********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: H-Net Staff <revh...@mail.h-net.msu.edu>
Date: Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 12:51 PM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Beall on Richie, 'Warsaw 1944: Hitler,
Himmler, and the Warsaw Uprising'
To: h-rev...@h-net.msu.edu


Alexandra Richie.  Warsaw 1944: Hitler, Himmler, and the Warsaw
Uprising.  New York  Farrar, Straus &amp; Giroux, 2013.
Illustrations. 738 pp.  $40.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-374-28655-2.

Reviewed by Jonathan Beall (University of North Georgia)
Published on H-War (December, 2016)
Commissioned by Margaret Sankey

Western audiences often interpret the Warsaw Uprising of August and
September 1944 as Joseph Stalin's attempt to kill off a Polish
independence movement by having the Germans do his dirty work. For
other Westerners, it is a mere anecdote to the otherwise inexorable
march of the Allies' victory over Nazi Germany. As Alexandra Richie
shows in her _Warsaw 1944_, it was more than that to the Poles, the
Germans, and the Grand Alliance. Richie places the uprising within
the larger scope of World War II and reveals the calculus of forces
that influenced the decisions to launch the uprising, the Germans'
reaction, and the uprising's eventual defeat.

Richie argues that three events influenced the course of the Warsaw
Uprising. The first was the widespread, but mistaken, Polish belief
that the Germans were on their last legs by mid-1944 after the
Soviets' successful Operation BAGRATION, which heavily influenced the
decisions to launch the uprising. Secondly, the plot to kill Adolf
Hitler by the Wehrmacht led to the elevation of Heinrich Himmler,
head of the SS, to handle the Warsaw Uprising. Third, Richie argues
that Field Marshal Walter Model's counteroffensive, which began hours
before the uprising, wholly prevented the Soviets from assisting the
Poles and allowed the Germans to quell the uprising.

As a whole, she deftly mixes macro-level events of leaders in London,
Moscow, Berlin, and Warsaw with the ground-level events in Warsaw and
throughout Belorussia. In the first fifth of the book, Richie
convincingly lays out how these decisions, experiences, and
perceptions strongly influenced the course of the Warsaw Uprising.

Although it is clear that Richie is fond of Poland, she is critical
of the senior leadership of the Armia Krajowa (AK). Richie portrays
the AK commander, General Tadeusz Komorowski, known simply as "Bór,"
as a good man but not the right man to lead the AK. She describes
other AK commanders, such as General Antoni Chruściel as a
misinformed, poor leader more interested in his place in history than
actual leadership. Richie also describes the nearly impossible
situation that Bór faced in late July. Polish leaders were aware
that the Soviets disapproved of an independent, democratic Poland,
but the Poles' failure to launch an uprising might have signaled to
the Soviets that the AK was "ineffectual--or worse, had even
collaborated with the Germans" (p. 165). Knowing the political
reality of Soviet suspicions toward Poland, realizing that the AK
could not do anything, understanding that the AK would not receive
any outside help, and influenced by a mistaken belief of imminent
German defeat, a reluctant Bór decided to roll the dice and order
the uprising.

The uprising takes up the rest of the book. From a faulty starting
point, the AK launched the uprising on August 1. Richie shows the
AK's early successes but demonstrates that it was doomed to fail from
the beginning. As the German garrison stopped the AK attacks, Himmler
deployed his SS units to suppress the uprising. Hitler ordered
Himmler to end the uprising, so Himmler relied on units that had
previously used brutality against Soviet partisans now against the AK
and civilians. In great detail, Richie records the mass murders in a
western Warsaw suburb as SS units slaughtered men, women, and
children regardless of their involvement in the uprising.

As these mass murders slowed down the Germans' progress, the Russian
_osttruppen_ deployed as well. In the Ochota suburb, these Russians
who fought for the Germans looted and raped their way through the
area. Richie recounts these terrifying tragedies in unsparing detail.
In the end, Wehrmacht forces were used to flush out the AK troops and
force the AK's surrender by the end of September. The book does not
detail the street-by-street movement of the urban combat between the
AK and the Germans. Rather, it emphasizes the civilians' brutalizing
experiences.

Throughout her work, it is clear that the author has a deep love for
Poland. To Richie, Poland was clearly a victim of Nazi occupation
wherein she observes "there were no quislings or Polish SS
divisions." While she allows for the occasional "individual
collaborators" who worked for the Germans, nearly all Poles
"unwaveringly shared their vision of freedom, democracy, and
self-determination" (p. 146). Poland's occupation was more complex
than Richie presents. Mark Mazower, in his _Hitler's Empire_, writes
that 250,000 Polish civil servants ran Poland under 40,000 German
officials. Indeed, Mazower suggests, the Nazi occupation of Poland
could not have happened without Polish administrative assistance.[1]
Mazower does not overturn the "Poland as victim" interpretation but
clearly shows that the situation was far more convoluted. His book
does not appear in Richie's bibliography. Because much of Richie's
data comes from AK veterans unquestionably dedicated to a democratic
Poland, it is not surprising that she strikes such a tone toward all
Poles.

