Ostatnia runda 1944: Jak Stalin wygrał wojnę

by Jonathan Dimbleby, Bartłomiej Pietrzyk (Translator)

Rok, który przypieczętuje los nazistów
Rok, w którym Stalin niczym kolos rzuci cień na Europę

Czerwiec 1944 roku. W trakcie operacji Bagration ponad 2 miliony żołnierzy Armii Czerwonej staje naprzeciw 500 tysięcy żołnierzy niemieckich. Sowieci mszczą się za swoją porażkę w operacji Barbarossa w 1941 roku. W tym samym czasie zachodni alianci triumfują na plażach Normandii, ale to wydarzenia na froncie wschodnim przypieczętują los Hitlera i doprowadzą do zniszczenia nazizmu.
Najnowsza książka bestsellerowego historyka to oparta na nieznanych na Zachodzie źródłach niemieckich, rosyjskich i polskich analiza uwzględniająca aspekty wojskowe, polityczne i dyplomatyczne ostatniego roku II wojny światowej. Ukazuje wyrafinowane formy oszustwa i podstępu, okrucieństwa wojny partyzanckiej i triumfy militarne Sowietów, które umożliwią Stalinowi okupację Europy Wschodniej, narzucenie warunków powojennego porozumienia i położą fundamenty pod Zimną Wojnę.

Rok 1944 jest pełen okrucieństwa, podstępów, militarnych triumfów i klęsk. Stalin wykorzysta szansę, by stać się jedynym zwycięzcą tej wojny. Po trupach wrogów i sprzymierzeńców dotrze do miejsca, z którego będzie decydował o przyszłości świata.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, World War II, Russia, War, Military History, Politics

640 pages, Hardcover

First published June 3, 2024

About the author

Jonathan Dimbleby is a writer and filmmaker based in England. His five-part series on Russia was broadcast by BBC2 and accompanied by his book Russia: A Journal to the Heart of a Land and its People. Destiny in the Desert was recently nominated for the Hessell-Tiltman History Prize.

Reviews

[Liviu · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good account of the war on the Eastern Front in 1944 when the German army was decisively defeated and on the diplomatic maneuvers of the year. Followed by a postcript linking the frozen political landscape of the Cold War with the current war in the East and a postcript with the fates of the book's many protagonists. Well written and absorbing.

[Nick Harriss · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book that follows on from the author's equally impressive "Barbarossa". Having slightly doubted Mr Dimbleby as a military historian before reading "Destiny in the Desert", I have become a firm fan, this being the fourth of his WW2 books I have read. Highly recommended.

[Moravian1297 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Even although I've read about much of the content within this book before, "Behind Closed Doors" and "Hitler & Stalin" both by Laurence Rees, "Berlin: The Downfall" and
”Stalingrad" both by Antony Beevor, with both these events sandwiching and overlapping the events in this book, and biographies of both Stalin and Zhukov, it was certainly the first to lay the case for the Red Army push of 1944, "Operation Bagration", to be the most decisive engagement of WWII and with hindsight, it probably is the correct call.

Obviously that's not to underestimate or malign in any way the importance of the D-Day landings in Normandy of the same year, and the extremely hard fought push through Western Europe by the Allied forces. Stalin’s years of agitation for a Western Front to be opened up, is self evident of this, but as I've always believed and maintained, WWII was won for the most part from the East by the Red Army and it is most satisfying to finally see a Western historian finally recognizing that fact in what should have made this an extremely important body of work.
But unfortunately the author goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid like Ukraine! (apologies for the lyrical parody, but I couldn’t help myself!)

