Barbarossa: Germany Strikes South

wormyguy

Banned
In 1940, Germany drew up two different plans for Operation Barbarossa. One was a strike north, above the Pripet marshes, to secure Belarussia and threaten Leningrad and Moscow (the OTL plan), with a secondary strike below the Pripet marshes to threaten the Ukraine, while the other was a strike south of the Pripet marshes to secure the Ukraine and threaten the Caucasus and Moscow with a secondary strike north of the marshes to threaten Leningrad (the ATL plan). The "strike south" was the plan that the German generals initially intended to use, as it was believed (correctly) that the bulk of the Red Army was concentrated in the south, and could thus be destroyed more easily, and also that the plains of the region were far more suited to Blitzkrieg-style armored warfare than the north of Russia (also correct). The plan was also much easier on logistics due to the proximity of the main offensive strike to the source of German oil in Romania. The industry and resources of the region would have been of greater value to Germany, and it would have set them up well for a secondary offensive towards Baku. However, due to mistaken intelligence indicating that the bulk of the Soviet army was north of the Pripet marshes, Hitler ordered the plan changed from "strike south" to the secondary "strike north" plan. What if the far superior "strike south" plan had been utilized by the Wehrmacht in Barbarossa? How much better (if at all) would Germany have done? One interesting thing to consider: if Germany strikes south, Finland is unlikely to join in the initial invasion (notice the Finnish attacks are only indicated on the "strike north" map.

"Strike North" (OTL)

lossberg-study.jpg


"Strike South" (ATL)

marcksplan.jpg
 
Last edited:
Any eta on when you plan to start posting it BW?

Ive posted about 10 chapters of it so far although it hasn't gotten into that portion of it yet (right now its in september 41)... its linked to manstein in africa... i should hopefully get back to updating that one soon (i aim for one update a day however when you have 4 or 5 open tls your thoughts can blend together :p)
 
This actually gives the Nazis a decent chance of winning the war, or at least holding out until the Nukina ex machina.
 
The alt hist is interesting but I am having some trouble with your presentation of the historical. When instructed to prepare plans for an invasion of Russia what emerged from OKH was an emphasis on Moscow so the schwerpunkt was Minsk, Smolensk then on to Moscow through the landbridge. Just like that French guy. NB that this is north of the Pripet.

Hitler was unhappy with the emphasis on Moscow and got talking with Jodl (there is a good discussion of this in Fugate) and produced a plan that deemphasized Moscow and concentrated on the "wings" with one thrust going for Leningrad and another concentrating on taking the Ukraine. Only when those two objectives were taken would Moscow be even considered as a secondary objective. It will be noted that since Leningrad was the birthplace of the revolution Hitler fantasized that's its loss would greatly demoralize the Bolsheviks. OTOH he would say of Moscow that it was only a geographical expression.

The plan that emerged was essentially a compromise between the Hitler/Jodl plan and the Halder/Marcks plan.
 
Arrows on a map are one thing but what would this mean regarding deployments? It seems that in the second map there is just more ambitions set in the south, meanwhile the north continues as before.
 
The plan was also much easier on logistics due to the proximity of the main offensive strike to the source of German oil in Romania. The industry and resources of the region would have been of greater value to Germany, and it would have set them up well for a secondary offensive towards Baku.

In case of southern strike there's also the great logistics causeway of the Black Sea available, if used wisely. Germany could have fairly easily constructed and used a fleet of light vessels to supply Southern Front via sea far more effectively than OTL. This would reduce wear and tear of trucks and railroads.

I did ponder somethign along this line in this thread, although by focusing on both Baltic and Black Sea as supply routes.

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=140283
 
Top