Festung Posen – The Red Army Experience
. . . underground structures each with several storeys, the whole projecting above the surrounding terrain. Only a mound was visible above ground -- the layer of earth covering the rest. Each fort was ringed by a ditch ten metres wide and eight metres deep, with walls revetted with brickwork. Across the ditch was a bridge, leading to one of the upper storeys. Among the forts, to the rear, there were one-storey brick bunkers. These were clad in concrete almost a full metre thick, and were used as stores. The upper works of the forts were sufficiently strong to provide reliable protection against heavy artillery fire. . . . the enemy would be able to direct fire of all kinds against us both on the approaches to the forts and within them, on the rampart. The embrasures were such that flanking fire from rifles and machine-guns could be directed from them.
A report dated 31 March 1945 by Chief of the Political Administration of the 1st Belorussian Front, General-lieutenant Galadshev, to his superiors on the front military soviet and the Chief of PUR, on the battle for Poznan, Poland reflects the differences between the Red Army of 1941 and that of 1945. The battle took place during January and February 1945 and deserved a special report because Poznan turned out to be unexpectedly difficult to subdue. Unexpected, because the 8th Guards Army, commanded by General Vasilii Chuikov, was in the process of rampaging across northern Poland and into East Prussia at the time, sweeping all before it until it bumped up against the stubborn defenders of Poznan. The 8th Guards Army encircled Poznan on 22 January 1945 and, failing to take it from the march, left a corps to capture it as soon as possible.
To begin, General-lieutenant Galadshev explained that the city was not taken initially because, “A check of workers of the political administration exposed serious shortcomings in the military work of units and formations and in party-political work which hampered the fulfillment of combat tasks.” One of the main problems was that many commanders and political workers were thrilled by the previous victories of the winter and had ceased to take into account that the enemy still was able to mount serious resistance. This main deficiency led to such subsequent shortcomings as the cessation of coordination between the two rifle corps of two different armies operating in the vicinity of Poznan. The commanders of these corps failed to share information. As this problem was revealed, command of all units in Poznan devolved solely into the hands of General Chuikov. Before the first attack, the Soviet forces very poorly reconnoitered the German forces defending Poznan. One report said the city was defended by only five or six thousand men, another that it was protected by 20,000. It turned out to be defended by nearly 50,000 German soldiers.
Ignorantly pushing against the fortified lines of an enemy of underestimated strength caused the majority of initial casualties. As a result, commanders stepped up reconnaissance and political workers stepped up propaganda work against enemy soldiers. Another problem was that men began to shirk their combat duty. In the first days of the attack few men participated in the fighting. One rifle battalion of a guards rifle regiment mustered only 15–16 riflemen for the assault, whereas rosters indicated there were supposed to be some 157 men in this grossly depleted battalion. “Where were these people at the time of combat?” asked Galadshev rhetorically. He answered they were hanging out in the homes of the local Polish inhabitants, drunk. Other regiments reported equally low numbers of effectives. The front commander quickly ordered the military procuracy of the front to prosecute shirkers as a way of increasing discipline and the number of men in the front-lines.
The old problem of coordination and cooperation between the various arms surfaced in the attack on the city. The artillery fell behind the infantry and did not know what the infantry’s objectives were. The artillery did not know which buildings were occupied by the Germans and which were not. There was a distinct lack of knowledge on how tanks, selfpropelled guns and infantry were to cooperate in the street fighting. Galadshev then credits the political organs for addressing and overcoming the corps’ problems in taking Poznan. The corps’ political workers were ordered to quickly have veterans of Stalingrad teach the newer recruits. They canvassed the divisions for veterans of Stalingrad and battles in other cities and organized them to instruct the rest of the soldiers in the tactics and techniques of urban warfare.
At the suggestion of veterans of Stalingrad, rifle battalions were reinforced with tanks, artillery, and flamethrowers transforming them into battalion-sized storm detachments which were further subdivided into storm groups. Soldiers were grouped into five man assault teams. The corps’ political organs organized some exclusively communist and Komsomol storm groups and sections. Groups were supported by direct fire from two or three selfpropelled guns, two or three field guns and indirect fire from division artillery.
