Ideas Up for Grabs

The Kutuzov Strategy

A crucial point in the history of World War Two is that Hitler was able to overrun the Soviet Union, in the summer of 1941, without much resistance. It was a Blitzkrieg. Or rather, it started like a Blitzkrieg. According to historical sources, Stalin simply did not believe that this was possible. In spite of intelligence reports (one came from Tokyo, from Dr. Sorge), which even specified the day, Stalin was convinced that this was misinformation from Britain, and its goal was to get the Soviet Union and Germany fight each other, so that Hitler should leave the British Isles alone.

I'm not particularly curious about Stalin's motives. He may have been a prisoner of his grand strategy that he and Hitler would share Europe, restricting themselves from hurting the other's vital interests. He may have been simply a fool. It does not matter. What I am interested in is why he did not follow Kutuzov's idea of retreating and hitting the enemy where it does not expect it. (Kutuzov was the Russian general who beat Napoleon.)

The mystery is this. Stalin was afraid that the rumors about the German invasion aimed at a preemtive strike on the part of the Russians. I accept that Stalin wanted to avoid this. I accept that he was afraid of a German response, to which the Soviet Union was not fully prepared yet. But if he, instead of reinforcing his troops, had withdrawn them from the border, then it would not have been a provocation and, practically, it would have saved them from a preemptive German strike. I know that each dictator is overconfident about his own army, and Stalin probably did not believe that a German invasion could do such a great damage. He was thinking in terms of a border incident, actually, for days after the German invasion had begun.

I cannot cure dictators of their lethal illusions, but I would like to play with the idea that there was (there could have been) a friend in Stalin's "court," who could have argued like this. So far the Germans did this Blitzkrieg thing every time, except for Britain, where landing would not have been practical. Why would they not try it against the Soviet Union? Our troops are lined up along the German- Soviet border, inviting a preemptive strike. However, if we withdraw our troops by a thousand kilometers, we would give up vast lands but would save our troops, and Hitler would not have any excuse for his invasion. And what kind of Blitzkrieg would it be when you have to march a thousand kilometers just to attack the enemy?

I admit, I don't know dictators so much as to guess what Stalin would have said to a proposition like this. I have read about Zhukov's suggestion about a preemptive Soviet strike. Stalin dismissed it as foolish. And he was right. The Red Army would not have been strong enough to strike first and thus starting a long war. And I know that he did not want to lose territory. Stalin had to know that Lenin saved the Russian revolution with the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, by surrendering a lot of former Russian territories (among others, the Baltic region). Stalin wanted to get back those lost territories. But there was Hitler at the gates, and this time the enemy wanted to do away with the whole Soviet Union. So Stalin must have been more cautious. The situation was more serious than at the end of World War I or at the time of Napoleon's invasion.

Let's see what could have happened. From the time Stalin got the news about a German invasion, the Soviet Union had three-four weeks. A reinforced defense line could have been created to connect Riga, Minsk and Kharkov, and Soviet troops could have been withdrawn safely, the airports abandoned, the airplanes relocated to far- away airports, south of Moscow, where German airplanes could not reach them from their existing bases. Only commandos would have been left in the area given up by the regular army. These would hide in the mountains, digging in their weapons, mine-throwers, cannons, even tanks.

This is how I imagine this strategy would have worked. The Germans cross the border but do not find any resistance -- other than heavily mined roads and fields. They march ahead happily, but every once in a while they run into an ambush. The concealed commandos fire their cannons, throw their mines and then flee, leaving the weapons behind. So the invaders would never be safe. In reality partisans did the same, only not in a very organized way, and they did it much later, when the invasion was already mostly successful. And they did not have heavy weaponry at their disposal. It is interesting to imagine what would have happened had a whole division had this hit-and-flee mission. I've read that the poor, muddy roads were a greater obstacle for the German army than the resistance of the defeated Soviet troops. Imagine what would have happened if concealed tanks had showed up at unexpected points and unexpected times. Or if remote controlled mines had blown up at cross-roads. (The question of remote controlled mines is a technical problem, and I don't know why they were not used more extensively in this war where even radio jamming was used. Since my idea is not about technical possibilities, I would leave this question open to experts. It is for sure that this type of mines would have helped commandos a great deal and that a few thousand men could halt the whole German offensive.)

