The best general of the eastern front?

I would just like to know your thoughts on this matter. According to you, who was the best general in the eastern front? It could be either of the wehmracht or the red army.

 

Walter Model for Germans, and Chuikov for the Red Army for me... Model was the man to calm the front wherever he went all through the 1941-45, and Chuikov made an impression especially with his work in Stalingrad but also during the rest of the war... Chuikov as I recall also accepted the surrender of Berlin.

 

I would agree with Kai. A difficult question to answer though.

 

I think that the most popular reply would be Erich Von Manstein or/and Georgy Zhukov.
But I would like to dig a little bit more. For example to check if there is any general that never lost a battle or if someone really stroke fear in the hearts of the enemy's soldiers.
So i will revert soon...

 

I think an answer is impossible,because of a lot of things:
-will you consider functions? comparing divisional commanders with army commanders is ,IMHO,not good.There also is the fact that some one can be good on divisional level,but a failure as army commander .And,what about an army commander,who never commanded a division (Paulus)?
-the periods:comparing an army commander from 1941 with one from 1945?
Guderian was 6 months in the East,Model 3 years ,but during the 6 months of Guderian,he commanded an army ,while Model was a divisional commander .
And,if the conclusion would be that A was good in the offensive,and B good in the defensive ?
And,if A was winning,having a superiority on the enemy,while B was sustaining,having a numerical inferiority ?
How to compare the prestation of a retreating Russian army commander in 1941,with the prestation of an advancing Russian army commander in 1945.

 

Model was not only a divisional commander:

"Steven Newton: Hitler´s commander"

June 28 1944: Walther Model was appointed commander of Army Group Center ( without relieving him of current position at Army Group North Ukraine ). The leadership of three quarters of ostfront armies had now been concentrated in the hands of Model or his protegé....

 

yes,I know,but in 1941,when Guderian was commanding a PzGr,Model commanded a division,and,when in january 1942,Model was commanding an army,Guderian was out .Thus,a comparison between both is,IMHO,impossible .

 

Ok , gotcha. Anyway, I would think it was much more difficult for German generals to operate in 1944-45 than , say, 1941-42, as the number of troops, tanks, planes and reserves were very different in comparison. And the enemy´s capability to fight you. So my "points" go to the ones who did well for Germans in 1944-45.

 

thank you for all your interesting replies

 

I think that Von Manstein was the most prestigious general of the german armed forces in the Eastern Front. Not only because of his successes in The Soviet Union but because ha had already in his record being the conqueror of France (it was his plan that was used for the invasion of France) And his record could have been much better if it was not for Hitler interference. One example was the delay by Hitler against Manstein advise of the Operation Citadel. And also the insisting on attacking instead of Manstein advise to wage a defensive war in 1944. As for the Soviet Generals I have to go with Zhukov although I believe there is a big difference between a Soviet general and any other beligerent country's general. They did not have to answer for the losses of thouzands of soldiers as long as they gained territory. It was not like that in any other army.

 

Manstein again:
1)there is no proof that a not delayed Citadelle would be successful
2)the insisting of attacking came not (principally) from Hitler,but (also) from Zeitler
3)There is also no proof that Manstein's advise for a defensive war in 1943 was better than the Citadelle option .

 

For the Germans and in this order:

Model, Gotthard Heinrici (he never lost a battle and was popular with the men he commanded) and Manstein.

For the Russians, I fully agree with Kai on Chuikov, then I would have to say Rokossovsky and Ivan Konev.

 

Although I agree that Heinrici was good,I doubt very much that popularity would be an indication of being a good general.

 

True, popularity doesnt mean a good General, but Heinrici REALLY was a good General. Any command Heinrici had, his men KNEW they would be well led and cared for as much as possible. i.e. Not wasted in useless battles thrown away and treated like the "sweepings from the road". Look at what he accomplished with the men under his command at the Seelowe Heights--which is just one example of ?????.

 

Von Paulus, because he shared the hardships with his men in Stalingrad. if we was caught it was only because of Hitler's stubborn attitude. After all Von Paulus is the one went the furtherst eastwards.

 

Heh heh, Skipper, one slight correction. Paulus wasn't a "von". ;-))

 

Model on the East along with Von Bock....

For the Russians I will go with Zhukov and a close Rokosovsky. Anywhere Zhukov went, calmness, order and morale was restored and victory achieved. There is a common myth regarding Soviet leaders and their disregard for their soldiers well being. All Generals cared, and did the best they could with what they had. The conflict on the Eastern Front was a bit larger than in the West so it is only natural for far larger casualties to amount. From the middle of 43-45 when the Red Army got its act together, the casualties between the two became far more proportionate. Zhukov's men would generally suffer less casualties than other Soviet Generals. In the battle for Berlin for example Zhukov's men reached the objective first, taking a harder path, and sustaining less casualties than others.

 

Good one Carl, this is a common confusion, as many German Generals were aristicrats and I should have remembered Friedrich was the son of a teacher.

 

Well said Slava and fully agree.

Skip, no problem there and thank you for the Salute. Up untill about 12 years ago, I too called Paulus a "von". ;-)) It seemed strange to just say: Friedrich Paulus. ;-))

Slava, you got repped whether you like it or not? :lol::lol:

 

What about Blaskowitz or List - both carried out excellent work before Barbarossa but/and then carried on giving solid east front performances despite Hitler disliking or disapproving of them until late war. Both made personal stands against Hitler and although "moved" were still left doing their jobs and both did them better than most, Blaskowitz especially.?

(and Hi Carl)