What do you think?
14-та гренадерська дивізія Ваффен-СС "Галичина" 1943–1945
Складна доля дивізії «Галичина», що стала першою піхотною дивізією у складі елітного Ваффен-СС, а згодом перетворилася на 1-шу Українську дивізію Української національної армії, а також її військовослужбовців, які прагнули проторувати власний шлях у боротьбі за незалежність України, багатьма усе ще сприймається крізь потворне відлуння радянської пропаганди або пострадянське невігластво, провокуючи не лише хибні оцінки, але й розбрат. Військовий історик з 30-літнім досвідом служби у збройних силах США, полковник у відставці Михайло Орест Лоґуш, спираючись на величезну джерельну базу, зокрема на матеріали американської розвідки, пропонує неупереджений погляд на бойовий шлях цього з’єднання. Книга адресована дослідникам політичної та воєнної історії, військовослужбовцям, волонтерам, усім, хто цікавиться військовою справою та вивчає вплив війни на суспільство.
- GenresWorld War IIHistory
880 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 1997
About the author
Michael O. Logusz
7 books12 followersMICHAEL O. LOGUSZ has served in both the Regular and Reserve branches of the U.S. Army, most recently during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2007–08. He holds a B.A. from Oswego State College and an M.A. in Russian Studies from Hunter College in New York. The author of numerous articles and a previous book on WWII, Lt. Colonel Logusz has personally examined the ground of each battle he describes. He currently lives in Florida.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 20, 2023
This is a rather strange quote in the book:
Of importance to note are the numerous contradictions in these accusations against the Galicia Division regarding so-called "war crimes." Of course, every propagandist had his say. But despite the many numerous contradictions, in the end, none can be substantiated. Indeed, in some cases, the accusations are so sensational that in themselves they become totally worthless. But most importantly, all the accusations are groundless, unreliable, very contradictive and cannot be substantiated. But as the years continue to go by there is no end to the falsehoods. Unfortunately, for the time being, these accusations will only continue.
......
All the accusations are groundless?
wikipedia
Polish and German commissions in the 2000s found it guilty of war crimes.
In 2003, the Chief Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation found that the 4th battalion of the 14th division was guilty of war crimes.
In 2005, the Institute of History at the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences confirmed the Polish findings of war crimes committed by the 4th battalion of the 14th division.
Elements of the Waffen-SS Galizien worked alongside one of the most brutal units of Nazi Germany, the SS-Sonderbattalion Dirlewanger, which had carried out brutal anti-partisan activities in Belarus and Poland, and had taken part in the suppression of the Warsaw Uprising.
The Waffen-SS Galizien destroyed several Polish communities in western Ukraine during the winter and spring of 1944.
Specifically, the 4th and 5th SS Police Regiments have been accused of murdering Polish civilians in the course of anti-guerilla activity.
At the time of their actions, those units were not yet under Divisional command, but were under German police command.
Yale historian Timothy Snyder noted that the division's role in the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia was limited, because the murders were primarily carried out by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army.
In a speech to the soldiers of the 1st Galician division, Heinrich Himmler stated:
'Your homeland has become so much more beautiful since you have lost, on our initiative, I must say, those residents who were so often a dirty blemish on Galicia's good name, namely the Jews... I know that if I ordered you to liquidate the Poles... I would be giving you permission to do what you are eager to do anyway.'
........
Mind you in his book on the 1777 Mohawk Campaign, he does mistakes of colossal proportions.
"At one point he claims the surgeon in Ft. Stanwix is laying out his instruments and chloroform; chloroform wasn't invented until some 60 years after the events he was describing."
And yeah, people accuse him of being highly biased in his other books, other than dealing with the Waffen-SS.
Surprise, surprise!
........
As for the author
Colonel Michael Orest Logush is a military historian with 30 years of service in the regular US Army and its reserve.
He was born in Syracuse, New York, in a family of emigrants from Ukraine.
