Did Stalin deliberately prolong the war?

[Brett]

One book I recall reading made what I considered a totally outrageous claim that Stalin didn’t push an earlier attack on Berlin because he didn’t want to advance beyond the occupation zones he agreed on with the Western Allies. (Unfortunately, I can’t find my notes, but believe the
book was something like “Great myths of WWII”).

I am deeply skeptical of that claim, but did he have other motives for his offensive strategy?

Note the following is:

A) Based on my somewhat sketchy knowledge of the Eastern Front &

B) Total speculation on my part (I have not seen or read anything to support this)


As I understand it, in the central part of the E. Front, there was basically just 4 Soviet offensives, with long stretches of inactivity otherwise.

1. Battle of Moscow counteroffensive Dec. ’41 – early ‘42
2. June ’44 in Byelorussia to the time of the Warsaw uprising.
3. Jan. ’45 from central Poland to close to Berlin, lasting just a few weeks
4. April ’45 to capture Berlin.


This contrasts with the situation in the S. part of the E. Front (Ukraine & Balkans), where my impression is there was much more offensive activity.

If this is true, why did Stalin do this? I would think that Byelorussia, Poland, & N. Germany is far better suited to attacks (with few natural barriers), as opposed to miserable terrain in the Balkans. In addition, NW Europe is far richer & a more valuable prize.

I can think of a few possible motives:

a) Fear of Ukrainian nationalism (up until when that nation was cleared of Axis troops). This may have some basis in fact, as I have read vague references to guerilla warfare against the Soviets up until the ‘50s there. (and also in Lithuania, but that is a much smaller nation).

b) A purge by other means. If Stalin prolonged the war, more from the Sovietmilitary would die, weakening potential threats to his regime.

c) Fear of what might happen if Soviets broke into W. Europe. There is better roads there then the Balkans, which means that Soviet troops might get beyond Stalin’s secret police. Additionally, the more advanced society there might provoke unwelcome questions about why the US

[Hagen]

I don't believe Stalin did anything to prolong the war, as a matter of fact, didn't he start his drive on Berlin earlier then he wanted to at the request of the western powers? The only time I'm aware of that Stalin held back was at Warsaw during the uprising. He let the Germans take care of that potential political problem.

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Hagen

The only time I'm aware of that Stalin held back was at Warsaw during the uprising. He let the Germans take care of that potential political problem.

A bit off topic I know but it is also true that Soviet had just completed a major offensive (Operation Bagration) which basically destroyed Army Group Center, and had stretched supply lines very far at that time.

BagrationMap2.jpg

Logistically, crossing the Vistula and defeating the Germans in Warsaw would have been nearly impossible. Not that this didn't play into Stalin's hand politically, but the fact is that his forces were probably not capable of taking Warsaw at that moment, and doing so would have required a shift in tactics and strategy.

[Brett]

Originally Posted by Hagen

I don't believe Stalin did anything to prolong the war, as a matter of fact, didn't he start his drive on Berlin earlier then he wanted to at the request of the western powers? .

Are you refering to Jan. '45 at the time of the Battle
of the Bulge?

Originally Posted by Hagen

The only time I'm aware of that Stalin held back was at Warsaw during the uprising. He let the Germans take care of that potential political problem.

Admittedly, this is circumstantial, based on the events
on the Eastern Front. But it seems to me that Stalin
could possibly have ended the war earlier.

This would entail making a full scale thrust on Berlin after
Krusk & continuing to press the offensive on that
front, instead of operations in the Ukraine and Balkans.

This might have been just a scheme in Stalin’s mind
that he never shared with anyone for reasons I outlined
in my first post. Obviously this is something that
can’t be proved, as I said I am just (hopefully not
too wildly) speculating.


(& responding to Jim O – I’m not sure how to quote
from 2 posts … but where you wrote:

A bit off topic I know but it is also true that Soviet had
just completed a major offensive (Operation Bagration)
which basically destroyed Army Group Center, and had
stretched supply lines very far at that time.

Logistically, crossing the Vistula and defeating the Germans in Warsaw
would have been nearly impossible.)


I believe a read a book “Russia at War” that made the claim that the relative inaction on the Central Front was due to logistical difficulties. But at least my impression is that on the S. Front operations were much more continuous
& I would have thought the same logistical problems would have applied there.

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Brett

I’m not sure how to quote
from 2 posts

multi_quote.gif
Click on the white box next to the quote button in all of the posts that you wish to quote.