I literally gasped with disbelief and exasperation, when in the Afterword the author, Mr Dimbleby totally undid all of his previous good work in this book by droning on about modern day Ukraine.
After previously spending several chapters telling us the facts about Ukrainian ultra nationalists and the horrors they inflicted on Jews and ethnic Poles among others, when they collaborated with the Nazis during WWII (see the movie "Hatred" directed by Wojciech Smarzowski for a better, if extremely harrowing perspective*). The author then proceeds to egregiously discount any truth to the fact, that when these Ukrainian Nazis overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian government in 2014, Russia, understandably in my book, just couldn't have it, and so, for the author to seemingly turn this book into a piece of Ukrainian Nazi propaganda, after just telling us of their historical atrocities, was mind boggling hypocrisy to say the least!
It was bad enough during the week at the D-Day commemorations, having to listen to Joe Biden harp on about Russia "illegally invading democracies", jeezo, that's been the cornerstone of US foreign policy since they dropped the bombs on Japan! Then we had King Charles III spuriously espousing the fallacious involvement of the Royal Family in the fight against Nazism, eh? The Royal Family were all, if not outright Nazis, at least and very much sympathizers, with photographic evidence of among others, the Queen Mother and the future Queen throwing Nazi salutes! Then worst of all, we had slimeball and ubercreep, Volodymyr Zelenskyy fawning all over the last of the rapidly diminishing D-Day veterans while he presides over whole battalions of neo-Nazi paramilitaries! You really couldn’t make this sh*t up! So the last thing I expected or wanted was another dose of nauseating, establishment propaganda at the end of my historical escapism. Especially as the author had been hitting the thoroughly researched nails so squarely on the center of the extremely detailed heads!

It has also been a rarity to read, as opposed to other accounts of events in WWII, that it was the timing of the Warsaw uprising that was to blame for the annihilation of the Polish home army (AK), and not a deliberate and nefarious move by Stalin. Although it was advantageous and somewhat expedient for Stalin, that the AK were all but wiped out, as they answered to the exiled Polish government in London and not Stalin's puppets, the Lublin Poles, it was however, irrelevant, as a full frontal assault on Warsaw by the Red Army, at that moment, just wasn't practical, in logistics, terrain or manpower. They eventually did what they could, when they could, but for the AK, it was too little too late. The AK's premature and ill judged assault on their oppressors proved highly expensive, as it led to the wholesale torture and slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians.
You also have to remember that the Red Army commander of the nearest units, Rokossovsky, was himself a Pole, so hardly likely to deliberately sit back and watch such a slaughter, if it could've been avoided.

I'll finish up on a lighter note, there was also a story of a Russian tank brigade that turned up for battle with it's own brass band in tow, which made me smile as it reminded me of the scene in the Clint Eastwood movie, "Kelly's Heros", where Donald Sutherland's character, "Oddball" turns up with a whole army of musicians trailing after his tank, and when asked, "Who the hell are they?" he replies,
"That's the band!"

*Trailer for the movie ”Hatred”
https://youtu.be/B-nwg693WCE?si=ZgUK7...

[Philip Kuhn · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really great book about the end of WWII in Eastern Europe that sheds light on the leading personalities and events. It's one of the few books that takes place on many different levels at the same time. It covers what really happened in the Big Three talks. And then the theater wide level of battle. Then the army level, division level and then stories and letters from individual soldiers. The author also follows up with an afterword that tells what happened to each of the major figures for the rest of their lives after WWII. Well researched and written. Highly recommended.

PHIL Kuhn

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

D-Day was dramatic, but this vast and brutal history of one year on the eastern front revises the historical focus to the continental war waged by the USSR.