PUR organized a party cell and a Komsomol organization in each detachment. Communists and Komsomols were given intense motivational talks and indoctrination as to their role in leading and inspiring their detachment or group in preparation for the resumption of the attack. The report claims that Komsomols did most of the political education work in the storm groups and acted as role models fighting fanatically in storming enemy positions. Several communists in each storm group were designated agitators with the task of coming up with short two- or three-sentence slogans about the need to take the next objective. Detachments with large numbers of party members or Komsomols were assigned to spearhead most attacks. They correspondingly suffered heavy losses.
The main role assigned to party organs and bureaus of primary party organizations in street fighting was to keep the men motivated in the attack and to keep an eye out for and prevent drunkenness and looting, and to keep men from fading away from the firing lines. Officers were said to be unable to do this as they were preoccupied with the fight at the very frontlines. Party members were also to keep an eye out for valorous behavior so they could recruit those men into the party on the spot. Communist agitators used not only words, but also actions to inspire their fellow soldiers and officers. One common tactic was to carry the red flag of the USSR in the vanguard of assaults. When one attack on Poznan’s citadel began to falter, a man holding a red flag leapt forward shouting, “For the Fatherland, for Stalin, forward!” and the rest of the detachment followed him. The political apparatus strongly urged immediate recognition of outstanding performance in combat with medals and awards and then spreading the word of the deeds among the other soldiers as a means of continuing to motivate the men in the midst of battle. Galadshev made great importance of the work of agitators in the victory at Poznan.
In street fighting regimental agitators and workers of political organizations were located with the battalions and storm groups. There they passed on the latest news from Sovinformbiuro, related the latest heroic acts, told how many Germans the regiments had killed and captured in the battle, gave lectures on the current military situation with the 8th Guards Army, and highlighted Stalin’s latest pronouncements, etc. Agitators passed out the all-important newspapers to the front-line soldiers. Of course the agitators were not completely successful in motivating all soldiers. Galadshev included an incident in which three flamethrower operators showed cowardice by letting the compressed air out of their flamethrowers then claimed they did not work so they could be excused from the flamethrower detachment. They were immediately turned over to a court-martial. The report sums up the contributions of the political sections in overcoming the problems in the opening phase of the battle for Poznan enumerated earlier. At the top level, the 8th Guards Army political section served to facilitate communications between the various unit commanders. Corps and division political sections did the same at their level. Most significant perhaps was the work of zampolits in the rifle units and the support given them by higher political sections. They ensured communication and fulfillment of orders, helped man storm units and prepared them for fulfilling their tasks.
Most important, of course, was what happened at the front. Galadshev wrote, “The center of all party-political work was in the storm groups.” It was given maximum attention by staffs and political sections. Komsomols and party members of all arms of storm groups held meetings to strengthen the combined arms work of the groups, increase the feeling of comradeship, and discuss how to coordinate their efforts. Division party commissions also kept up their work during the battle. The commission secretaries organized and held meetings to handle party business such as admitting applicants and examining infringements of party or military duties by party members. Another important job of senior party instructors was to keep track of casualties of communists.
At higher levels the party also had important practical work to do. Division political sections helped evacuate wounded and bury the dead. Political sections also combed the rear areas for supernumerary men, vehicles, and horses and sent them back to the front. One division political section flushed out nearly 300 men from the rear to send to the front in the last days of January, before the resumption of the attack on Poznan. Despite this success, Galadshev admitted that the work and organization of party and Komsomol organizations in the rear area was poor. For example, both the regimental supply point and the automotive company of one division went for over a month without holding meetings, and not a single man was admitted to the party in that time. In his conclusion General Galadshev stressed the role of the political apparatus and party members in assisting the military leadership in achieving victory in Poznan.
The most illuminating aspect of the report is how the Red Army was able to regroup and teach itself how to fight in the middle of a battle. One reason for this was the Red Army had the initiative, and in this instance could take the time to regroup and reorganize before returning to the attack. In 1941, front-line units seldom had the luxury of time for reappraisal, and, because the Germans had the initiative, generally spent most of their time reacting to German attacks. Another telling aspect was the especially active role of the party and political organs and communist and Komsomol soldiers and officers. These groups and individuals were far better organized and far more active and motivated in 1945 than in 1941. In most of 1941 and 1942 after action reports there were calls for greater political work, but in 1945 such work was more often than not highly integrated into the standard procedures of combat units and paid obvious dividends. On the purely military side, recurring problems with reconnaissance and coordination between units continued to result in unnecessary losses.
LINK
Posts
