Why was Kharkov so important?

[Michael Dorosh]

I get the impression from my superficial study of the Eastern Front that the battle of Kharkov in early 1943 was something of a big deal - or was it.

Firstly, it would seem the retaking of Kharkov was given a LOT of press; with the involvement of the GD division, I suppose that was natural - those glory hogs had their own PK unit and seemed to get a lot of press! But there does seem to be a lot of photographs taken in Kharkov at that time, including a lot of often republished ones of SS units there wearing their distinctive fur lined parkas.

Was Kharkov really a big deal, or was it blown out of proportion?

Stalingrad fell not long before, bringing with it a period of national mourning (which some Germans feel was overdone - no radio music or entertainment in theatres etc. for several days IIRC). This was not only a major German defeat but also I think the first public admission of any kinds of setbacks. From that perspective, I suppose any news would be good news - given the fortunes also of the army in North Africa, at that time forced back into Tunisia and fighting for its life.

Can Kharkov be considered a phase of the war in the East all to its own, sandwiched in between Stalingrad and Kursk?

[Mikael]

The Germans counted 23,000 Russian dead on the battlefield and captured 615 tanks and 354 guns, plus 9000 prisoners. Manstein had effectively shattered the Soviet winter offensive, which was already at high tide and threatening the lower Dniepr crossings. More importantly, the Germans, thanks to this battle, reasserted their superiority at the tactical and operational levels.

From an operational point of view, Manstein had also dramatically straightened the front line, freeing up valuable German troops and restoring, as you said, morale amongst the troops and the high command. Manstein even thought about following up this success with a strike at the Kursk salient but was halted by the thaw. This tells a lot about how the third battle for Kharkov gave the Germans the operational intiative.

On the other side, Stavka was so shocked by the German counterstrike that they dramatically overestimated its success and scope and immediately evacuated Belgorod and withdrew behind the Donets.

But as you said, the German propaganda machine obviously made the most out of the battle which only came in one month after the surrender of Fortress Stalingard.

[Cauldron]

Kharkov was the centre of a rail network in a similar way to Kursk.

The German supply throughout most of the war was abysmal. I guess that ws the reason it was important. I believe it was 2nd SS involved in 1943.

eric

[Mikael]

Besides, Kharkov was the fourth largest city in the URSS and I believe it was an important rail and communications centre. Having already been fought over and recaptured during the preceding years, its symbolic value was also enhanced.

[Mikael]

Cauldron, the German units involved were the 1.SS "LAH", 2.SS "das Reich" and 3.SS "Totenkopf" Panzerdivisions, all part of Hausser's 1.SS PzKorps.

[Slapdragon]

I am doing a great deal of studying of the battles around Kharkov in preparation for writing scenarios with the release of the longed for CM:BB. Kharkov, as my Ukrainian sources tell me, was a lynch pin as a rail hub, road hub, major city, communications nexus, and for its political value to the Ukrainians. It also, if you look at it, sits midway between the two major river obstacles in the Ukraine.

[Skipper]

From soviet side, this story looked like this:

In late December 1942, Stavka decided that in order to ensure successful strategic operaitons in south, Voronezh-Millerovo railroad must be taken under control.

This idea was successfully implemented as Ostrogozhsko-Rossoshanskaya operation (13-25 January 1943). As a result of this operation, 2nd hungarian army was encircled and eventually destroyed.

This operation suceeded so swiftly and decisively, that it surprised even soviet high command. It also surprised the germans, of course. Southern flank of 2nd german army was hanging loose, and german defensive positions there were hastily constructed and weak. RKKA successfully exploited this opportunity, too. Voronezhsko-Kastornenskaya operation, 24-29 January. The bulk of german second army was also encircled and by mid February - destroyed.

As a result of these two operations, in soviet perception, german strategic front in south was significantly weakened. Therefore, a strategic offensive was planned, to exploit this perceived weakness, capture Kursk, Kharkov, Belgorod and Donbass area, and push german army behind Dnepr.

The most significant strategic gain here would be actually Donbass, coal mining region. Taking the above said cities wouldn't hurt, either.

Offensive started rather successfully, and soviet assessment was that germans are trying to do an organized withdrawal behind Dnepr.

As we know now, this perception was far from reality, and in fact objective of german delaying actions was not to withdraw, but to gain time and beneficial positions for a counteroffensive.

Blinded by outstanding successes of December and January, soviet high command missed this german intention completely, until it was way too late.

So, by the time when german counteroffensive started on 19 February, soviet armies were weakened by several weeks of fighting, in linear strategic formation, 300 km off from supply bases and airfields, and without reserves. Oops.

By the way, soviet situation could have been much, much better if german 6th armny would not continue to fight in encirclement as long as it actually did. Eventually, german counteroffensive was stopped not by thaw, but by 21st army and other troops redeployed from Stalingrad area as soon as fighting there was finished.

[Grisha]

I'd only add to Skipper's post that Soviet low level unit commanders were reporting their misgivings about further exploitation, seeing the German 'withdrawal' for what it really was, but the STAVKA was so swept up in success that these warnings were discounted. After this second Kharkov fiasco, the STAVKA finally woke up to the dangers of overextension.

[Commissar]

Wasn't the main tank school and many tank factories also located in Kharkov?

[Skipper]

Yes, but not in 1943, obviously.

[RCHRD]

Hausser's corps was the II SS Pz Kps in 43.

[Mikael]

Hausser's corps was the II SS Pz Kps in 43.

You are very right, and I was very wrong.