He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Oswego College, New York, and a Master of Arts degree in Russian-Soviet Studies from Hunter College, New York City.
served in West Point, New York; the 18th Airborne Corps of the Rapid Deployment Force, and participated in operation Joint Endeavor (Balkans 1996) and Iraqi Freedom (2008‒2009).
In 2006, served as an instructor at the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany.
........
Journal of Ukrainian Studies
The author portrays the Galicia Division as a group of patriotic Ukrainians who fought to protect their country from the Soviets and neither subscribed to Nazi ideology nor committed war crimes.
It is a straightforward message meant to counter allegations of collaboration and treason, and it operates on two premises:
First, that Stalin’s Soviet Union was a greater threat to Ukraine than Hitler’s Germany; and second, that the division would bring essential military training to the Ukrainian national cause.
As historians have noted, these same views were held by the Ukrainian leaders who supported the division.
Moreover, after Stalingrad many of these leaders anticipated Germany’s defeat but believed that well-trained nationalist forces would keep the Red Army at bay until Western armies arrived.
Germany’s promise to train the division and provide Ukrainian chaplains reinforced nationalist expectations.
Logusz rehearses these points and also attempts to justify the Ukrainians’ views. He argues that Soviet propaganda disseminated a false image of Ukrainian nationalists as collaborators and war criminals.
It is true that Soviet historians constructed an ideological dichotomy between the (good) partisan and the (bad) fascist/nationalist, with members of the Galicia Division falling into the latter category.
At the same time, however, some Western historians have emphasized Stalinist terror to such a degree that they seem to gloss over the consequences of a nation’s decision to come to some level of accommodation with the Germans.
The creation of the Galicia Division was one episode in a tale of complicated relationships among Ukrainian nationalist groups and Nazi leaders, who negotiated with each other in the spring of 1943 against the backdrop of an approaching Red Army
Were Logusz to delve into these relationships, there might emerge a valuable analysis of the ideological affinities and disparities between Ukrainian nationalist visions and Nazi racial views, and of the political manoeuvrings that took place as German defeat became imminent.
Such an analysis, however, would require a source base broader than Logusz’s, as well as a greater emphasis on the chronological context within which to track and explain outlooks that changed during the course of the war.
The author’s references show a familiarity with well-known secondary literature on the German-occupied east, but his diseussion tends to revolve around the relatively harmonious voices of Ukrainian soldiers and some German officials, thus paying scant attention to the voices of other nationalities or even Ukrainians who experienced the war differently.
Numerous transliteration errors and inconsistencies throughout the text, notes, and bibliography reinforce the reader’s impression that not all perspectives are being sufficiently acknowledged.
Moreover, in the occasional reference to a Yiddish, Polish, or Russian first-person account, Logusz dismisses that source unless it supports a particular interpretation.
One example of this tendency is found in his response to an allegation that a battle group of the Galicia Division killed all the inhabitants of a Polish village in February 1944 (page 457 note 37).
Logusz attempts to discredit two Polish sources on the basis of their conflicting figures (one refers to “several hundred” victims, the other to “around 500”).
Then, ironically, he finds supporting evidence in the memoirs of the Soviet Dmitrii Medvedev, who called the perpetrators “Hitlerites”—a name, Logusz states, reserved for Germans, not Ukrainians.
Finally, Logusz asserts that reports from both the Polish government-in-exile and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army verify Medvedev’s characterization of this particular Polish village as a partisan stronghold, so that the action was justified for security reasons, even if in such circumstances “civilians frequently are caught in the midst.”
Missing from this discussion is the context within which the village was destroyed.
Regardless of the position of the Galicia Division in February 1944, the fact remains that bloody conflicts between Poles and Ukrainians continued for some time while the Soviets pushed back the Germans and established control over these borderlands.
Logusz passes over such contextual points in silence, thus obscuring some of the darker aspects of warfare.
A broader perspective would not necessarily negate the qualities of loyalty, unity, and pride with which Logusz endows the members of the Galicia Division; it would put these characteristics into a more realistic and appropriate framework.
Christine Anne Kulke
University of California, Berkeley
.........
