I frequently read the English-language version of Der Spiegel even though I know the magazine is Left-wing. I do so mainly because the translations are very good and it provides a partial view inside Europe. Needless to say, I always take a bag of salt with me and sprinkle it about liberally! However, this story which they feature is not concerned with contemporary affairs but deals with history, in this case, the battle of Stalingrad. It features the work of a former Soviet historian, Isaak Izrailevich Mints. Apparently, in 1941 he set up the “Commission on the History of the Patriotic War”. According to the ‘comrades’ at Spiegel:
The idea was for everyone in the armed forces, from common soldiers to high-ranking officers, to express their thoughts, feelings and experiences as a model for others -- but with no embellishments.
At that point I nearly swallowed my bag of salt! Would anyone in Soviet Russia under Stalin ever dare to speak freely to strangers in that fashion? I don’t think so! The writers dismiss out of hand Antony Beevor’s assessment in his book Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege, that 13,000 Russian soldiers were summarily executed at Stalingrad alone. Actually, Beevor does say that there was a fair degree of honest and open talk, including criticism, right up at ‘the sharp end’ where denunciation of one’s comrades (in the military sense of the word) was minimal. However, he also writes (p.288):
As one veteran put it, “A soldier felt that having paid with his blood, he had a right to free speech.” He had to be far more careful if evacuated to a Field Hospital, where informants and political officers were vigilant for any criticism of the regime.
Spiegel even shoots itself in the head, so to speak, with this admission:
There is no doubt that there were executions on the front. Lieutenant General Vasily Chuikov, supreme commander of the 62nd Army, personally told historians how he dealt with "cowards": "On Sept. 14, I shot the commander and commissar of a regiment, and shortly thereafter I shot two brigade commanders and commissars. They were all astonished."
“Astonished”? Well, quite! But according to Spiegel, the Political Commissars who were attached to every formation HQ down to battalion level were really just a sort of combination of Father Christmas and Mother Russia:
At critical moments, the political officers occasionally also distributed chocolate and mandarins to the demoralized comrades. One of them, Izer Ayzenberg, from the 38th rifle division, used to tour the trenches with his "agitation suitcase." Aside from brochures and books, it contained games like checkers and dominoes.
Well, that’s nice, isn’t it? And no-one in the Russian army would doubt their good motives, would they? However, it seems to be true, as confirmed by Alexander Werth’s book, Russia At War 1941-194 [p:420], that efforts were made at high level to cool down the murderous activities of the Political Commissars. The magazine Red Star produced a notable article on the subject:
Thus this truly historical article in the Red Army’s paper not only sounded the alarm over the excessively ruthless and perhaps irresponsible application of the new “iron discipline” rules but also brought to the surface the chronic conflict that had been brewing for a long time between the officer [class] and the commissar [class].
Spiegel claims to be making an effort to right the wrong of a widely-held belief:
These latest findings completely undermine the argument -- put forward by the Nazis and repeated by the West during the Cold War -- that the Red Army soldiers only fought so fiercely because they would have otherwise been shot by members of the secret police.
I have never read a book that suggested fear of their Commissars was the main imperative behind Russian heroism. Obviously it was a factor but far from being the largest – love of country, hatred of invader, comradeship and fear for family (or quite often revenge for loss of family) was likely to be much stronger. Spiegel’s attempt to pink wash the Commissar class in the Soviet Army, some of whom were exceedingly brave men, might be politically correct from their point of view, but it hardly fits the facts.
