German anti-partisan warfare in Russia

I just run over an essay by the german historian Christian Gerlach. He identified 55 different german anti-Partisan operations only within the region of White Russia during 1942 and July 1944 (17 in 1942, 27 in 1943, 11 in 1st half of '44).

Result: in this 55 operations, carried out by Police, Wehrmacht and SS, 135,000+ Russians were reported to be killed, the same number being "caught" or "deported" ("caught" usually ended up in execution, "deported" means sent to Germany for slave labour).

German losses as reported: approx. 1,200 men; booty in firearms: approx. 9,000.

So in other words, for every german loss in those anti-partisan operations, 112 Russian were killed, the same number "caught". The ratio of captured weapons to killed Russians is 1 firearm for 15 killed.

The kill ratios, numbers of weapons or deported people differ over the years, in essence the kill ratio went down from 1:500 in 1942 to 1:50 in the 1st half of 1944.

Again, this is only white Russia and only the 55 identified operations with all the missing data who makes the calculation pretty difficult.

But if you compare those numbers with dedicated anti-partisan operations elswhere (f.ex. France or Vietnam) you will see that Wehrmacht, SS and Police just shoot everybody they could get.
There are Operations with 500-1000 killes "Partisans" and ZERO german losses or ZERO captured firearms.

1941 is not included, because at this time there was no noteworthy partisan movement in White Russia or Russia at all.

Cheers,

 

This is interesting, here's something that I posted on feldgrau for a while ago:

In the period 1941-45 it's estimated that about 1.5 german and axis troops were killed or wounded by partisans. Further, 21 000 trains were derailed, 12 000 bridges destroyed and 1100 aircrafts were destroyed. In january, 1943, there were 57 5000 partisans in Belorussia and by the beginning of 1944 there were over 250 000 partisans. And this is only in the soviet union.

source: German Campaigns of World war II

regards

 

You mean 57.000, don't you? Because 57 million are I think too much.

I hate Partisan warfare, it just provoked more violence and cruelty.

 

I think that i might have put one = too much there.

regards

 

I hate Partisan warfare, it just provoked more violence and cruelty.

I absolutly dont agree whit this the partisan warfare was just answer to german ocupation and teror in ocupated countrys

 

Yep, I'd have to agree. If you invade and occupy a country you have to expect it, and I think partisans were often extremely brave and heroic, knowing that if they did live through it and were captured, it would be sure death, probably with tourture. I'd almost surely be part of it, if I were in that place. I also understand that it can be seen as "playing dirty", but again, I think it's understandable.

 

Partisans in Russia tended to be as ruthless as the German occupiers, just without the resources for large scale operations. They tended to loot their own people and execute those they believed traitors, which was a loose term to them. In fact, many partisans were not only Anti-German, but Anti-Soviet as well. At times it was like a 3 way war.

 

Also, in this case, partisan warfare was easily the most effective way the russians had to damage the german transports and supplies. One partisan soldier could easily plant a bomb on a railroad bridge and completely throw off german supplies for a whole area.
I don't have any good info though on the levels of cooperation between the russian army aand the partisans... dasreich, it sounds like your info suggests that there was in fact often severe animosity between partisans and army... You'd think the army would have really tried to use the partisans to their advantage.

 

Don't forget that many partisans were based on russian tropps left behind due to encirlcements etc. I also think that some partisans were organized by russian paratroopers.

regards

 

Many partisans did indeed work with the regular army, but some just rose amid the chaos to steal and plunder. And others saw it as an oppurtunity not only to rid Russia of Germans, but Communists as well. Had the partisans been much more organized and committed to one cause, they could have done catastrophic damage to the German war machine, perhaps shortening the conflict considerably.

 

You know, this could even be in the "What If?" forum...
Going on dasreich's point... had the russian partisans been much more organized and coordinated, along with some more equipment, I'd say they could have shortened the war in the east by at least a year, if not more. Which, (as I'm sure Friedrich will agree!) would have had a HUGE impact on the war as a whole.
I hadn't really thought of this before on a large scale... While I don't know too much about the whole partisan movement, I do know that it never got organised enough to have a huge impact. Certainly, relatively large amounts of german troops remained tied down throughout the eastern conflict fighting the partisans. But throughout the war, it remained relatively static (except for some of the unfortunate atrocities)- german troops tied down, russian partisans having sporadic success...

But let's say that not only had the partisans been organised, but had they been coordinated and supplied by the russian army, I bet they could have seriously hampered all german operations from 1943 onward. Once the russian army stabilised itself from collapse, the partisan movement could have begun an aall-out attack on german logistics, which were weak as it was...

