Rommel vs Rokossovsky

[Citizen Koba]

One for the WWII buffs I guess...

Two of the war's most prominent and highly regarded non-anglophone Field Commanders, both charismatic and worshiped by their men, both widely considered more humane than many of their colleagues and by the prevaling standards of their respective theatres and both falling afoul of their respective regimes (Rokossovsky was rehabilitated after being tortured during the purges and Rommel of course was coerced into suicide after his connection with the Stauffenberg plot).

KONSTANTIN ROKOSSOVSKY




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Rokossovsky



(I actually got a copy of this edition of his memoirs kicking around somewhere on my shelves)

Major battles and operations:

Moscow
Stalingrad
Kursk
Bagration


ERWIN ROMMEL



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel




Campaigns and operations:

Poland
Fall Gelb
North Africa
Italy
Atlantic wall.


Two fascinating individuals, outdoubtedly both brilliant commanders but also driven by personal values that went well beyond obedience to their dictators, both patriots but also men of duty and personal character.

Any of you buffs got a favourite between these two dudes, and which would you prefer on your side in a war?

[millcitymauler]

One for the WWII buffs I guess...

Two of the war's most prominent and highly regarded non-anglophone Field Commanders, both charismatic and worshiped by their men, both widely considered more humane than many of their colleagues and by the prevaling standards of their respective theatres and both falling afoul of their respective regimes (Rokossovsky was rehabilitated after being tortured during the purges and Rommel of course was coerced into suicide after his connection with the Stauffenberg plot).

KONSTANTIN ROKOSSOVSKY




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Rokossovsky



(I actually got a copy of this edition of his memoirs kicking around somewhere on my shelves)

Major battles and operations:

Moscow
Stalingrad
Kursk
Bagration


ERWIN ROMMEL



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel




Campaigns and operations:

Poland
Fall Gelb
North Africa
Italy
Atlantic wall.


Two fascinating individuals, outdoubtedly both brilliant commanders but also driven by personal values that went well beyond obedience to their dictators, both patriots but also men of duty and personal character.

Any of you buffs got a favourite between these two dudes, and which would you prefer on your side in a war?

I respect both men as soldiers, and strategists...It's kind of hard to compare because as I've always seen it, KR was always committed to not only The Motherland, but also the Bolshevist cause. Rommell however, had witnessed the pathos of Hitler and the criminal N A Z I system, and became a reluctant participant, now only committed to his men and civilian countrymen. Rommell didn't think they could win the war, even before he was sent to western France, whereas, KR always belived in total victory. I could be corrected though...

[Citizen Koba]

I respect both men as soldiers, and strategists...It's kind of hard to compare because as I've always seen it, KR was always committed to not only The Motherland, but also the Bolshevist cause. Rommell however, had witnessed the pathos of Hitler and the criminal N A Z I system, and became a reluctant participant, now only committed to his men and civilian countrymen. Rommell didn't think they could win the war, even before he was sent to western France, whereas, KR always belived in total victory. I could be corrected though...

Well the Rommel myth has grown over the years, but there's probably some substance. Sober appraisal ranks him as a careerist and patriot, more a consumate professional in fact than actually anti-nazi, even his tangential involvement in the assasination plot seems to have been more about saving Germany from annihilation that stopping the evil of Naziism. It does seem according to most accounts that he was not an active participant in the murder or excessive persecution of Jews within his theatre of command however (although some reports say there was some persecution and forced labour)

Rokossovsky was indeed a devout party member throughout - or at least gave every appearance of one. Even his arrest and torture (during which he was beaten with a hammer and had his front teeth knocked out) in Stalins purges of the military had a great deal more to do with Stalin's paranoia and wish to eliminate any threat than any genuine anti-party activity on Rokossovsky's part. Basically Stalin saw threats everywhere and the army command was of course the one force remaining in the Soviet Union which might have the power to move directly against him.

It was partly Stalins purges of course which led to the complete unpreparedness of the red Army for Barbarossa and the vast casualties of 41 and 42... literally he'd annihilated most of top talent in his army.

That said this isn't so much an examination of the two men's ideologies, I've no doubt Konstantin believed as a party member that the excesses of the regime were justified in the context of the grand scheme of 'historical progress' and furthermore the circumstances and context of North Africa were vastly different to the Total War of the Ostfront so it's hard to know how Rommel might have acted in different circumstances and under orders to co-operate with the einstzgruppen.

Nah I'm more thinking about their operational records and tactical and strategic successes, how they'd stack up... though of course in some respects they are kinda best known for slighly different things, Rokossovsky for strategic level operations and planning - at least from Stalingrad onwards - and the ability to anticipate enemy actions and think out side the box, whereas Rommell was better known for his tactical brillance and adaptability. Still they got some parallels... Rokossovsky probably was more of an exception than Rommel of course, the Wehrmacht was generally always pretty good at recognising and promoting talent and originality whereas the Red Army was kinda slow to catch on and had a tendency to treat original thinkers with suspicion.