What do you think?
Rate this book
Galicia Division: The Waffen-SS 14th grenadier Division 1943-1945
This new book is a historical account of the 14th Waffen-SS Galicia Division (also known as the 1st Ukrainian Division of the Ukrainian National Army). In 1943/1944 a determined group of young men and women in Galicia volunteered to serve in a combat division destined for eastern front combat. Their goal: to engage and destroy the Soviet hordes menacing their homeland and to counter Nazi Germany's subjugation of their country. Although initially Galicia's Volunteers would serve in a German sponsored military formation, in actuality the volunteers of the Galicia division wanted to engage all hostile ideologies-both from the east and west-in order to secure a free independent Ukraine. The division's history is presented along with a human aspect of what the soldiers endured during the brutal battles on the eastern front.
- GenresWorld War IIHistory
592 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 1997
1 person is currently reading
35 people want to read
About the author
Michael O. Logusz
7 books10 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 of 1 review
October 22, 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
Displaying 1 of 1 review