Originally Posted by Brett

I believe a read a book “Russia at War” that made the claim that the relative inaction on the Central Front was due to logistical difficulties. But at least my impression is that on the S. Front operations were much more continuous & I would have thought the same logistical problems would have applied there.

Not necessarily. A good historian to read on the subject is David Glantz. He has reviewed a great deal of Soviet archival material that has been made available since the collapse of the USSR. I highly recommend his books, especially When Titans Clashed. Again, I'm not saying that this didn't all play into Stalin's hand politically, just that crossing the Vistula and taking on the enemy in Warsaw at that moment in time would have been extremely difficult at best.

[Pirate-Drakk]

Originally Posted by Jim O

A bit off topic I know but it is also true that Soviet had just completed a major offensive (Operation Bagration) which basically destroyed Army Group Center, and had stretched supply lines very far at that time.

Attachment 438

Logistically, crossing the Vistula and defeating the Germans in Warsaw would have been nearly impossible. Not that this didn't play into Stalin's hand politically, but the fact is that his forces were probably not capable of taking Warsaw at that moment, and doing so would have required a shift in tactics and strategy.

Once Army Group Center was destroyed there was nothing left in the way of Russia taking Berlin. All they had to do was keep moving but they didn't. Stalin was a ruthless warlord and he saw a lot of territory for the taking. In fact he kept most of what he got in the Balkans for a long long time.

Letting the Germans fight the Allies while he played mop up worked nicely for Stalin. It also extended the Lend Lease shipments a few months longer. Those were some nice care packages coming in by that time.

I have to agree with Brett's premise that Stalin intentionally extended the war. Wouldn't you in his position? It was the ruthless dictator like thing to do. Stalin's only concern was to insure that he take Berlin before the Allies. Notice how well he timed that move? For the price of war, Stalin had all of Poland and half of Germany along with a slew of other countries occupied by Germany.

Plus, he never paid a dime for any of that Lend Lease. Nice move Stalin!

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Pirate-Drakk

Once Army Group Center was destroyed there was nothing left in the way of Russia taking Berlin.

Assuming there were adequate supplies of food and materiél, which there simply was not, at least not once the Soviets had reached the Vistula. The Soviet armies had gone a long distance and needed to rest and refit.

As for prolonging the war, I disagree. Had he advanced faster he could have had all of Germany and perhaps Paris. Then he could have gone back on "his word" and told the Allies to pound sand because he was keeping it! Any negotiation at that point might have had him withdrawing to the Rhine if that far. No, I disagree with the premise that he prolonged anything. It was simply not to his advantage. Was it not Stalin who said something to the effect of "But Alexander took Paris" when asked about having taken Berlin?

[Wolster]

I would agree that he didn't prolong the war, in fact, he would have like dit shorter! I believe that Stalin wanted VE day to be the 1st May for the significance that would have held!!

As for the Polish uprising, I believe that the Stalin waiting so the Poles would be liquidated is one of the biggest myths of the war. The whole point of the uprising was for the Polish Home Army to capture Warsaw before the Soviet Army got there to create a free and independant Poland. With a Polish government in power when the Soviet army arrived Stalin would have to become overtly aggresive to take Poland, what would that have done to his fragile alligance with the west not to mention the lend-lease arangements!. Why let the Soviets help when you would then have to try to get rid of them!!

[dgfred]

Originally Posted by Jim O

Assuming there were adequate supplies of food and materiél, which there simply was not, at least not once the Soviets had reached the Vistula. The Soviet armies had gone a long distance and needed to rest and refit.

As for prolonging the war, I disagree. Had he advanced faster he could have had all of Germany and perhaps Paris. Then he could have gone back on "his word" and told the Allies to pound sand because he was keeping it! Any negotiation at that point might have had him withdrawing to the Rhine if that far. No, I disagree with the premise that he prolonged anything. It was simply not to his advantage. Was it not Stalin who said something to the effect of "But Alexander took Paris" when asked about having taken Berlin?

I believe you are right on the mark with your analysis .

[grognard]

Stalin certainly did not prologn the war--logistics dictated the limits of many advances--and German resistance had something to do the time it took.

Look at it this way: a superficial analysis could produce the conclusion that the western allies prolonged the war when they didn't take Berlin in 1944--after all the Germans in France were completely shattered and the west wall wasn't complete--so why didn't keep going? Logistics and German resistance.

the fact the Germans regrouped enough to hold Ags 12 & 21 at bay through the fall 0f 44 and winter of 45 is sometimes referred to as "the miracle of the west"--that's how bad it was for the Germans after Falaise, etc.