(Sorry if I'm rambling or hi-jacking a thread... It's a lazy saturday afternoon, and Crazy's enjoying it!!!! )

 

I found some stats on this during the "Kursk discussions " in August:

"I´ve just been reading a book by a Finnish colonel on the russian war machine, tanks especially. He also goes through some statistics on the partisan war. I can´t help but think that as well as the russian war tactics the partisans were very effective. At least by these numbers:

In 6/1943 all along the front 1114 attacks

8/43 1395 attacks

9/43 1256 attacks

during these 343 trains off the rails

This point is important considering our main subject here:

In july 1943 between Smolensk-Brjansk-Minsk 841 attacks, 298 steam engines destroyed, 1222 train wagons destroyed, 44 bridges blown up. Also one train carrying tiger tanks was destroyed (!), but no number of tanks shown.

SO, one more thing to have an effect on Kursk and the later counter attacks. "

Actually I wondered how on earth the Germans got the supplies as they did if the partisans were so effective...

------

Something to read:

http://www.globalterrorism101.com/articleGermanAntiPartisanOps.html

--------

On German anti-partisan ops an example from the net

March 19, 1942

Operation 'Munich' is launched. Joined by a new air detachment, German troops attack partisan bases around Yelnya and Dorogobuzh. Another anti-partisan sweep, Operation 'Bamberg’, begins near Bobruisk. SS Police troops attack Russian villages and German security forces burn many villages, killing 3,500 people. Both operations succeeded only in infuriate the Russian civilians. Many of them joined the partisans, making the whole exercise very counter-productive. The 3rd Panzer Army diaries says "There are indications that the partisan movement in the region of Velikiye Luki, Vitebsk, Rudnya, Velizh, is now being organized on a large scale. The fighting strength of the partisans hitherto active, is being bolstered by individual units of regular red army troops."

---------

At the end of the year 1941 there were 30,000 partisans; by the following summer their number had grown to 150,000.
The partisans were concentrated mainly in the forest of Belorussia, bordering on Poland and the Ukraine.
At first their activities were limited by the lack of arms and radios, and by hostile villagers who betrayed them. But their operations soon expanded, as the Soviet High Command started airlifting supplies to them.

http://motlc.wiesenthal.org/text/x20/xm2088.html

--------

They may not have been well organized but the areas were huge and Germans could not guard everywhere. As well local men were drafted to look after the partisans but as they had families to think of they were often just bystanders as they feared something might happen to the families. Also the partisans may have been from their village and both sides knew each other well and actually nothing happened even if they met and knew what the other one was doing.
If Hitler had treated the Russians better they would have turned willingly against Stalin and the war might have ended differently in the east.
Then again the racial theme was the key element..

 

And you know the worst thing about the partisan warfare on the Eastern Front?

Most of it could have been avoided.

When German forces first invaded Byelorussia and the Ukraine, most of the citizens of those areas were happy to see them. They hated the Russians (especially the communist officials) more than anything. They looked on the German invaders as liberators.

Unfortunately, due to Hitlers intolerance of so-called "inferior" races, and the excesses of senior German officials in those areas, this soon changed from liberation to extermination.

If the German occupation authorities had handled it differently, treating the local polulation as equals etc. instead of shooting them and sending them off as slave labour, the threat of partisan warfare would have been minimised. Not eliminated entirely, but certainly kept to probably only nuisance value. Certainly not tying up much needed forces in anti-partisan operations.

________________________________

Why should I demoralize him (the enemy) by military means if I can do so better and more cheaply in other ways - Adolf Hitler

Compared to war, all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, how I love it. - General George Patton

 

Yes, Crazy, I agree! Indeed many more partisans, better coordinated could have became a huger nightmare to the German logistics (Crazy) which had a lot of problems already...

And I think 57.000.000 were too many not much.

 

Nice stuff, Kai...
Looking at some of those numbers makes one wonder what the partisans could have accomplished with further organisation. The amount of space and distance involved in the railways in russia made it nearly impossible for the germans to effectively defend them. With even more problems for their supplies, operations like Kursk could have been made impossible.
And the point about german treatment of russian cvilians is right on the money. In a way, the germans brought it upon themselves. The whole "What If?" idea here works both ways- if the germans had treated russian civilians in captured territory better, it could have easily effected the balance of the war in the east.

 

Actually the germans were not that welcomed, it was only the very western parts of ukraine that greeted the germans. I think it's a modern myth.

regards

 

Not entirely true. Generaloberst Ewald von Kleist DID treat the local population very well in his advance towards Rostov and the Caucasus and he had much more less logistics and supply problems.

 

Partisans are illegal and should be shot. The real ones. Not the false ones. The problems is catching the real ones.

 

Isn't the americans who fought the british army during the indepence war to be considered partisans. Please note that I mean the ones that didn't wore a uniform.

regards

 

I don't know, charlie- all the sources I've read say that the russians were generally happy to see the germans. At least, if not happy, then many of the russians seemed at least willing to see if their new occupiers would be better than Stalin.

on "partisans"- from Webster's dictionary-
"any group of guerilla fighters; esp. a member of an organized civilian force fighting covertly to drive out occupying enemy troops."

So there is certainly the aspect of occupying forces. Good shot, charlie- the americans fighting in the revolutionary war seem to fit this defintiion fine!