[Maria Luisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un eccellente resoconto sulle intricatissime vicende della II Guerra Mondiale che si svolsero soprattutto nel 1944, a partire dall'incontro tra Churchill, Roosevelt e Stalin a Teheran alla fine del 1943, focalizzate sul fronte Orientale che vide un'avanzata sbalorditiva delle truppe russe al fine della riconquista di tutti i territori perduti durante la campagna nazista "Barbarossa" e il cui obiettivo principale era arrivare a Berlino.
Le varie azioni, battaglie, scontri, punteggiati da numerosissimi episodi di violenza e ferocia inaudita, da entrambe le parti, sono ricostruiti non solo dal punto di vista militare ma anche tratteggiati grazie a testimonianze dirette di militari e civili di entrambi i fronti tratte da lettere, diari, resoconti e trascritture di incontri. Fa capolino in alcune parti con i suoi articoli anche Vassilij Grossman, inviato di guerra.
Le parti che ho apprezzato maggiormente però sono quelle dove si legge la narrazione delle decisioni politiche dei tre maggiori protagonisti: Churchill, Roosevelt e Stalin. Il 1944 è stato un anno dove i tre alleati hanno giocato una immensa partita a scacchi durata un anno. Già la parola "alleati" è una parola grossa. Ognuno cercava di portare a casa il migliore risultato possibile. Churchill, il più debole dei tre, aveva già previsto di come sarebbe andata a finire la stessa partita e ne era inorridito: alla fine della guerra l'Europa sarebbe stata divisa in due parti, di cui una, quella Orientale, compresi i Balcani, sarebbe caduta volente o nolente, sotto l'influenza dell'URSS. Si battè con tutte le sue forze contro ciò e nonostante la sua ideologia imperialista e i suoi limiti, cercò di opporsi ma potè poco contro uno statista senza scrupoli, che incarnava un totalitarismo cieco e feroce, che stava riportando una schiacciante vittoria su un altrettanto despota, e un alleato lontano, che non voleva sentir parlare di sfere di influenza, impegnato in una campagna elettorale interna lunga ed estenuante e che voleva instaurare a tutti i costi un clima di collaborazione e di reciproco rispetto con il dittatore russo, mostrandosi sempre più accondiscendente.
Ho trovato Churchill un leader cocciuto, orgoglioso, collerico ma anche disilluso e molto lucido, eroico nel voler salvare a tutti i costi la Polonia, uno dei paesi più martoriati e per cui la Gran Bretagna aveva dichiarato guerra alla Germania; Roosevelt ingenuo, illuso, lontano, alla ricerca di essere sempre accomodante, poco incline a voler capire i problemi europei, ormai stanco; Stalin assetato di vendetta e freddo calcolatore, nonché estremamente furbo, incurante del numero di vittime del suo popolo perchè non doveva rispondere a un paese democratico.
L'Europa è ancora oggi purtroppo un campo di battaglia, dove si combatte una guerra feroce e di cui non si vede la fine: una guerra i cui semi ho trovato proprio nel racconto di questo libro. E l'Europa è divisa e debole, con lo sguardo rivolto a Ovest per un aiuto che è sempre più vacillante e svogliato. Ma non c'è traccia di alcun Churchill.
Ho trovato la mia edizione in ebook poco curata, con tanti errori sia grammaticali che di ortografia. Peccato.

[David Wasley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good account including maps and photos. A major theme is the overwhelming strength of the Soviet forces. However, apart from a few paragraphs mentioning Lend-Lease supplies by the Allies, there is no description of how that strength came about. The massive shift to a total war economy was an organisational masterstroke.

[Chris Jaffe · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good account of a year which determined a lot of how the war would end, and how the post-war would begin. When 1944 began, much of the USSR was occupied by the Nazis. Leningrade was still under siege, for example. Well, a series offensives at the start of the year knocked the Germans further back. Then a huge June offensive - Operation Bagration - pushed them pretty much entirely out of the USSR, and to the gates of Warsaw. From there, Germany's allies Romania and Bulgaria looked to make peace with the Soviets, leading them into the Balkans. Hungary tried to do likewise, only for Germany to initiate a coup (and force all of Hungary's many Jews into concentration camps in the process). The last really big battle is at Budapest.

Stalin comes off pretty pragmatic here, especially compared to Hitler. Oh, Stalin is more than willing to let millions die, but there isn't the strident inflexibility that Hitler showed all retreat long.

The book also covers diplomacy and relations between the Big Three of Churchill, FDR, and Stalin. Dimleby argues that Stalin did very well for himself in these rounds, playing the two western allies off each other (which wasn't too hard, as the viewpoints of FDR and Churchill didn't always line up). That said, I felt the book spent too much time on these matters. Ultimately, as the book notes, what mattered most in determining the fate of East Europe was less what happened at Yalta and more what happened on the battlefield in 1944. The Soviets occupy eastern Europe and so were going to make it their kind of eastern Europe.

It's very thorough and contains many dispatches and writings from common soldiers, so you get a sense of how the war felt on the ground, not just up above from the seat of the leaders.

[Eddie Georgelin · Rating 4 out of 5]

First book regarding this period of the war, thought Dimblely blended 3 elements of the war to aplomb, these being: the politics going behind the curtain between the big 3, the generals and armies perspective as the Wehrmacht is pushed back on all fronts, and of course the soldiers and civilian's perspectives in letters and diaries.

