we can learn the lessons of past conflicts, inform future military operations and shape our understanding of the world. Whether we are students, policymakers, military planners or simply interested citizens, the study of military history provides us with a valuable tool for understanding the world and ensuring a safer, more peaceful future.
The study of military history can also teach us to be more critical and analytical and question our assumptions and biases because it provides us with a unique perspective on the past and the present. By examining historical events and military strategies, we can gain a deeper understanding of how decisions were made, what factors influenced them, and what the consequences were. This can help us develop critical thinking skills, as we learn to evaluate evidence, weigh different perspectives, and analyse complex situations.
Furthermore, studying military history can expose us to a range of different cultural and political perspectives, allowing us to see how biases and assumptions can impact decision-making. By understanding the context and motivations behind historical events, we can develop a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the world and our place in it. This can help us become more empathetic and open-minded, as we learn to appreciate different viewpoints and challenge our own assumptions and biases.
Overall, the study of military history can help us become more critical and analytical thinkers, better equipped to navigate the complexities of the modern world and make informed decisions based on a deeper understanding of the past.
Sources:
1. Number of flights performed by the global airline industry from 2004 to 2022 (2023), Statista.com, <https://www.statista.com/statistics/564769/airline-industry-number-of-flights/> [accessed 20 February 2023].
2. Michael Howard, ‘The Use and Abuse of Military History,’ Parameters 11, no. 1 (1981), doi:10.55540/0031-1723.1251.
3. General Sir William Scotter, ‘A Role for Non-Mechanised Infantry’, The RUSI Journal, 125.4 (1980), 59–62.
4. Charles J Dick, ‘The Goodwood Concept - Situating the Appreciation’, The RUSI Journal, 127.1 (1982), 22–28.
5. CMH Staff Rides, U.S. Army Center of Military History, <https://history.army.mil/staffRides/index.html> [accessed 28 February 2023].
6. Anthony King, ‘The Staff Ride: A Sceptical Assessment’, ARES& ATHENA Applied History 14, Centre for Historical Analysis and Conflict Research (CHACR), (2019), 18-21.
Night of the Bayonets and the Battle for Texel Island
In this book review, The War Years takes a look at Eric Lee’s Night of the Bayonets that tells the surprising true story of the last battle of the Second World War in Europe.
The war in northwest Europe was supposed to have been over on the 8th of May 1945. However, Eric Lee’s new book, Night of the Bayonets tells a very different story. Instead, his book transports us to the Wadden Islands, where the Battle of Texel raged from 6th April until 20th May 1945. The central act in this real-life drama, the brutal massacre of some 400 German troops at the hands of their comrades, gives the book its menacing title. While the rest of the Continent celebrated VE Day, the Dutch inhabitants of Texel Island found themselves in the middle of a bloody conflict between German troops and their erstwhile allies of the Georgian Legion, itself part of the Wehrmacht.
Now an almost forgotten footnote to the Second World War, the Battle of Texel quickly became a propaganda vehicle for Dutch communists, the Soviet Union, and Georgian nationalists. In 1968, the story was even transformed into a Soviet film called Crucified Island. In Night of the Bayonets, historian and journalist Eric Lee tries to untangle the facts from the fiction. His book also asks some difficult questions about national and political loyalties versus morality and the human imperative for survival. Caught between starvation, disease, or a bullet in the neck, would you voluntarily take up arms for your enemy? Would you knowingly endanger civilians, many of them children, to save your own skin?
Basically, Night of the Bayonets is a book of three parts. First, Lee explains the turbulent history of Georgia from the First World War until its brief period of independence was eclipsed by the new Soviet state. Next, he focuses on how 800 Georgians ended up on the peaceful Dutch island of Texel, as part of the German army of occupation. He goes onto explain the planning of the Georgian uprising, the murder of 400 German troops, and subsequent battle. Finally, he discusses the aftermath of the battle and myth-making that quickly followed.
Eventually, Canadian military forces put an end to the battle for Texel. The estimated casualties were around 2,347 (killed, wounded, and missing) including 89 Dutch civilians. Of the 800 Georgians who fought in the battle, just 228 survived. Although the Germans were increasingly short of manpower as the war progressed, it does seem naive of them to have placed any trust in the loyalty of the Osttruppen (Eastern troops). Night of the Bayonets is well-researched and makes for an interesting read. However, the main protagonists, the Georgians, remained remote, opaque, unsympathetic figures. They changed sides, and then changed sides again. They killed 400 former comrades in cold blood, many of them while they slept. In a desire to save themselves, the Georgians threatened the lives of the island’s entire population. Perhaps it is no surprise that today’s islanders are ambivalent about this period in their history, and would rather leave the matter buried in the Russian Cemetery.
Night of the Bayonets: The Texel Uprising and Hitler’s Revenge, April-May 1945 by Eric Lee is published by Greenhill Books, 2020. You can also visit NightoftheBayonets.com for more information.