I get the feeling they aren't going to update the book!
make your own conclusions on this one
Of importance to note are the numerous contradictions in these accusations against the Galicia Division regarding so-called "war crimes." Of course, every propagandist had his say. But despite the many numerous contradictions, in the end, none can be substantiated. Indeed, in some cases, the accusations are so sensational that in themselves they become totally worthless. But most importantly, all the accusations are groundless, unreliable, very contradictive and cannot be substantiated. But as the years continue to go by there is no end to the falsehoods. Unfortunately, for the time being, these accusations will only continue.
......
All the accusations are groundless?
wikipedia
Polish and German commissions in the 2000s found it guilty of war crimes.
In 2003, the Chief Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation found that the 4th battalion of the 14th division was guilty of war crimes.
In 2005, the Institute of History at the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences confirmed the Polish findings of war crimes committed by the 4th battalion of the 14th division.
Elements of the Waffen-SS Galizien worked alongside one of the most brutal units of Nazi Germany, the SS-Sonderbattalion Dirlewanger, which had carried out brutal anti-partisan activities in Belarus and Poland, and had taken part in the suppression of the Warsaw Uprising.
The Waffen-SS Galizien destroyed several Polish communities in western Ukraine during the winter and spring of 1944.
Specifically, the 4th and 5th SS Police Regiments have been accused of murdering Polish civilians in the course of anti-guerilla activity.
At the time of their actions, those units were not yet under Divisional command, but were under German police command.
Yale historian Timothy Snyder noted that the division's role in the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia was limited, because the murders were primarily carried out by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army.
In a speech to the soldiers of the 1st Galician division, Heinrich Himmler stated:
'Your homeland has become so much more beautiful since you have lost, on our initiative, I must say, those residents who were so often a dirty blemish on Galicia's good name, namely the Jews... I know that if I ordered you to liquidate the Poles... I would be giving you permission to do what you are eager to do anyway.'
........
Mind you in his book on the 1777 Mohawk Campaign, he does mistakes of colossal proportions.
"At one point he claims the surgeon in Ft. Stanwix is laying out his instruments and chloroform; chloroform wasn't invented until some 60 years after the events he was describing."
And yeah, people accuse him of being highly biased in his other books, other than dealing with the Waffen-SS.
Surprise, surprise!
........
As for the author
Colonel Michael Orest Logush is a military historian with 30 years of service in the regular US Army and its reserve.
He was born in Syracuse, New York, in a family of emigrants from Ukraine.
He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Oswego College, New York, and a Master of Arts degree in Russian-Soviet Studies from Hunter College, New York City.
served in West Point, New York; the 18th Airborne Corps of the Rapid Deployment Force, and participated in operation Joint Endeavor (Balkans 1996) and Iraqi Freedom (2008‒2009).
In 2006, served as an instructor at the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany.
........
Journal of Ukrainian Studies
The author portrays the Galicia Division as a group of patriotic Ukrainians who fought to protect their country from the Soviets and neither subscribed to Nazi ideology nor committed war crimes.
It is a straightforward message meant to counter allegations of collaboration and treason, and it operates on two premises:
First, that Stalin’s Soviet Union was a greater threat to Ukraine than Hitler’s Germany; and second, that the division would bring essential military training to the Ukrainian national cause.
As historians have noted, these same views were held by the Ukrainian leaders who supported the division.
Moreover, after Stalingrad many of these leaders anticipated Germany’s defeat but believed that well-trained nationalist forces would keep the Red Army at bay until Western armies arrived.
Germany’s promise to train the division and provide Ukrainian chaplains reinforced nationalist expectations.
Logusz rehearses these points and also attempts to justify the Ukrainians’ views. He argues that Soviet propaganda disseminated a false image of Ukrainian nationalists as collaborators and war criminals.
It is true that Soviet historians constructed an ideological dichotomy between the (good) partisan and the (bad) fascist/nationalist, with members of the Galicia Division falling into the latter category.
At the same time, however, some Western historians have emphasized Stalinist terror to such a degree that they seem to gloss over the consequences of a nation’s decision to come to some level of accommodation with the Germans.