Some parts I thoroughly enjoyed:
- The detail and realism to which the Russians carried out 'Maskirovka' , as well as the personalities within the Stavka that executed the plans.
- The meetings, conferences and general between the Poles, Soviets, Brits and Americans makes for enligheting reading; Dimbley paints Stalin as an inevitable colossus, using diaries and notes of aide's and ambassadors and the rhetoric that comes in these communications shows an inescapable 'Bear' that will dominate Eastern Europe. Fascinating was the rifts between them (including the Western allies).
- The accounts of soldiers and the plights of civilians that were stuck in the middle (Poles, belorussians, baltics, ukrainians), give views of despair, horror and hope.
- The maps were excellent, if you're not an expert like me, and can't remember exactly where Ternopil or Lvov is, it's easy to flick back. This allows the reader to follow chronollogically as the Army Group's are broken down by the Russians


Think a few parts were a little too long, and the themes reptitive and not expanded on in a great way, and wasn't a fan of how the author felt the need in the afterword give his complete commdenation of Putin, without even touching on the very collobarations between Nazis and Ukrainian nationalists that he wrote about in such interesting depth in the book!
Overall though doesn't detract and would highly reccommend for reading about this period

[Komrade · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this up because I liked his previous book (Barbarossa).

Endgame is written in the same style, and relies on historical sources from all sides of the conflict (British, American, German, and Soviet). This time, however, there are a lot more personal journals quoted in the book, which I appreciate. It serves to remind you that the most devastating conflict in world history was not fought by figures on a map and numbers in a spreadsheet - it was fought by real human beings who hated every second of the war.

While the big three (Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt) discussed future plans for Europe and the world order, the soldiers and civilians on the ground had to endure harsh elements, a lack of food, water and shelter, and an overabundance of mud.

Just like he did in Barbarossa, Dimbleby tries to explain how every allied country acted pragmatically, out of their own best interest: Britain wished to save their empire and prevent communism from spreading, USA under Roosevelt wished to form a new (peaceful) world order (under the Big 5 in the Security Council), and USSR fought for survival, to create a buffer between itself and the West, and a partial restoration of the territories lost in the dissolution of the old Russian Empire.
This is realpolitik in its essence: every side had clear goals in mind whenever they expended resources. To paint the west or east as evil (which is common in eastern, or western historiography, respectively) is to take a very simplistic view to history. The only person you could paint as irredeemably evil is AH himself, but the book hammers this point repeatedly, in case you had any doubts.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really good, well written, giving a clear picture of the price that Russia paid in defeating the Germans in WW2.

The battles fought between the Germans and Russians are dealt with, their scope necessitating broad brush strokes rather unit by unit detail. The book also includes the political battles between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill, charting the rise of Stalin and to a certain extent the sidelining of Churchill.

Dimbleby has managed to acquire more information than most on the actions of the main players, although German records have been easier to obtain.

The numbers of combatants involved in the battles are mind boggling and the casualties horrific on both sides, two leaders who seemed unconcerned with the fate of the fighting man and civilians. Dimbleby does not gloss over the brutal behaviour of the Russian troops, particularly as they move into Germany, but points out that most of this was seen as payback for the treatment the Germans “dished out” when they invaded Russia.

The final chapter “Afterword” should be required reading along with “Prisoners of Geography” and “Chernobyl” to explain why Russia invaded Ukraine.

[Phil Curme · Rating 5 out of 5]

I hadn't read any of Jonathan Dimbleby's military history books before, as I felt that he didn't have the necessary 'credentials'. How wrong I was. As this book proves, Dimbleby is more than capable of undertaking truly insightful research and producing a really compelling narrative as a result. This is a big topic and for that reason some aspects of the Red Army's success in 1944 are given the lightest of touches (for example the gearing up of industry and the sheer volume of Lend-Lease provisioning). However, the arguments do run deep when it comes to examining the geo-politics of this period and the way in which the decisions made by nation state leaders were shaped by what happened on the battlefield. The author is adept at articulating the broad strategic picture, whilst digging into the details which shaped the key decisions. A thoroughly engaging and thought provoking book which I would recommend without hesitation.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's hard to imagine a greater demonstration of the human capacity for evil than the Eastern Front during WWII. The sheer horror unleashed by the Nazis and the ferocious response of the Soviet Union seems unparalleled in scope and duration in history. It is to Dimbleby credit, although all the more harrowing to the reader, that he gives the individual human a voice amongst the hellscape.