Another major issue is the place of Poland and the Warsaw Uprising
within the Grand Alliance. Like Norman Davies's earlier _Rising '44:
The Battle for Warsaw _(2003), Richie strongly criticizes the
Americans and the British for their failure to stand against Stalin
and more actively help Poland. Richie portrays Franklin Delano
Roosevelt pandering to the Russian dictator, although it is not clear
why. She portrays Winston Churchill as willing but unable to help the
Poles, given Britain's shrinking status as a great power. She depicts
Stalin as the Communist dictator longing to "Sovietize" Central and
Eastern Europe (p. 475).

These judgments, however, are made in light of the Cold War that
developed after World War II. During the war, a multitude of national
interests and changing geostrategic positions influenced how national
leaders responded to different issues, which Richie largely fails to
recognize. Matters like Poland fell into the maze of coalition
politics amid more pressing concerns, such as balancing the war's
demands across multiple fronts and theaters as well as maintaining
the direction of the Allied war effort through Europe, the Pacific,
and the China-Burma-India theater. In terms of Soviet interests and
strategy, she does not consider that Stalin wanted friendly
governments bordering the Soviet Union as buffer states and that he
was motivated as much by national security fears as by Marxist
ideology.

That Roosevelt would concede elements of Polish sovereignty in 1943
and 1944 to Stalin is not altogether surprising given the
multifaceted internal dynamics of the Grand Alliance and the Big
Three nations' changing strategic positions. In his analysis of
American wartime leadership, Mark A. Stoler describes why Roosevelt
stopped working with Churchill to cooperate more with Stalin. Stoler
argues that Roosevelt assessed that America's and the Soviet Union's
growing wartime strengths would make them the primary leaders in the
postwar world, not the British. On the basis of that assessment,
Roosevelt sought "to befriend Stalin and establish a basis for
postwar cooperation." If giving up Poland retained Soviet cooperation
and achieved his larger goals of a transformed international order,
then so be it. Although, to be sure, Stoler points out that Soviet
actions in Poland worried senior American leaders.[2] From this view,
Roosevelt did not pander to Stalin; he accurately foresaw the
geopolitical situation after the war.

The wartime decisions made concerning Poland and the Warsaw Uprising
doubtless helped create the preconditions to the Cold War--Richie
calls Warsaw "the first battle of the Cold War" (p. 475)--but these
consequences could not have been known in 1944. Just as the
occupation of Poland was more complex than Richie describes, so the
coalitional politics within the Grand Alliance and the constituent
nations' interests, policies, and strategies were also more intricate
than she portrays.

These different interpretations of Poland in World War II have taken
on importance in Polish politics and society in the last few years.
_Warsaw 1944_ generally perpetuates the "Poland as victim" view but
Mazower and Stoler undermine that view. Mazower indicates how
Germany's occupation of Poland depended on vital Polish assistance.
Stoler shows the messy, convoluted reality behind the Grand Alliance
where compromises and tough decisions had to be made. These
understandings undermine the "Poland as victim" interpretation, but,
at the same time, there is no doubt that Warsawians suffered greatly
as Nazi forces massacred, raped, and plundered tens of thousands of
civilians. They received minimal outside help during the uprising.

This book is geared toward a general audience who has a strong
understanding of World War II in Eastern Europe. Because it is not an
academic monograph, it is not rigorously footnoted. Richie relies
heavily on primary sources, including many survivors' accounts,
wartime government documents, and postwar court proceedings. However,
it is not always clear from where she has pulled her information.
This is not a major complaint--and might be the fault of the
publisher--but one would think that a book with this much information
would be more documented than it is.

Finally, Richie's book succeeds as a narrative that explains and
describes what the Warsaw Uprising was like for those who endured
those eight weeks of horror. She places the uprising in the context
of World War II in Eastern Europe as well as the Grand Alliance. Some
of the book's interpretations could be tempered by such historians as
Mazower, Jan Gross, and Stoler, but these interpretive critiques do
not take away from the horrifying experiences endured by Warsawians
during the uprising. On the macro level, _Warsaw 1944_ reminds us
that World War II was much more complex than a simplistic,
two-dimensional story of the Allies versus the Axis. On the micro
level, it reminds us that that complexity affected tens of thousands
of innocent lives in terrible and dreadful ways.

Notes

[1]. Mark Mazower, _Hitler's Empire: How the Nazis Ruled Europe_ (New
York: Penguin Press, 2008), 448-449.

[2]. Mark A. Stoler, _Allies and Adversaries: The Joint Chiefs of
Staff, the Grand Alliance, and U.S. Strategy in World War II_ (Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000), 167.

Citation: Jonathan Beall. Review of Richie, Alexandra, _Warsaw 1944:
Hitler, Himmler, and the Warsaw Uprising_. H-War, H-Net Reviews.
December, 2016.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=46735

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.

 --



-- 
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to