“Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941 was the biggest, bloodiest and most barbarous military enterprise in the history of warfare. The specific purpose of Operation Barbarossa, as the Fuhrer codenamed this cataclysmic venture, was also the most decisive campaign of the Second World War. Had Hitler achieved its objective – the annihilation of the Soviet Union – he would have been the master of Europe’s destiny. As it was, by the time his armies reached the gates of Moscow less than six months later, any prospect he might once have had of realizing his delusional version of a Thousand Year Reich had already vanished…”
- Jonathan Dimbleby, Operation Barbarossa: The History of a Cataclysm
Everything is bigger in Russia. Thus, it makes sense that the greatest invasion of history’s greatest war would cross over her borders.
On June 22, 1941, Adolf Hitler unleashed an attack of incredible magnitude against Joseph Stalin and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Along a front nearly 2,000 miles long, three German army groups consisting of around 3.3 million men, some 600,000 motorized vehicles, thousands of tanks, and a surprisingly large number of horses, plunged into the USSR, marking the beginning of one of the grimmest periods in the long history of humankind.
By Christmastime, there would be over a million German casualties, and 4.5 million Soviet, a toll so large that it is hard for the mind to conceive of it. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a million of anything, not stars or ants or grains of rice.
Unsurprisingly, there are a lot of books about Operation Barbarossa. Many of them, however, are really detailed studies, some of them academic monographs. If you want to learn about this catastrophic encounter, but don’t want to make it your life’s work, then Jonathan Dimbleby’s Operation Barbarossa is a really good pick. And if you just want to get your footing before learning more, it’s also a solid place to start.
***
Context is good. Context is our friend. Without context, events cannot be understood. They just drift aimlessly in time and space, without real meaning. I love context.
You probably sense the “but” coming, and here it is: Operation Barbarossa probably has too much. Specifically, Dimbleby starts things off in 1922, with the Treaty of Rapallo between Germany and the Soviet Union. It’s not just a quick summary, either, but twenty plus pages. This is a bit much, and makes for a slow start.
Indeed, Dimbleby takes over 130 pages to get to the beginning of the invasion. Of course, some of that time is well spent, especially with regard to deconstructing the infamous Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, in which Germany and the Soviet Union publicly agreed to avoid aggression with each other, and privately decided to carve up Poland between themselves.
***
Operation Barbarossa hits its stride when the titular event finally kicks off. Dimbleby approaches this gargantuan assault from the strategic and operational levels. In other words, he looks at the big-picture objectives that the Germans were trying to accomplish, and how they tried to do that within the theater. Much of the ultimate failure of Hitler’s gamble rested upon murky thinking at these levels, as the up-jumped runner from the First World War kept changing his mind as to where the heaviest blow – north, center, or south – needed to fall. This wasted an enormous amount of time which – as Dimbleby frequently points out – he did not have. This is especially true given the delay engendered by Hitler’s pre-Barbarossa Balkan incursion, brought about by Italy’s ill-conceived attack on Greece. It should be noted that while Dimbleby tries to keep everything in frame, his focus – as he acknowledges at the start – is on Army Group Center, which thrust toward Moscow. Army Group North and Army Group South are discussed mainly to the extent they impacted the move on Moscow.
Tactics – how the actual battles unfolded through the movement of individual military units – is almost entirely ignored. However, Dimbleby provides the ground-level view by the judicious use of first-person accounts of those involved in the fighting. Unlike many histories, which simply throw witness testimonies on the page, without much further development, Dimbleby chooses his participants well and – where possible – follows them throughout the course of Barbarossa.
One of the bits of received wisdom about Germany’s failure is that it was done in by the mud of autumn, and the snow and cold of winter. Obviously, this is a gross simplification, challenged even contemporaneously. The weather was bad, but it fell upon the just and unjust alike. As Dimbleby explains, it was Germany’s failure to prepare for these inevitabilities that doomed their efforts. For instance, despite Napoleon Bonaparte’s well-known example, Hitler sent forth his troopers without winter clothing.
It is one of the rare graces bestowed upon the 20th century world that Hitler was such a clod. His forceful propensity to ignore the advice of talented generals, and to devolve instantly into childish rants, proved of immense benefit to his opponents. These opponents – it must be added – often outfought Hitler’s legions, after recovering from the disastrous opening months of Barbarossa.
***
Apart from the purely martial aspects, Dimbleby occasionally cuts away to follow other threads. For example, he spends a chapter exploring the strained relationship between Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin. Up until Germany invaded the Soviet Union in summer 1941, Great Britain – which had been fighting Hitler since 1939 – found itself opposite Russia. It had even come close to going to war with the Soviets after they invaded Finland. All that changed when Germany barged through the front door, and Great Britain and the Soviet Union found themselves wary allies.
Another major theme is the “Holocaust by bullets,” a widespread effort by rear-echelon death squads to eliminate Soviet Jewry. As Dimbleby grimly states, this effort – fronted by the Schutzstaffel (SS) but abetted by the Wehrmacht – proved the more successful prong of Hitler’s overarching scheme. Hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children were murdered in places like Babi Yar. The psychological toll on Germany’s willing executioners eventually prompted Nazi leadership to devise more efficient and depersonalized methods of annihilation, culminating in the industrialized liquidation by gas at places like Auschwitz.
***
Dimbleby’s thesis is that Operation Barbarossa was the decisive moment of the Second World War, and that Hitler lost the instant he launched it. Reasonable minds can disagree on this point. Honestly, I found the analysis a bit unsophisticated. It is in the first instance contradictory, especially depending on your definition of “decisive.” If we take it to mean settling the issue, then this is clearly not the case. Dimbleby even acknowledges this in describing how the very next year, Hitler’s minions undertook another massive offensive, only to be stopped at Stalingrad, yet another in a line of allegedly-decisive moments.
Furthermore, Dimbleby’s proposition hews to the standard, wholly conventional belief that the Second World War was decided on the battlefield. He does not address the convincing countertheory that war in general, and this war in particular, turns on logistics. In other words, it does not matter how much material is destroyed on the battlefield – numbers upon which Dimbleby ruminates at length – but how much material gets to the field in the first place. To that end, Allied – see Western – efforts in the air and on the sea were arguably the thumb on the scale. This is not a hidden insight, and Dimbleby is probably well aware of this, since he wrote an entire volume on the Battle of the Atlantic, and how it “won the war.”
In any event, this mushy reasoning is not really a deal breaker, as this is an avowedly popular history, and popular histories are fueled by simplistic codas.
***
Whatever his conclusions about Soviet triumphs, Dimbleby is extremely clear-eyed about the normalization of brutality that governed both the Soviet and Nazi regimes. He suggests that the Soviets won the war, but he also reminds you that they were hardly virtuous and innocent victims, having already digested half of Poland, parts of Romania, and Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. More to the point, before Hitler attacked him, Stalin might have held the title of worst person ever.
On the flipside, Dimbleby does not fall into the trap of glamorizing or heroizing the German soldier. It is easy – and rather seductive – to both celebrate their fighting prowess, while lumping them in with the millions of other victims of Hitlerism. Dimbleby ably demonstrates through eyewitnesses that many German soldiers truly believed in Hitler’s vision of widespread ethnic cleansing in order to secure vast tracts of land for German smallholders.
***
Operation Barbarossa almost entirely succeeds at being what it sets out to be: a mainstream, easily accessible narrative of an epic and ugly collision of totalitarian states. It is not comprehensive, and it has some holes, but it is a stark journey into a hell of mankind’s own making, to a place where death reigned supreme, destroying the guilty and innocent alike.