Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

After The Blitzkrieg: The German Army’s Transition To Defeat In The East
After The Blitzkrieg: The German Army’s Transition To Defeat In The East
After The Blitzkrieg: The German Army’s Transition To Defeat In The East
Ebook131 pages1 hour

After The Blitzkrieg: The German Army’s Transition To Defeat In The East

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars

()

Read preview

About this ebook

The German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 sparked a guerilla resistance unparalleled in modern history in scale and ferocity. In the wake of the initial invasion, the German Army began its struggle to secure a territory encompassing one million square miles and sixty-five million people and to pacify a growing partisan resistance. The German endeavor to secure the occupied areas and suppress the partisan movement in the wake of Operation Barbarossa illustrates the nature of the problem of bridging the gap between rapid, decisive combat operations and “shaping” the post-major conflict environment-securing populations and infrastructure and persuading people to accept the transition from a defeated government to a new one. In this regard, the German experience on the Eastern Front following Operation Barbarossa seems to offer a number of similarities to the U.S. experience in Iraq in the aftermath of OIF. This study highlights what may be some of the enduring qualities about the nature of the transition between decisive battle and political end state-particularly when that end state is regime change. It elaborates on the notion of decisive battle, how the formulation of resistance movements can be explained as complex adaptive systems, the potential of indigenous security forces and the influence of doctrine, cultural appreciation and interagency cooperation on operational-level transition planning.
LanguageEnglish
PublisherVerdun Press
Release dateAug 15, 2014
ISBN9781782895763
After The Blitzkrieg: The German Army’s Transition To Defeat In The East

Related to After The Blitzkrieg

Related ebooks

Asian History For You

View More

Related articles

Related categories

Reviews for After The Blitzkrieg

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
0 ratings

0 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    After The Blitzkrieg - Major Bob E. Willis Jr.

     This edition is published by PICKLE PARTNERS PUBLISHING—www.picklepartnerspublishing.com

    To join our mailing list for new titles or for issues with our books – picklepublishing@gmail.com

    Or on Facebook

    Text originally published in 2005 under the same title.

    © Pickle Partners Publishing 2014, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted by any means, electrical, mechanical or otherwise without the written permission of the copyright holder.

    Publisher’s Note

    Although in most cases we have retained the Author’s original spelling and grammar to authentically reproduce the work of the Author and the original intent of such material, some additional notes and clarifications have been added for the modern reader’s benefit.

    We have also made every effort to include all maps and illustrations of the original edition the limitations of formatting do not allow of including larger maps, we will upload as many of these maps as possible.

    AFTER THE BLITZKRIEG: THE GERMAN ARMY’S TRANSITION TO DEFEAT IN THE EAST

    By

    Major Bob E. Willis Jr., United States Army.

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    Contents

    TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

    ABSTRACT 5

    INTRODUCTION 6

    Background 8

    Thesis 9

    OPERATION BARBAROSSA: A LINEAR, KINETIC APPROACH 11

    Strategic and Operational Objectives 11

    The Military Zone of Operation 13

    The Civil Zone of Operations 14

    Summary 15

    DECISIVE BATTLE FOUNDERS: THE RISE OF THE PARTISAN WAR 17

    The Genesis of the Early Partisan Movement 17

    From Scattered Resistance to All-peoples War 21

    One Last Opportunity: The German Experience with Indigenous Security Forces 22

    BARBAROSSA IN RETROSPECT: PLANNING TO FAIL 27

    Doctrine and Experience 27

    Information Bias: The German Army’s Appreciation of Soviet Politics, Society and Culture 31

    Interagency Unit of Purpose: Relations Between Civil and Military Administration 38

    CONCLUSION 43

    The Chimera of Decisive Battle 44

    Complex Adaptive Systems 45

    The Role of Indigenous Security Forces 47

    Doctrine, Culture and Interagency Coordination 48

    APPENDIX A: NOTES ON SOURCES 50

    APPENDIX B: KEY PERSONS OF INTEREST IN THE STUDY 53

    APPENDIX C: KEY TERMS AND ORGANIZATIONS 54

    REQUEST FROM THE PUBLISHER 56

    BIBLIOGRAPHY 57

    Memoir 57

    Reports 57

    Books 57

    U.S. Doctrinal and Concept Publications 60

    Theses and Research Papers 61

    Articles 61

    ABSTRACT

    AFTER THE BLITZKRIEG: THE GERMAN ARMY’S TRANSITION TO DEFEAT IN THE EAST by Major Bob E. Willis Jr., United States Army.