If Leibstandarte, das Reich, and Totenkopf formed the 2.SS PzKorps, what units were included in 1.SS Pz Korps? I did a google search but nothing turned up. Can anyone fill me in?

[Patgod]

Originally posted by Mikael:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Hausser's corps was the II SS Pz Kps in 43.

You are very right, and I was very wrong.

If Leibstandarte, das Reich, and Totenkopf formed the 2.SS PzKorps, what units were included in 1.SS Pz Korps? I did a google search but nothing turned up. Can anyone fill me in?</font>

[Mikael]

It seems that the SS PzKorps under Hausser's command didn't have a number attached to it until Operation Zitadelle, when it became 2SS Pz Korps and separated itself from the Leibstandarte, which went on to form the 1SS PzKorps on its own.

It does seem kind of strange to make a Korps out of an existing division, although 12SS was to join the Leibstandarte in 44.

I took the info from

http://www.wssob.com/001kpspzr.html

Edit: Patgod, thanks for the link even though I had already found the one above!

[ May 04, 2002, 08:23 PM: Message edited by: Mikael ]

[gatpr]

I think Hausser actually goofed sending troops into Kharkov. Manstein seems to have thought the bag would have been bigger and losses fewer if the SS armor had swung round and not gotten bogged in street fighting.

[RCHRD]

I SS Pz Corps, in 44, was LSSAH and HJ plus some other units I'd have to look up, like the s.Pz Abt 101 and some Heer units.

[daft]

Patgod,

http://www.skalman.nu/third-reich/ss-1-aa.htm

P.S. that was a google response, i dont know a thing about the web site(so dont kill me if its wrong, not what you are looking for, or some neo-nazi ****e!)

I just thought that I should mention that I have visited Skalman.nu (the website you linked to), for little over a year now. In fact, I'm a moderator on the Swedish forum over there and consequently I know the webmaster Marcus Wendel quite well even though I've never met him in person. I just wanted to point out that he is most certainly no nazi, and if you guys haven't visited his site, you should, since it holds a great deal of information on the Third Reich. Just thought I should mention it, that's all.

[Michael Dorosh]

Thanks to all for the info, very helpful. And yes, Marcus Wendel has a very good site with lots of great info; I've used it often myself.

[Patgod]

Originally posted by daft:

Patgod,

ahh cool, i didnt originally have that disclamer, but then realised that i had only skimmed the article. given the nasty tendency of sites dealing with anything SS to be...less then kosher(bad choice of words. oh well) i felt i should distance myself from it

but hey, glad its a good site, i will check it out in the future.

[ May 04, 2002, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Patgod ]

[TSword]

Kharkov was an important railway and traffic Hub, it also had a big Tankfactory. In fact the russians in the short time it became russian again, produced some T-34's along with large quantities of other vehicles.

"Das Reich" captured 18 of these new built T-34 and used them by their own in a separate tank-company up to 1944.

Beside if Manstein's troops (Foremost the "fresh" SS-troops) had failed, the war would have been over around 1 year earlier. (Big parts of Armygroup South would have been cut-off and destroyed, therefore total collapse of Armygroup South)

To gatpr,

Hausser was forced by Hitler's directive to defend the city at all costs. Hausser against the Furherbefehl then decided at the last possible moment to pull his damaged troops out. (If he wouldn't there wouldn't have been a recapture of Kharkov at all..and Armygroup South would most likely have been lost)

Of course somebody had to be responsible for this insubordination against a Fuhrerbefehl and Hausser's boss Lanz was relieved from command.

I really recommend George M. Nipe's book "Last Victory in Russia", although very complex and difficult to understand by the huge amount of information,distances and troops involved together with a good map it's extremely detailed (Down to Bataillon or Company level at times) for the german side actions, and good detailed for the russian actions.

The Kharkov-battles surely are some of the most interesting fought in the east, they show both side in all aspects of warfare (defense, retreat, attack, pursuit) with many, many very interesting battles.

[ May 05, 2002, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: TSword ]

[gatpr]

Thanks but I believe we're talking about the 2nd battle when the Germans captured the city the second time, not when the soviets catured it after Kursk.

[TSword]

gatpr,

I mentioned only the second Kharkov battle (Jan- March 1943) and operations leading to it.

[Alsatian]

By March 5th, Hoth's 4th Panzer Army had gotten within 10 miles south of Kharkhov, but it took 4 days to cover those last miles to the city's outskirts.

During that fighting, a company commander of the 1st Independent Czechoslovak Battalion became the first foreigner to receive the decoration of Hero of the Soviet Union.

Hint hint scenario designers.

[WWB]

Alsatian:

Email me details and it might get done.

I have done a fair amount of research, and the SS Panzer Korps seems to not have had a number at that time.

As for re-taking the city itself, that was almost entirely LAH. After the Battle's "The 4 Battles of Kharkov" mag has picture of a very interesting map, showing the varios KGs of LAH's routes through the city. Get it if you can, it is worth the $10 or so. Too bad CM cannot handle 10 story apartment blocks. . .

WWB

[freaky ol'man w/very long wings]

Hi all,(Flap,Flap). For the subject on the battles of Kharkov I would recommend to read Paul Carell's book "Scorched Earth". It had information on the four battles of Kharkov, plus many other encirclements, cauldrons, pockets. I believe this his continuation to his "Hitler goes East", book. It gives a light on Manstein's role on the Kharkov battles. Another book would be John Erickson's "Road to Berlin". Which is also very detailed. I had posted my first post a day or two ago with a list of titles. Pls check, thanks.(Flap, Flap)flies away to his own post...