The point that the Soviet Union bore the brunt of the fighting and losses in defeating Hitler's armies is perhaps not as contentious as the author makes out he does pull together a great deal of evidence in support. I found the discussion of the differences between the US and the UK in terms of how to deal with the Soviet Union and the consequences this had for post war Europe more interesting but presumably more contentious.

Above all though the visceral horror of this time is what remains in the mind.

[Mike Morrow · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well written and impressively researched, this easy-to-read book gives a different perspective on the usual 'America won the war' narrative. The description of the political machinations that went on between Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt are particularly revealing.

But be warned - this is a harrowing book to read as it describes the complete dis-regard for human life and the mindless killing, torture and destruction carried out by Axis and by Russian troops, both on prisoners of war and innocent civilians, on a massive scale. It describes humanity at its very worse.

My only criticism of the book is that it is overly long because of too much detail of individual battles. This might suit the more serious historian, but not I suggest the general reader that this book is aimed at.

[Bryan Fichter · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author does a great job of capturing the immense scale of the Eastern Front in 1944, with the Nazis and Soviets both fielding armies numbering in the millions. He also weaves in the diplomacy among the Big Three and drives home the point that the Soviets were always going to end up in control of most of eastern Europe whether FDR and Churchill liked it or not. (FDR comes across as really naive about Stalin.) Dimbleby also makes excellent use of letters, diaries, etc. from ordinary soldiers trying to endure a hellish war.

[Tolu Fatogbe · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found parts very enlightening. Especially the bits about how the big three i.e.Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill were in reality the big two plus one. Churchill struggled to cope with Britain's diminished status. Churchill was not able to win an argument unless Roosevelt or Stalin agreed with him or neither could be bothered "it was not a role he relished".

[Paul Gibson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deeply researched and very well written, this is a gripping narrative of the Eastern Front. Interspersed with both gripping and moving real life accounts, Dimbleby has managed to interweave the background politics of the time, the main personalities involved , and the military action on the ground to produce a very well constructed narrative of this major event in world history.

[Brian Gowthorpe · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book, filling in another gap in my yawning ignorance. A tale of two psychopaths. Stalin wins hands down: more people killed, even more ruthless and he got his own back. Revenge of the Untermensch. Churchill and Rossevelt were fatally charmed by Uncle Joe, an unwise and inapposite soubriquet.

[Edward Truemper · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engrossing tome about the last complete year of WWII on the Eastern Front. The author covers the major battles, commanders. The politics surrounding the partition of Eastern Europe by the Allies. Intersperses the intrigue between the Allied leaders and their generals . Numerous testaments of the common soldier and the slaughter and horrors of modern warfare

[Mark Davies · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to look beyond some of the myths and propaganda about WW2, then look no further than this expertly written book about the events of 1944. Its describes the enormous sacrifices of the Russian people (approximately 27 million dead), the horrendous brutality civilians had to endure across Europe and the political exchanges/agreements between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill.

[Kevin McMahon · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's amazing what you can achieve if you sit on your backside all day enjoying the sun. Really well researched enjoyable book on the eastern front of Word War II whilst Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin played god.

[Stuart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another fantastic book my Dimbleby.


The book covers the last year of the war in exciting detail. From gaint offensives and politics in Washington. Everything you need to know about the dying months of then war is in this book.

[Tjalling Snabilie · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a magnificent read it was. This book looks further than merely Bagration, and goes into great detail about all events in 1944 on the Eastern Front and beyond. Of course it's bloody every now and then as well, but those are the horrors of that front.

[james woodcock · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read

This is a fantastic book about the war on the Eastern front i read johnathan dimbleby 'Barbarossa' which was also
a fantastic read and this is just as good if not better and highlights the tremendous sacrifice the red army made in the defeat of nazism.

[Donald Robertson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Detailed but engrossing

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Briiliant, gripping ,witha lot of new sources, more than highly recommended. Bravo!!!

[Stephen E. Morris · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating - if at times necessarily gruesome - account of the lesser known and lesser taught (at least in the UK) endeavours of the Russian military during the second world war.

[Grouchy Historian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very very good. Combine this with the book Stalin's War and you will have a totally different perspective of World War 2, its aftermath, and the beginning of the Cold War.

[Kirby Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well-researched and even better-written book.

[Howard Sundwall · Rating 5 out of 5]

Major history.