The creation of the Galicia Division was one episode in a tale of complicated relationships among Ukrainian nationalist groups and Nazi leaders, who negotiated with each other in the spring of 1943 against the backdrop of an approaching Red Army
Were Logusz to delve into these relationships, there might emerge a valuable analysis of the ideological affinities and disparities between Ukrainian nationalist visions and Nazi racial views, and of the political manoeuvrings that took place as German defeat became imminent.
Such an analysis, however, would require a source base broader than Logusz’s, as well as a greater emphasis on the chronological context within which to track and explain outlooks that changed during the course of the war.
The author’s references show a familiarity with well-known secondary literature on the German-occupied east, but his diseussion tends to revolve around the relatively harmonious voices of Ukrainian soldiers and some German officials, thus paying scant attention to the voices of other nationalities or even Ukrainians who experienced the war differently.
Numerous transliteration errors and inconsistencies throughout the text, notes, and bibliography reinforce the reader’s impression that not all perspectives are being sufficiently acknowledged.
Moreover, in the occasional reference to a Yiddish, Polish, or Russian first-person account, Logusz dismisses that source unless it supports a particular interpretation.
One example of this tendency is found in his response to an allegation that a battle group of the Galicia Division killed all the inhabitants of a Polish village in February 1944 (page 457 note 37).
Logusz attempts to discredit two Polish sources on the basis of their conflicting figures (one refers to “several hundred” victims, the other to “around 500”).
Then, ironically, he finds supporting evidence in the memoirs of the Soviet Dmitrii Medvedev, who called the perpetrators “Hitlerites”—a name, Logusz states, reserved for Germans, not Ukrainians.
Finally, Logusz asserts that reports from both the Polish government-in-exile and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army verify Medvedev’s characterization of this particular Polish village as a partisan stronghold, so that the action was justified for security reasons, even if in such circumstances “civilians frequently are caught in the midst.”
Missing from this discussion is the context within which the village was destroyed.
Regardless of the position of the Galicia Division in February 1944, the fact remains that bloody conflicts between Poles and Ukrainians continued for some time while the Soviets pushed back the Germans and established control over these borderlands.
Logusz passes over such contextual points in silence, thus obscuring some of the darker aspects of warfare.
A broader perspective would not necessarily negate the qualities of loyalty, unity, and pride with which Logusz endows the members of the Galicia Division; it would put these characteristics into a more realistic and appropriate framework.
Christine Anne Kulke
University of California, Berkeley
.........
I get the feeling they aren't going to update the book!
make your own conclusions on this one
September 17, 2026
Це важкий нонфікшн. Причому важкий у всіх сенсах — і за змістом, і буквально за вагою 😅 Справжня цеглина: близько 600 сторінок тексту, фотографій та мап і ще приблизно 280 сторінок приміток.
Я не знаю, пощастило мені чи ні, але до цієї книги я про дивізію Ваффен-СС «Галичина» не знала практично нічого. Ось така у мене була освіта кцпською мовою в Харкові з підручниками історії рососійською мовою 🙃 Тож фактично цілий шматок української історії я відкривала для себе вперше.
І читала з величезною цікавістю. З болем. Сумом. І періодичним усвідомленням того, що сучасні нації та їхні прагнення подекуди не так уже й сильно відрізняються від того, що було майже сто років тому.
Українці хотіли своєї держави. Хотіли самі собою керувати, не мати над собою чергових іноземних панів, зберігати свою мову, традиції, релігію. Щоб до нас нарешті просто не лізли.
І саме через цю призму книга дуже детально показує мотивацію людей, які вступали до дивізії: їхні сподівання, розрахунки, бажання отримати військовий вишкіл та зброю, які в майбутньому могли знадобитися у боротьбі за власну державу. І водночас — наскільки складним, суперечливим та жорстоким був світ, у якому вони намагалися цими можливостями скористатися.
Бо це взагалі був час, коли різні сили воювали буквально в усі боки. Прокомуністичні, пронацистські, українські національні рухи — різні цілі, різні союзи, різні вороги, які могли змінюватися залежно від обставин. І між усім цим — звичайні люди, які намагалися вижити та зрозуміти, де в цьому всьому місце для їхньої країни.