If this is a novel, I would have in it scenes of psychological warfare, such as big banners welcoming the Germans marching into evacuated Kiew ("What the hell I'm doing here, so far from my home and family?"), pictures of killed Germans on fliers ("You might have your turn"), when Germans began to withdraw, I would show pictures of surrender, exhausted German troops happy to be fed ("They have surrendered. They will survive the war.") And on the eve of invading Germany proper, fliers would say this: "If you surrender, Hitler will say you are a traitor. But what will your mother say? And your children?" I would let the names of fallen soldiers read on the German broadcasts of The Voice of Moscow. And I would have found a use of outdated Soviet airplanes in the first period of the war: just let them fly over enemy lines with the pilot safely parashooting, and let them fall, full of explosives. (My only problem with the story is that I just don't know how a love affair could be squeezed into it. But others may be luckier.)

If the Germans had not been able to wipe out practically the whole Soviet air force deployed in the western territories, the situation would have been very different. The Soviets would have had air superiority, at least in numbers, and this fact would have turned the Blitzkrieg into a nightmare. Tens of thousands of Germans would have been killed or wounded even before the actual battle started.

In actual history, for the German troops it took six months to reach the outskirts of Moscow. Following this imaginary Kutuzov strategy, they would have reached the Minsk defense line in two months, by early August. Now, with no direct confrontation, the Red Army would have been practically intact, only with the Germans bleeding. And, according to history books, at the beginning of hostilities, the Soviets outnumbered the Germans in troops, in artillery and even in tanks and airplanes. So, without the unnecessary casualties at the first hours and days of the invasion, the Read Army would have had the upper hand. At least in numbers. Because their tanks, airplanes and small guns were outdated, and the proportion of mechanized units was much lower. Anyway, they could have performed a good defense -- with their heavy artillery and airplanes beating the German lines. Beacuse they too needed new weapons and reinforcement, I think there would have been trench warfare for months. I also suppose that the Germans would have been able to break through, in the direction of Moscow. But by then a new defense line would have stopped them, in front of the Soviet capital city. And the strength of the Red Army would have increased much faster than that of the Germans. And the German wedges would have been cut off from their supplies. All this would have led to encirclement and a mass capitulation (or annihilation from the air and from artillery barrages) -- at the time the real Battle of Moscow took place. What this means is that there would have been no Battle of Stalingrad, the Germans would have been turned back in December 1941.

From the point of view of a possible fantastic novel, the story would end here. The end game is less dramatic -- although no less surprising. Think of it: Pearl Harbor is still a few days ahead. The United States has no reason to enter the war. And the Russians are coming.

In reality for the Soviet Union it took two years to get from Stalingrad to Berlin. If this had happened in 1941, they would have been able to march through Eastern Europe and reach the German borders in one year, by the end of 1942. And the Americans could have landed only about that time. What this means is most of the Jews would have been saved. The whole of Germany would have been occupied by the Soviets. Japan would have been attacked in 1943 and chances are that instead of Germany (which would have become a large "DDR", Japan would have been split between the Soviets and the Americans. (Imagine a "North Japanese Soviet Republic!") The atom bomb was not ready and could not have been used. Even Chinese history would be different. If the Soviets had entered the Asian theater much earlier, they could have joined forces with the communists. No Kuomintang participation in the war, and no Republic of China on Taiwan... Can you imagine such an outcome? And all this because Stalin withdraws his troops, following the Kutuzov Strategy...

Someone should write this book.


Jump to:
Ideas Menu
English Menu
Bilingual Main Menu