    One of the most complex challenges facing the U.S. military today is the problem of imposing stability over the chaos that follows major combat operations. Despite the U.S. military’s predilection to distill warfare into the linear, Newtonian paradigm, recent experience in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) suggests that the cause and effect correlation between high-velocity major combat operations and achieving a complex political end state such as regime change is becoming less certain in the contemporary strategic environment. The transition to stability operations in a non-linear, dynamic environment is proving more difficult, and perhaps more decisive, than the major combat phase of a campaign. At some point in every war, the focus must shift from rupturing the existing system to stabilizing and legitimizing a new one; the center of gravity from the enemy’s military forces to ending the chaos and violence that follow major combat operations. The aim of this study is to examine the difficulty in planning and executing these transitions from a historical perspective.

    The German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 sparked a guerilla resistance unparalleled in modern history in scale and ferocity. In the wake of the initial invasion, the German Army began its struggle to secure a territory encompassing one million square miles and sixty-five million people and to pacify a growing partisan resistance. The German endeavor to secure the occupied areas and suppress the partisan movement in the wake of Operation Barbarossa illustrates the nature of the problem of bridging the gap between rapid, decisive combat operations and shaping the post-major conflict environment—securing populations and infrastructure and persuading people to accept the transition from a defeated government to a new one. In this regard, the German experience on the Eastern Front following Operation Barbarossa seems to offer a number of similarities to the U.S. experience in Iraq in the aftermath of OIF. This study highlights what may be some of the enduring qualities about the nature of the transition between decisive battle and political end state—particularly when that end state is regime change. It elaborates on the notion of decisive battle, how the formulation of resistance movements can be explained as complex adaptive systems, the potential of indigenous security forces and the influence of doctrine, cultural appreciation and interagency cooperation on operational-level transition planning.

    INTRODUCTION

    Transitions are incredibly hard. Everyone understands that— all the way back to all the dead Germans.—A Senior U.S. General Officer speaking on the lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom.

    One of the most complex challenges facing the U.S. military today is the problem of imposing stability over the chaos that follows major combat operations. In the coming decades, the nature of the strategic environment will likely place an even greater demand on the U.S. military’s ability to plan and execute these transitions between major combat and stability operations.{1} The situation facing U.S. and Coalition military forces in Iraq at the time of this writing is one example that demonstrates the nature of this problem. Despite defeating the Iraqi Army and removing Saddam Hussein’s regime in the major combat phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), a fierce insurgency emerged in the ensuing chaos which now poses a serious threat to the U.S. strategic objectives in Iraq.{2} According to one U.S. national intelligence estimate, a stable, independent government in Iraq is unlikely for the foreseeable future. A state of persistent chaos or even outright civil war is far more likely.{3} By any measure, the U.S. has yet to impose the security required to facilitate the transition to, and reconstruction of a new normal-the first step towards winning the peace.{4}

    Related to this problem in the changing nature of warfare, the U.S. experience in OIF suggests that the cause and effect correlation between high-velocity major combat operations and the political end state is becoming less certain in the contemporary strategic environment.

    Contrary to the U.S. military’s predilection to distill warfare into the linear, Newtonian paradigm as postulated by Jominian theory, the transition to stability operations in a non-linear, dynamic environment is more difficult, and often more vital to the overall aim, than conventional combat operations.{5} It is difficult at the present juncture to evaluate the merits of this assertion vis-a-vis Iraq as OIF is still a work in progress. However, the problem of bridging the void between major combat operations and a campaign’s ultimate political aims is not idiosyncratic to U.S. forces in Iraq. It is therefore useful to gain an understanding of the difficulty in planning and executing these transitions from other historical cases.

    There exists a great body of study on the operational planning for the German invasion of the Soviet Union.{6} The majority of historical and professional military interest in Operation Barbarossa is focused on the customary elements of operational design: the dubious end state, the failure to commit to a center of gravity, culmination and the selection of lines of operations. By comparison, there is a dearth of analysis on the German Army’s plan to transition from major combat operations to securing the occupied areas. This aspect of the German invasion was an unequivocal, yet highly instructive failure. The planning and execution of this transition in the early months of the war gave rise to "one of the greatest guerilla organizations

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1