А розділ про бій під Бродами мене просто прибив.
Він настільки детально написаний, настільки багато там зібрано фактів, свідчень, переміщень військ, рішень та людських історій, що після нього я почувалася так, наче сама звідти вийшла. З болем від усвідомлення, скільки людей там загинуло. Українців із дивізії, які не хотіли повернення комуністичної влади. Українців, примусово мобілізованих до Червоної армії. Людей, яких історія поставила по різні боки фронту й перемолола у величезній війні.
Мабуть, саме це мене зачепило найбільше.
Цю книгу точно варто прочитати тим, хто хоче краще зрозуміти мотивацію частини українців того часу: чому вони боролися проти комуністів, чого сподівалися досягти та чому намагалися використати ті можливості для військового вишколу й озброєння, які взагалі були їм доступні.
Це дуже гідна й неймовірно масштабна праця. Я щиро вдячна авторові за те, наскільки ретельно він усе це дослідив, зібрав і систематизував.
І дуже тішусь, що через 20+ років після першого видання ця робота нарешті вийшла українською. Особливо зараз — під час повномасштабного вторгнення, коли ми знову настільки гостро відчуваємо ціну власної держави, мови, культури та права самим вирішувати, як нам жити.
Я не знаю, пощастило мені чи ні, але до цієї книги я про дивізію Ваффен-СС «Галичина» не знала практично нічого. Ось така у мене була освіта кцпською мовою в Харкові з підручниками історії рососійською мовою 🙃 Тож фактично цілий шматок української історії я відкривала для себе вперше.
І читала з величезною цікавістю. З болем. Сумом. І періодичним усвідомленням того, що сучасні нації та їхні прагнення подекуди не так уже й сильно відрізняються від того, що було майже сто років тому.
Українці хотіли своєї держави. Хотіли самі собою керувати, не мати над собою чергових іноземних панів, зберігати свою мову, традиції, релігію. Щоб до нас нарешті просто не лізли.
І саме через цю призму книга дуже детально показує мотивацію людей, які вступали до дивізії: їхні сподівання, розрахунки, бажання отримати військовий вишкіл та зброю, які в майбутньому могли знадобитися у боротьбі за власну державу. І водночас — наскільки складним, суперечливим та жорстоким був світ, у якому вони намагалися цими можливостями скористатися.
Бо це взагалі був час, коли різні сили воювали буквально в усі боки. Прокомуністичні, пронацистські, українські національні рухи — різні цілі, різні союзи, різні вороги, які могли змінюватися залежно від обставин. І між усім цим — звичайні люди, які намагалися вижити та зрозуміти, де в цьому всьому місце для їхньої країни.
А розділ про бій під Бродами мене просто прибив.
Він настільки детально написаний, настільки багато там зібрано фактів, свідчень, переміщень військ, рішень та людських історій, що після нього я почувалася так, наче сама звідти вийшла. З болем від усвідомлення, скільки людей там загинуло. Українців із дивізії, які не хотіли повернення комуністичної влади. Українців, примусово мобілізованих до Червоної армії. Людей, яких історія поставила по різні боки фронту й перемолола у величезній війні.
Мабуть, саме це мене зачепило найбільше.
Цю книгу точно варто прочитати тим, хто хоче краще зрозуміти мотивацію частини українців того часу: чому вони боролися проти комуністів, чого сподівалися досягти та чому намагалися використати ті можливості для військового вишколу й озброєння, які взагалі були їм доступні.
Це дуже гідна й неймовірно масштабна праця. Я щиро вдячна авторові за те, наскільки ретельно він усе це дослідив, зібрав і систематизував.
І дуже тішусь, що через 20+ років після першого видання ця робота нарешті вийшла українською. Особливо зараз — під час повномасштабного вторгнення, коли ми знову настільки гостро відчуваємо ціну власної держави, мови, культури та права самим вирішувати, як нам жити.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews